Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans: Oregon

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OR-69-7284a; FRL-5984-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans: Oregon

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approves a revision to

the Oregon State Implementation Plan. This revision establishes a

source specific Reasonable Available Control Technology (RACT)

determination for Dura Industries, Inc. at 4466 NW Yeon, Portland,

Oregon 97210. This action is taken under Part D of Title I of the Clean

Air Act (Act).

DATES: This action is effective on June 1, 1998 unless adverse or

critical comments are received by April 30, 1998. If the effective date

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

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Montel Livingston,

SIP Manager, Office of Air Quality (OAQ-107), EPA, 1200 Sixth Avenue,

Seattle, Washington 98101.

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,

D.C. 20460. Copies of material submitted to EPA may be examined during

normal business hours at the following locations: EPA, Region 10,

Office of Air Quality, 1200 Sixth Avenue (OAQ-107), Seattle, Washington

98101, and Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) 811 SW

Sixth Ave, Portland, Oregon 97204-1390.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tracy Oliver, Office of Air Quality

(OAQ-107), EPA, Seattle, Washington 98101, (206) 553-1388.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Section 172(a)(2) and (b)(3) of the Act, as amended in 1977,

requires sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC) to install, at a

minimum, RACT in order to reduce emissions of ozone precursors. EPA has

defined RACT as the lowest emission limitation a source is capable of

meeting with control technology that is reasonably available,

considering technological and economic feasibility (44 FR 53762).

EPA develops Control Technology Guidelines (CTG) to advise state

and local agencies of available air pollution control techniques for

reducing emissions from various source categories. CTGs establish

``presumptive norm'' emission levels based on EPA's evaluation of the

capabilities and problems associated with control technologies. EPA has

recommended that states adopt RACT requirements consistent with these

presumptive norm levels.

In Section 182(a)(2)(A), Congress statutorily adopted the

requirement that ozone nonattainment areas improve their deficient RACT

rules for ozone precursors. Areas designated nonattainment before the

effective date of the 1990 amendments which retained that designation

with a marginal or worse classification were subject to RACT ``fix-

up.'' States were mandated to correct their RACT requirements by May

15, 1991. The corrected requirements were to be in compliance with

section 172(b), as it existed before the 1990 amendments and as

interpreted in the pre-amendment guidance. Oregon was subject to this

requirement.

On May 13, 1991, the State of Oregon submitted OAR 340-22-100

through OAR 340-22-220, General Emission Standards for Volatile Organic

Compounds, as an amendment to the Oregon SIP. On September 29, 1993,

EPA approved these revisions and incorporated the rules by reference

into the Oregon SIP (58 FR 50848).

The Portland-Vancouver Air Quality Maintenance Area was designated

as a non attainment area for ozone in 1978. On October 7, 1982, EPA

approved the Portland-Vancouver area ozone attainment plan, including

an extended attainment date of December 31, 1987 (47 FR 44262). On

November 15, 1990, the area was redesignated to marginal non-attainment

under section 181(a)(1) of the 1990 Act for failing to attain the

standard. An attainment deadline of November 15, 1993 was established.

Ambient air monitoring data from 1991 through 1997 showed no violations

of the ozone standard. On May 19, 1997, EPA redesignated the Portland-

Vancouver area to attainment for ozone and approved its maintenance

plan.

Section 4.50.3.2.3.4 Industrial Emission Strategies of the approved

maintenance plan includes RACT requirements for VOC sources. This

includes implementing: (1) Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 340-022-

0104 which requires VOC emission limits for new and existing sources

located within the Portland-Vancouver area; and (2) OAR 340-022-0170

which defines the VOC emission limits for surface coating in

manufacturing, consistent with EPA's 1976 CTGs for this source

category.

On October 30, 1997, Oregon submitted an alternative RACT

determination for Dura Industries, Inc., a high performance

architectural coating operation in Portland, Oregon. The alternative

RACT determination modifies Dura Industries' Air Contaminant Discharge

Permit to allow 6.5 lbs/gal VOC instead of 3.5 lbs/gal VOC, the

standard RACT for this source category. The higher VOC content is

accompanied by additional requirements on the source to develop

compliant coatings. This submission is subject to OAR 340-022-0104 and

OAR 340-022-0170.

This Federal Register document approves the rule revision as an

amendment to the Oregon SIP.

II. Summary of Action

EPA is approving the revision to the Oregon State Implementation

Plan submitted on October 30, 1997, as source specific amendment for

Dura Industries, Inc. EPA finds the alternative RACT determination

meets all of the applicable requirements of the Act and the Oregon SIP.

EPA is not taking action on the entire Air Contaminant Discharge

Permit for Dura Industries, Inc., but only the conditions necessary for

implementation and enforcement of the RACT requirement in OAR 340-022-

0104(4). Because the RACT requirements are contained in the approved

SIP, the source specific RACT limits will remain in effect as a matter

of state law, even if the Oregon permit expires.

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.

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 rules 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 become effective

without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant adverse

comment on the parallel notice of

[[Page 15294]]

proposed rulemaking on or before April 30, 1998.

Should the Agency receive such comments, it will publish a document

withdrawing this rule. All public comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The

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

Any parties interested in commenting on the proposed rule should do so

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

that this rule will be effective on June 1, 1998 and no further action

will be taken on the proposed rule.

III. 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

CAA do 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, I certify 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 regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute

federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of State action. The

CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 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-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 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 pre-

existing 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

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), as added by the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted 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

General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's

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 Clean Air Act, petitions for

judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court

of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 1, 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), 42

U.S.C. 7607(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by

reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the Implementation Plan for

the State of Oregon was approved by the Director of the Office of

Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

Dated: March 6, 1998.

Chuck Findley,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region X.

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

amended as follows:

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

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

Subpart MM--Oregon

2. Section 52.1970 is amended by adding paragraph (c) (124) to read

as follows:

Sec. 52.1970 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(124) On October 30, 1997 the director of the Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality (ODEQ) submitted a source specific Reasonable

Available Control Technology (RACT) determination as a SIP revision for

VOC emissions and standards.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Letter dated October 30, 1997 from the Director of ODEQ

submitting a SIP revision for Dura Industries, Inc. , an architectural

surface coating operation in Portland, Oregon--permit #26-3112 dated

September 14, 1995.

[FR Doc. 98-8057 Filed 3-30-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P