Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Termination of Alternative Emission Reduction Plan for the Reynolds Metals Company, Bellwood Reclamation Plant

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[VA 082-5032; FRL-5975-5]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

Virginia; Termination of Alternative Emission Reduction Plan for the

Reynolds Metals Company, Bellwood Reclamation Plant

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision

submitted by the State of Virginia. This revision establishes and

requires the affected facilities at the Bellwood Reclamation Plant to

comply with the particulate emission limits of the Virginia process

weight rule or new source review permit, as the case may be. The

intended effect of this action is to approve a termination of a 1983

[[Page 11841]]

alternative emission reduction plan in accordance with a Consent

Agreement signed on November 7, 1997. This action is being taken under

section 110 of the Clean Air Act.

DATES: This final rule is effective May 11, 1998, unless by April 10,

1998, adverse or critical comments are received. If the effective date

is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Makeba A. Morris, Chief, Technical

Assessment Section, Mailcode 3AP22, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

19107. Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available

for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air

Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III,

841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107; the Air and

Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460; Virginia Department

of Environmental Quality, 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia

23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denis M. Lohman, (215) 566-2192, or by

E-mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 12, 1997, the State of Virginia

submitted a formal revision to its State Implementation Plan (SIP). The

SIP revision consists of the termination of a 1983 consent agreement

and order that established an alternative emission reduction plan for

the Bellwood Reclamation Plant owned by the Reynolds Metals Company.

On February 7, 1983, the State Air Pollution Control Board approved

a consent agreement and order to establish an alternative emission

reduction plan (also referred to as a ``bubble'') for the Bellwood

Reclamation Plant. On March 31, 1983, the Commonwealth of Virginia

submitted the alternative emission reduction plan for the Bellwood

Reclamation Plant as a source-specific revision to the State

Implementation Plan (SIP). The alternative emission reduction plan was

approved by EPA on March 26, 1984 (49 FR 11176).

The previously approved bubble applies to two major processes at

the Bellwood Reclamation Plant; the Herreshoff process and the melting

furnaces #2, #4, and #5. The bubble allows the Herreshoff process to

emit particulates in excess of the quantity allowed by the Virginia

process weight rate rule in exchange for compensating emission

reductions from specified other operations within the plant.

Since 1984, the Bellwood Reclamation Plant has undergone a number

of changes that impact the bubble. Reynolds have decommissioned a

number of the units subject to the bubble, including the Herreshoff

process and furnace #4, and have obtained a state new source review

permit for furnace #5. At this time furnace #2 is the only operating

unit subject to the bubble. As a result, the bubble is no longer needed

to demonstrate compliance with Virginia's process weight rate rule and

needs to be rescinded.

Summary of the SIP Revision

The SIP revision consists of a Consent Agreement terminating the

1983 Consent Agreement and Order that established the Bellwood bubble.

The Consent Agreement was signed on October 24, 1997, by Cathy C.

Taylor, Director, Corporate Environmental Quality Department of

Reynolds Metals Company. The Consent Agreement became effective on

November 7, 1997, when it was signed by Thomas L. Hopkins, Director,

Virginia Department of Environmental Quality.

EPA is approving this SIP revision without prior proposal because

the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates

no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal

Register publication, EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision

should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be

effective May 11, 1998, unless, by April 10, 1998, adverse or critical

comments are received.

If EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn before

the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this

action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do

so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is

advised that this action will be effective on May 11, 1998.

Final Action

EPA is approving the SIP revision request submitted by the

Commonwealth of Virginia to terminate and rescind the Consent Agreement

and Order which established an alternative emission reduction plan for

the Bellwood Reclamation Plant owned by the Reynolds Metals Company.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or

allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for

revision to any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to

the state implementation plan shall be considered separately in light

of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA

must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of

any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.

Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small

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

and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than

50,000. SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the

Clean Air Act does not create any new requirements but simply approve

requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the

Federal SIP approval does not impose any new requirements, the

Administrator certifies that it does not have a significant impact on

any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the

Federal-State relationship under the CAA, preparation of a flexibility

analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base

its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. 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

(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or

final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated

costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or to

the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under Section 205, EPA

must select the most cost-

[[Page 11842]]

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.

EPA has determined that the approval action proposed/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. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for

judicial review of this action to terminate and rescind the 1983

alternative emission reduction plan for the Bellwood Reclamation Plant

must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate

circuit by May 11, 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).)

E. 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. Section 804, however, exempts from section 801 the

following types of rules: rules of particular applicability; rules

relating to agency management or personnel; and rules of agency

organization, procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect

the rights or obligations of non-agency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3).

EPA is not required to submit a rule report regarding today's

action under section 801 because this is a rule of particular

applicability. The rule applies only to the Bellwood Reclamation Plant

of Reynolds Metals Company.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by

reference.

Dated: February 26, 1998.

Thomas C. Voltaggio,

Deputy Regional Administrator, Region III.

40 CFR part 52, is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart VV--Virginia

2. Section 52.2420 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(122) to read

as follows:

Sec. 52.2420 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(122 ) Revisions to the Virginia Regulations to terminate and

rescind the 1983 alternative emission reduction plan for the Bellwood

Reclamation Plant submitted on November 12, 1997 by the Department of

Environmental Quality:

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Letter of November 12, 1997 from the Department of

Environmental Quality transmitting a Consent Agreement to terminate the

1983 alternative emission reduction plan for the Bellwood Reclamation

Plant.

(B) Consent Agreement to terminate and rescind the 1983 alternative

emission reduction plan for the Bellwood Reclamation Plant, signed and

effective on November 7, 1997.

[FR Doc. 98-6279 Filed 3-10-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-U