Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; District of Columbia; GSA Central and West Heating Plants

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[DC040-2016; FRL-6448-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

District of Columbia; GSA Central and West Heating Plants

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action approving revisions to the

District of Columbia State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revisions

consist of portions of an

[[Page 52655]]

operating permit which reduce sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions

from two steam-generating facilities located in the District of

Columbia. The intent of this action is to approve, as SIP revisions,

portions of the operating permit issued by the District of Columbia on

October 17, 1997 to the General Services Administration (GSA) for its

Central Heating and Refrigeration Plant and West Heating Plant in

accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on November 29, 1999 without further

notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by November 1,

1999. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform

the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be mailed to Walter Wilkie, Acting

Chief, Technical Assessment Branch, Mailcode 3AP22, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania 19103. 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,

1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; the Air and

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

Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460; District of Columbia

Department of Public Health, Air Quality Division, 51 N Street, N.E.,

Washington, DC 20002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denis Lohman (215) 814-2192, or by e-

mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On October 23, 1997, the District of Columbia submitted a formal

revision to its SIP. The SIP revision consisted of an October 17, 1997

operating permit issued by the District of Columbia to GSA for its

Central Refrigeration and Heating Plant (CHRP) and West Heating Plant

(WHP). On December 16, 1998, the District submitted an amendment

intended to clarify the scope of its of October 23, 1997 submittal. The

amendment clarified that the District is only requesting that portions

of the operating permit be approved and incorporated into the SIP. EPA

is approving all of the portions of the permit requested by the

District in its December 16, 1998 submittal. While the other provisions

of the operating permit are federally enforceable pursuant to Title V

of the Act, certain SO2 provisions are being approved as SIP

revisions because they are needed to ensure attainment of the annual

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) set for SO2.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

The operating permit imposes emission limits for SO2 and

establishes restrictions on fuel burning capabilities to minimize

SO2 from the plants. The operating permit requires the

combustion of natural gas at all times at GSA's CHRP and WHP. There is,

however, a provision for the use of No. 2 ``on-road Diesel'' fuel with

a maximum sulfur content of five hundredths weight percent

(0.05%wt ) during periods of natural gas service

interruption by the supplier. In addition to limiting the sulfur

content of the fuel that may be combusted during periods of natural gas

interruption, the permit also limits the total gallons per calendar

year that may be combusted at each facility. These restrictions on fuel

type and usage have significantly reduced the SO2 emissions

from these plants to the point where such emissions presents a

negligible potential for impact on the surrounding area. Under the

existing SIP, the average annual SO2 emissions for CHRP and

WHP were 523 and 626 tons per year, respectively, during the period of

1980 to 1990, inclusively. The provisions of the operating permit,

which are the subject of this SIP revision, restrict annual

SO2 emissions to 17 tons per year at CHRP and 12 tons per

year at WHP.

The permit provisions being approved as SIP revisions also require

GSA to report the necessary information to ensure compliance with the

annual emission limits. The principle compliance determination method

is the use of continuous emissions monitoring when combusting natural

gas or No. 2 ``on-road Diesel'' fuel. In addition, the District

requires fuel analysis or fuel certification substantiating the maximum

hydrogen sulfide and weight percent sulfur of the gas or oil consumed.

GSA must submit quarterly reports for each boiler at CHRP and WHP

including; hours of service, types and quantities of fuel combusted,

fuel composition and heat content, service interruptions and total tons

of SO2 emitted on a monthly basis and on rolling 12 month

basis. Monthly reports are to be prepared demonstrating GSA's

maintenance of the NAAQS for SO2 in the vicinity of the two

facilities. Sulfur-in-fuel reports are due each month detailing

specific information about fuel oil, if any, that was burned during the

month. The level of reporting detailed above provides adequate

assurance that the compliance status of GSA can be quickly and

accurately tracked at all times.

EPA has determined that the portions of GSA's operating permit

which the District of Columbia has requested be approved as SIP

revisions serve to strengthen the District of Columbia SO2

SIP, and EPA is therefore approving the District's request.

EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no

adverse comment. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's

Federal Register, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve

as the proposal to approve the District's SIP revision if adverse

comments are filed. This rule will be effective on November 29, 1999

without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by November

1, 1999. If EPA receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely

withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule

will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a

subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not

institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties

interested in commenting must do so at this time.

III. Final Action

EPA is approving, as a revision to the District of Columbia SIP,

the District's December 16, 1998 submittal (amending its October 23,

1997 submittal) consisting of portions of the operating permit issued

by the District on October 17, 1997 to GSA for its Central and West

Heating Plants.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

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

regulatory action from review under E.O. 12866, entitled ``Regulatory

Planning and Review.''

B. Executive Order 12875

Under E.O. 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not

required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local, or

tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds

necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those

governments. If EPA complies by consulting, E.O. requires EPA to

provide to the Office of Management and Budget a description of the

extent of EPA's prior consultation with representatives

[[Page 52656]]

of affected state, local, and tribal governments, the nature of their

concerns, copies of written communications from the governments, and a

statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition,

E.O. 12875 requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting

elected officials and other representatives of state, local, and tribal

governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development

of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''

Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local or tribal

governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these

entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875

do not apply to this rule.

C. Executive Order 13045

E.O. 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from Environmental

Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies

to any rule that the EPA determines (1) is ``economically

significant,'' as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) the environmental

health or safety risk addressed by the rule has a disproportionate

effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the

Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the

planned rule on children and explain why the planned regulation is

preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible

alternatives considered by the Agency.

This final rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it is not an

economically significant regulatory action as defined by E.O. 12866,

and it does not address an environmental health or safety risk that

would have a disproportionate effect on children.

D. Executive Order 13084

Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not

required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the

communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial

direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal

government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by the tribal governments. If EPA complies by

consulting, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to provide to the Office

of Management and Budget, in a separately identified section of the

preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior

consultation with representatives of affected tribal governments, a

summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the

need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084

requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected and

other representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide

meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory policies

on matters that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''

Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities

of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve or impose

any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the

requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 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 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 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 Clean Air Act, 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).

F. 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

annual 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.

EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not

include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual 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.

G. 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

pertaining only to the General Services Administration's (GSA) Central

Heating and Refrigeration Plant and West Heating Plant located in the

District of Columbia.

H. 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 November 29, 1999. Filing a

petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule,

pertaining to GSA's operating permit for its Central and West heating

plants, 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 approving portions of the

District's operating permit issued to GSA for its Central and West

heating plants may not be challenged later in proceedings to

[[Page 52657]]

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by

reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.

Dated: September 20, 1999.

W. Michael McCabe,

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 J--District of Columbia

2. In Section 52.470, the entry for GSA permit-to-operate fuel-

burning equipment in the ``EPA Approved District of Columbia Source-

specific requirements'' table in paragraph (d) is added and the entry

``None'' is removed to read as follows:

Sec. 52.470 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(d) EPA-Approved District of Columbia Source-Specific Requirements

EPA-Approved District of Columbia Source-Specific Requirements

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

Name of Source Permit number State effective date EPA approval date Comments

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

General Services N/A--it is the Oct 17, 1997. Sept 30, 1999 [page The following

Administration Central operating permit cite.]. portions of

Heating and Refrigeration issued to GSA by GSA's operating

Plant and West Heating Plant. the District of permit are not

Columbia on included in the

October 17, 1997. SIP: The

portion of

Condition 3

referring to

Table 1, Table

1, Condition 4,

Table 3, and

Condition 17.

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

[FR Doc. 99-25422 Filed 9-29-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P