Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Louisiana: Reasonable Available Control Technology for Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds from Batch Processes

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[LA-47-1-7388a; FRL-6156-3]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Louisiana:

Reasonable Available Control Technology for Emissions of Volatile

Organic Compounds from Batch Processes

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a revision to the Louisiana State

Implementation Plan (SIP) rule requiring Reasonable Available Control

Technology (RACT) for emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)

from Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI) Batch

Processes. The EPA finds the rules for Batch Processes in the Louisiana

SIP are consistent with EPA's guidance for this source category and

therefore constitute RACT. This action converts the conditional

approval to a full approval.

DATES: This action is effective on November 9, 1998 unless adverse or

critical comments are received by October 8, 1998. If EPA receives such

comments, then it will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal

Register informing the public that this rule will not take effect.

[[Page 47430]]

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Mr.

Thomas H. Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), at the EPA Region

6 Office listed below.

Copies of documents relevant to this action are available for

public inspection during normal business hours at the following

locations. Anyone wanting to examine these documents should make an

appointment with the appropriate office at least two working days in

advance.

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Planning Section (6PD-

L), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.

Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Air Quality Division,

7290 Bluebonnet Boulevard, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70810, telephone

(504) 765-7247.

Documents which are incorporated by reference are available for

public inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information

Center, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington,

DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Deese of the EPA Region 6 Air

Planning Section (6PD-L) at (214) 665-7253 at the Region 6 address

above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. RACT Rule Requirements

Sections 182(b)(2)(A) and 182(c) of the Clean Air Act (the Act) as

amended in 1990 requires States to adopt RACT rules for stationary

sources of VOCs located in ozone nonattainment areas classified as

moderate or above that are covered by a Control Technique Guideline

(CTG). A CTG has been developed by EPA providing guidance on the level

of control that constitutes RACT for SOCMI processes.

B. Conditional Approval

On December 2, 1997 (62 FR 63658), EPA conditionally approved the

Louisiana SOCMI Batch Processing RACT rule. The rule was conditionally

approved because of a deficiency identified in the single unit

operation exemption thresholds. The State made a commitment to EPA to

correct the deficiency in the rule within one year of the publication

of the conditional approval. This condition was codified in 40 CFR

52.994(b).

C. State Submittal

In a letter dated March 23, 1998, the Governor of Louisiana

submitted a revision to the Batch Processing RACT rule found in

Louisiana Administrative Code, Title 33, Part III, Section 2149 (LAC

33:III.2149) entitled ``Limiting Volatile Organic Compound Emissions

from Batch Processing.'' The revision eliminates the individual process

single unit operation exemptions and sets the overall single unit

operation exemption to 500 pounds per year or less. The revision also

adds language which clarifies the successive ranking scheme exemptions

for aggregate streams of unit operations. Louisiana's rules for Batch

Processes are consistent with EPA's guidance for this source category

and therefore have been determined to constitute RACT.

The EPA removed 40 CFR 52.994(b) by mistake in a Federal Register

action published March 9, 1998 (63 FR 11374), when EPA removed the

entire section 40 CFR 52.994. The intent of the March 9, 1998, action

was to remove only section 52.994(a). Because 40 CFR 52.994(b) is

already removed, it not necessary to remove it in this action.

II. Final Action

The EPA is approving a revision to the Louisiana SIP rule requiring

RACT for emissions of VOC from SOCMI Batch Processes. Louisiana's rules

for Batch Processes are consistent with EPA's guidance for this source

category and therefore have been determined to constitute RACT. The

rule revision sets the overall single unit operation exemption to 500

pounds per year and clarifies the successive ranking scheme exemptions

for aggregate streams of unit operations. This action converts the

conditional approval to a full approval.

The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no

adverse comments. However, in the proposed section of this Federal

Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will

serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should relevant

adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective November 9, 1998

without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant adverse

comments by October 8, 1998.

If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document

withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will

not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in

a subsequent final rule based on this rule. The EPA will not institute

a second comment period on this rule. Only parties interested in

commenting on this rule should do so at this time. If no such comments

are received, the public is advised that this rule will be effective on

November 9, 1998 and no further action will be taken on the proposed

rule.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or

allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for

revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and

environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and 13045

The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this regulatory

action from E.O. 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning Review,''

review. The final rule is not subject to E.O. 13045, entitled

``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks,'' because it is not an ``economically significant'' action under

E.O. 12866.

B. Regulatory Flexibility

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq.,

generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility

analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking

requirements unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a

significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions. This final rule will

not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities

because SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the

Act do not create any new requirements but simply approve requirements

that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP

approval does not create any new requirements, I certify that this

action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-

State relationship under the Act, preparation of flexibility analysis

would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of

state action. The Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs

on such grounds. See Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246,

255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

C. Unfunded Mandates

Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995,

signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must prepare a budgetary impact

statement to accompany any proposed or final rule

[[Page 47431]]

that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs to

State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to private

sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA must select the

most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative that achieves the

objectives of the rule and is consistent with statutory requirements.

Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan for informing and advising

any small governments that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by

the rule.

The EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does

not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of

$100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in

the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves

preexisting requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new

requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or

tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

D. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally

provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating

the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,

to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the

United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and

other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of

Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior

to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a

``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review

of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for

the appropriate circuit by November 9, 1998. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect

the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does

it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be

filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.

This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its

requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Incorporation by reference, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: August 21, 1998.

Jerry Clifford,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is

amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation of part 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart T--Louisiana

2. Section 52.970 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(77) to read as

follows:

Sec. 52.970 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(77) Revisions to the Louisiana Administrative Code, Title 33, Part

III, Chapter 21, Section 2149 (LAC 33:III.2149), ``Limiting Volatile

Organic Compound Emissions from Batch Processing,'' submitted by the

Governor on March 23, 1998.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

LAC 33:III Chapter 21, revised paragraph 2149.A.2.b; paragraphs

2149.C.2.a, b, and c become paragraphs 2149.C.2.d, e, and f

respectively; and add new paragraphs 2149.C.2.a, b, and c, as adopted

in the Louisiana Register on November 20, 1997 (LR 23:1507).

(ii) Additional material. None.

[FR Doc. 98-24043 Filed 9-4-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P