Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Connecticut; VOC RACT Catch-Up

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CT-17-1-6536a; A-1-FRL-6225-4]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

Connecticut; VOC RACT Catch-Up

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

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

submitted by the State of Connecticut. The revision consists of

approving revisions to subsections 22a-174-20(s), 22a-174-20(v), and

22a-174-20(ee) of Connecticut's regulations, which define reasonably

available control technology (RACT) for specific categories of

industrial sources which emit volatile organic compounds (VOC), as

meeting the requirements of the CAA. This action also involves the

conditional approval of a new section 22a-174-32 which defines RACT for

sources of VOC which do not fall into any of the other industry-

specific categories of Connecticut's VOC control regulations. This

action is being taken in accordance with the Clean Air Act.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective on May 10, 1999 without

further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by April 9, 1999.

If adverse comment is received, EPA 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: Comments may be mailed to Susan Studlien, Deputy Director,

Office of Ecosystem Protection (mail code CAA), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region I, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston,

MA 02114-2023. Copies of the documents relevant to this action are

available for public inspection during normal business hours, by

appointment at the Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region I, One Congress Street, 11th floor, Boston,

MA and the Bureau of Air Management, Department of Environmental

Protection, State Office Building, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106-

1630.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven A. Rapp, at (617) 918-1048, or

at [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 5, 1994, the Connecticut DEP

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

revision consists of changes made pursuant to the requirements of

Sec. 182(b)(2) of the Act to the following Connecticut Regulations for

the Abatement of Air Pollution: Secs. 22a-174-20(s), Miscellaneous

Metal Parts and Products, Secs. 22a-174-20(v), Graphic Arts

Rotogravures and Flexography, Secs. 22a-174-20(ee), Reasonably

Available Control Technology for Large Sources, and the addition of

Sec. 22a-174-32, Reasonably Available Control Technology for Volatile

Organic Compounds. VOCs contribute to the production of ground level

ozone and smog. These rules were adopted as part of an effort to

achieve the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone.

On November 9, 1994, EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPR) in the Federal Register (59 FR 55824) which proposed full

approval of the revisions to sections 22a-174-20(s), 22a-174-20(v), and

22a-174-20(ee) and limited approval/limited disapproval of the new

section 22a-174-32. Given additional documentation submitted by

Connecticut, however, EPA now believes that section 22a-174-32 is now

conditionally approvable. Therefore, this direct final rulemaking

action supersedes the November 1994 NPR. The conditional approval of

section 22a-174-32 is discussed below. The reader may also want to

refer to the November 1994 NPR for additional information regarding

EPA's earlier evaluation of Connecticut's submittal.

I. Background

Under the pre-amended Clean Air Act (i.e., the Clean Air Act before

the enactment of the amendments of November 15, 1990), ozone

nonattainment areas were required to adopt RACT rules for sources of

VOC emissions. EPA issued three sets of control technique guideline

(CTG) documents, establishing a ``presumptive norm'' for RACT for

various categories of VOC sources. The three sets of CTGs were: (1)

Group I--issued before January 1978 (15 CTGs); (2) Group II--issued in

1978 (9 CTGs); and (3) Group III--issued in the early 1980's (5 CTGs).

Those sources not covered by a CTG were called non-CTG sources. EPA

determined that the area's SIP-approved attainment date established

which RACT rules the area needed to adopt and implement. Under Section

172(a)(1), ozone nonattainment areas were generally required to attain

the ozone standard by December 31, 1982. Those areas that submitted an

attainment demonstration projecting attainment by that date were

required to adopt RACT for sources covered by the Group I and II CTGs.

Those areas that sought an extension of the attainment date under

Section 172(a)(2) to as late as December 31, 1987 were required to

adopt RACT for all CTG sources and for all major (i.e., 100 ton per

year or more of VOC emissions) non-CTG sources.

Under the pre-amended Clean Air Act, Connecticut was designated as

nonattainment for ozone and sought an extension of the attainment date

under Section 172(a)(2) to December 31, 1987. Therefore, the State was

required to adopt RACT for all CTG sources and for all major (i.e., 100

ton per year or more of VOC emissions) non-CTG sources. However, the

State of Connecticut did not attain the ozone standard by the approved

attainment date. On May 25, 1988, EPA notified the Governor of

Connecticut that portions of the SIP were inadequate to attain and

maintain the ozone standard and requested that deficiencies in the

existing SIP be corrected (EPA's SIP-Call).

On November 15, 1990, amendments to the Clean Air Act were enacted.

Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. Secs. 7401-

7671q. In Section 182(a)(2)(A) of the amended Act, Congress adopted the

requirement that pre-enactment ozone nonattainment areas that retained

their designation of nonattainment and were classified as marginal or

above fix their deficient RACT rules for ozone by May 15, 1991. All of

Connecticut, with the exception of the portion of Connecticut located

in the New York-New Jersey-Long Island Consolidated Statistical

Metropolitan Area (NY-NJ-CT CMSA), was classified as serious

nonattainment for ozone. The remaining portion of the State, i.e., the

Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT CMSA, was classified as severe

nonattainment for ozone. 56 FR 56694 (Nov. 6, 1991). The State

submitted revisions to meet the RACT fix-up requirement and EPA

approved those revisions to the Connecticut SIP on October 18, 1991 (56

FR 52205).

Section 182(b)(2) of the amended Act requires States to adopt RACT

rules for all areas designated nonattainment for ozone and classified

as moderate or above. There are three parts to the Section 182(b)(2)

RACT requirement: (A) RACT for sources covered by an existing CTG--

i.e., a CTG issued prior to the enactment of the 1990 amendments to the

Act; (B) RACT for sources covered by a post-enactment CTG; and (C) all

major sources not covered by a CTG, i.e., non-CTG sources. This RACT

requirement applies to nonattainment areas that were previously exempt

from certain RACT requirements to ``catch up'' to those nonattainment

areas that became subject to such requirements during an earlier

period. In addition, it

[[Page 12020]]

requires newly designated ozone nonattainment areas to adopt RACT rules

consistent with those for previously designated nonattainment areas.

Because Connecticut was previously required to adopt RACT

regulations for all the CTG and major non-CTG sources to meet the RACT

``catch-up'' requirement, the State did not need to adopt any

additional RACT rules. However, under Section 182 of the Act, the major

source definition for serious and severe nonattainment areas was

lowered to include sources that have a potential to emit greater than

50 or greater than 25 tons per year of VOC, respectively. Therefore,

the State needed to lower the applicability cutoff of its CTG-based

and/or relevant non-CTG regulations to include newly classified major

sources in these categories.

The following is a summary of EPA's evaluation of the changes to

Connecticut's Regulations for the Abatement of Air Pollution,

subsection 22a-174-20(s), subsection 22a-174-20(v), subsection 22a-174-

20(ee), and the addition of section 22a-174-32. Additional information

concerning EPA's evaluation of all the submitted regulations is

detailed in a memorandum, dated June 17, 1998 entitled ``Technical

Support Document--Connecticut--VOC RACT Catch-ups--Final.'' Copies of

that document are available, upon request, from the EPA Regional Office

listed in the ADDRESSES section of this document.

II. EPA Evaluation

In determining the approvability of a VOC rule, EPA must evaluate

the rule for consistency with the requirements of the Act and EPA

regulations, as found in section 110 and Part D of the Act and 40 CFR

Part 51 (Requirements for Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of

Implementation Plans). EPA's interpretation of these requirements,

which forms the basis for today's action, appears in various EPA policy

guidance documents. The specific guidance relied on for this action is

referenced within the technical support document and this document.

For the purpose of assisting State and local agencies in developing

RACT rules, EPA prepared a series of CTG documents. The CTGs are based

on the underlying requirements of the Act and specify presumptive norms

for RACT for specific source categories. EPA has not yet developed CTGs

to cover all sources of VOC emissions. Further interpretations of EPA

policy are found in, but not limited to, the following: (1) the

proposed Post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide policy, 52 FR 45044

(November 24, 1987); (2) the document entitled, ``Issues Relating to

VOC Regulation Cut points, Deficiencies, and Deviations, Clarification

to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal Register Notice,'' otherwise

known as the ``Blue Book'' (notice of availability was published in the

Federal Register on May 25, 1988 and in the existing CTGs); and (3) the

``Model Volatile Organic Compound Rules for Reasonably Available

Technology,'' (Model VOC RACT Rules) issued as a staff working draft in

June of 1992. In general, these guidance documents have been set forth

to ensure that VOC rules are fully enforceable and strengthen or

maintain the SIP.

The VOC regulations that were included in Connecticut's January 5,

1994 submittal are briefly summarized below.

Subsection 22a-174-20(s)

This regulation was amended to include an exemption for

noncompliant coatings used in amounts less than 55 gallons in the

aggregate for any consecutive 12 month period at a miscellaneous metal

parts facility. The change is consistent with EPA's August 10, 1990

policy memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief of the Ozone/Carbon Monoxide

Programs Branch of the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,

entitled, ``Exemption for Low-Use Coatings.'' Section 193 of the Clean

Air Act (i.e., the General Savings Clause), requires that any

regulation in effect before the date of the enactment of the Clean Air

Act Amendments of 1990 in any nonattainment area may only be modified

if the modification insures equivalent or greater reductions of the

same pollutant. Although the proposed change to 22a-174-20(s)

represents a small relaxation of an existing control requirement, the

requirements of Section 193 are met by the reductions resulting from

other changes being proposed in this notice.

Subsection 22a-174-20(v)

This regulation was amended to define RACT for graphic arts sources

with potential emissions from all printing operations of 50 tons or

more per year in the serious ozone nonattainment area or, 25 tons or

more per year in the severe ozone nonattainment area, which were not

previously subject to the rule. The adopted regulation maintains the

applicability of any printing line with actual emissions of 40 pounds

or more per day. This change is consistent with the requirements of

Section 182 of the Act.

Subsection 22a-174-20(ee)

Most of this subsection has been deleted and replaced with a

reference to the new Section 32, entitled, ``Reasonably Available

Control Technology for Volatile Organic Compounds.'' The amended

regulation removes the previous major source limits on applicability

and refers all sources of VOC to Section 32. Sources previously subject

to 22a-174-20(ee) that have enforceable consent orders or permits which

currently define RACT at those facilities will continue to be regulated

by those orders until Connecticut decides otherwise.

Section 22a-174-32

For major non-CTG sources of VOCs, the addition of this section

sets forth both presumptive RACT norms and processes by which RACT can

be established for sources that cannot meet the presumptive norms. The

first two options of Section 22a-174-32 define presumptive norms for

RACT, and are consistent with EPA's Model VOC RACT Rules for ``Other

Facilities that Emit Volatile Organic Compounds.'' The other options

describe a process by which RACT can be defined on a case-by-case basis

but do not specify RACT emission limitations or technology standards.

Issues

As discussed in the November 1994 NPR, EPA has two major issues

with section 22a-174-32 as submitted in January 1994. One issue is the

open-ended nature of two of the compliance options of section 22a-174-

32, the non-CTG RACT rule. Essentially, the non-CTG RACT rule contains

four compliance options. Two of the options explicitly define

presumptive norms for RACT. The third and fourth options, however,

describe processes by which RACT can be defined on a case-by-case basis

(i.e., as a credit trade or as a relaxation from the presumptive RACT

standards) rather than explicit RACT emission limits or technology

standards.

Ordinarily, the two process options by themselves would not be

approvable as defining explicit RACT requirements. However, as

discussed in the November 1994 NPR, the rule could be fully approved by

EPA if Connecticut defined explicitly, and had approved by EPA, case-

specific RACT determinations for all of those sources which do not

conform to the two presumptive RACT options outlined in the regulation.

Alternatively, the NPR went on to say that if EPA determined that none

of the

[[Page 12021]]

affected sources relied on the open-ended compliance options to

implement RACT, section 22a-174-32 could be fully approved upon

Connecticut making such a demonstration.

On October 27, 1997, Connecticut sent EPA a list of the sources

subject to the rule and the compliance option used by each of the

sources. The list demonstrates that there are no sources in the State

complying by using either of the process options. Given this

documentation, EPA believes that the rule is now approvable as defining

RACT for all sources subject to the regulation.

The second issue discussed in the November 1994 NPR relates to the

applicability of section 22a-174-32. As described in the background

section of this notice, Section 182(b)(2) of the CAA requires

Connecticut to develop regulations or case-specific RACT determinations

for major stationary sources of VOCs which fall into one of the 13

categories articulated in Appendix E of the Title I General Preamble

(57 FR 18077). According to Appendix E, States are required to adopt

RACT rules for major sources in these categories, even if EPA does not

publish a CTG for each category.

On November 15, 1993, EPA published CTGs for two of the categories

listed in Appendix E, namely synthetic organic chemical manufacturing

industry (SOCMI) distillation and reactor vessels (58 FR 60197). On

January 20, 1994, however, EPA announced that the finalization of the

remaining eleven CTGs would be delayed. Connecticut had anticipated

EPA's issuance of the other 11 CTGs prior to the adoption of section

22a-174-32. For that reason, the applicability of the regulations,

specifically subsection 22a-174-32(b)(3)(C), was written to exclude

VOC-emitting equipment which fall into one of the remaining CTG

categories.

Therefore, although section 22a-174-32 is now fully approvable as

defining RACT for those sources subject to the regulation, Connecticut

does not have regulations which define RACT for VOC emitting processes

which fall into one of the eleven delayed CTG categories. In order for

the regulation to fulfill the non-CTG requirements of section

182(b)(2), section 22a-174-32 would need to be revised to remove the

exclusion of such sources from the applicability of the rule. In the

November 1994 NPR, EPA stated that if the exclusion was removed,

section 22a-174-32 could be used to determine RACT for VOC sources

which fall into one of the categories for which the CTG has been

delayed.

Since the publication of the November 1994 NPR, there have been

numerous discussions, letters, and correspondences between the EPA and

the Connecticut DEP regarding the issues articulated in the NPR. These

correspondences have included letters dated November 25, 1994, and

December 8, 1997, from EPA to Connecticut as well as electronic mail

messages from Connecticut to EPA in October 27, 1997, February 27,

1998, and May 11, 1998. Copies of these communications can be found in

the docket located at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section

above.

On December 16, 1997, Connecticut sent a letter to EPA committing

to make revisions to the applicability of section 22a-74-32 in order to

establish RACT for sources not yet covered by Connecticut's RACT

requirements. The letter expresses Connecticut's intent to revise the

regulations within 9 months of starting the drafting process. EPA

received a draft revision to section 22a-174-32 by electronic mail on

November 16, 1998 indicating the start of the drafting process. Given

the formal commitment to make the changes within nine months of the

start of the drafting process (i.e., by the end of August 1999), EPA is

hereby conditionally approving section 22a-174-32.

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 action will be effective May

10, 1999 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant

adverse comments by April 9, 1999.

If the 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 the proposed rule. The EPA will not

institute a second comment period on this action. All parties

interested in commenting should do so at this time. If no such comments

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

May 10, 1999 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

II. Final Action

EPA is taking two actions. First, EPA is fully approving the

changes to sections 22a-174-20(s), 22a-174-20(v), and 22a-174-20(ee) of

Connecticut's regulations as submitted as a SIP revision on January 5,

1994.

EPA is also conditionally approving section 22a-174-32 as submitted

by Connecticut as a SIP revision on January 5, 1994. In addition to the

adopted regulation, the State has formally committed to submit to EPA,

by September 1, 1999, a revised section 22a-174-32 which removes

certain applicability exclusions of the current regulation.

If the State meets its commitment, within the applicable time

frame, the conditionally approved submission will remain a part of the

SIP until EPA takes final rulemaking action approving or disapproving

the new regulation. If EPA approves the revised section 22a-174-32, it

will be fully approved in its entirety and replace the conditionally

approved section 22a-174-32 in the SIP. If the State meets its

commitment to submit a revised regulation within the applicable time

frame but EPA disapproves the new submittal, or if the State fails to

meet the commitment to submit revised regulations, this conditional

approval will convert to a limited approval/limited disapproval. EPA

will notify the State by letter that such an action has occurred. EPA

subsequently will publish a document in the Federal Register notifying

the public that the conditional approval converted to a limited

approval/limited disapproval.

EPA believes that converting the conditional approval to a limited

approval/limited disapproval would be appropriate because limited

approval of the current section 22a-174-32 would strengthen the SIP

even though the rule does not meet all of the requirements of the CAA.

The approval would be limited because EPA's action also would include a

limited disapproval, due to the fact that the current rule would not

meet the requirement of Section 182(b)(2) because of the deficiencies

noted above. In light of the deficiencies, EPA could not grant full

approval of the current rule under section 110(k)(3) and Part D.

However, EPA can grant a limited approval of the submitted rule under

Section 110(k)(3) and EPA's authority pursuant to Section 301(a) to

adopt regulations necessary to further air quality by strengthening the

SIP.

If the State fails to meet its commitment or submits a regulation

that is not fully approvable, EPA would also issue a limited

disapproval action because of deficiencies that have not been corrected

as the Act requires. Under Section 179(a)(2), if the Administrator

disapproves a submission

[[Page 12022]]

under Section 110(k) for an area designated nonattainment based on the

submission's failure to meet one or more of the elements required by

the Act, the Administrator must apply one of the sanctions set forth in

Section 179(b) unless the deficiency has been corrected within 18

months of such disapproval. Section 179(b) provides two sanctions

available to the Administrator: highway funding and offsets. The 18-

month period referred to in Section 179(a) will begin at the effective

date established in this limited disapproval. Moreover, the final

disapproval triggers the federal implementation plan (FIP) requirement

under section 110(c).

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.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

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

regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled

``Regulatory Planning and Review.''

This regulatory action has been submitted to the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) for Executive Order 12866 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, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by

consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office

of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior

consultation with representatives 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

Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) is

determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O.

12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA

has reason to believe may have 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 rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does not involve

decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks and

is not economically significant under E.O. 12866.

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, or EPA consults with those

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 officials 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 approvals of SIP

submittals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air

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 impose 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 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).

If the conditional approval is converted to a disapproval under

section 110(k), based on the state's failure to meet the commitment, it

will not affect any existing state requirements applicable to small

entities. Federal disapproval of the state submittal does not affect

its state-enforceability. Moreover, EPA's disapproval of the submittal

would not impose a new Federal requirement. Therefore, I certify that

the potential disapproval action will not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small entities because it would not

remove existing requirements nor would it substitute a new federal

requirement.

F. Unfunded Mandates

Under Sections 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

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

must

[[Page 12023]]

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.

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. 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).

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 May 10, 1999. 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, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Reporting and record keeping requirements.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the State Implementation

Plan for the State of Connecticut was approved by the Director of

the Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

Dated: January 18, 1999.

John P. DeVillars,

Regional Administrator Region I.

Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 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 H--Connecticut

2. Section 52.369 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as

follows:

Sec. 52.369 Identification of plan--Conditional approval.

* * * * *

(c) Elements of the revision to the State Implementation Plan

submitted by the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection on

January 5, 1994 which establish reasonably available control technology

requirements for major stationary sources of volatile organic

compounds. If Connecticut fails to meet these conditions by September

1, 1999, the conditional approval of section 22a-174-32 will

automatically convert to a limited approval/limited disapproval as

explained under section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act.

3. Section 52.370 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(75) and

(c)(76) to read as follows:

Sec. 52.370 Identification of plan.

* * * * * *

(c) * * *

(75) Revisions to the State Implementation Plan submitted by the

Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection on January 5, 1994.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Letter from the Connecticut Department of Environmental

Protection dated January 5, 1994 submitting a revision to the

Connecticut State Implementation Plan.

(B) Regulations sections 22a-174-20(s), ``Miscellaneous Metal Parts

and Products,'' sections 22a-174-20(v), ``Graphic Arts Rotogravures and

Flexography,'' sections 22a-174-20(ee), ``Reasonably Available Control

Technology for Large Sources,'' adopted and effective on November 18,

1993, which establish reasonably available control technology

requirements for major stationary sources of volatile organic

compounds.

(76) Revision to the State Implementation Plan submitted by the

Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection on January 5, 1994.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Letter from the Connecticut Department of Environmental

Protection dated January 5, 1994 submitting a revision to the

Connecticut State Implementation Plan.

(B) Regulation section 22a-174-32, ``Reasonably Available Control

Technology for Volatile Organic Compounds,'' adopted and effective on

November 18, 1993, which establishes reasonably available control

technology requirements for major stationary sources of volatile

organic compounds.

(ii) Additional materials.

(A) Letter from Connecticut dated June 27, 1994 clarifying language

in section 22a-174-32(A).

4. In Sec. 52.385, Table 52.385 is amended by adding a new entry

under the state citation for Section 22a-174-20, ``Control of Organic

Compound Emissions'' and by adding a new state citation for Section

22a-174-32 to read as follows:

Sec. 52.385--EPA-approved Connecticut Regulations

* * * * *

[[Page 12024]]

Table 52.385.--EPA-Approved Rules and Regulations

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

Dates

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

Connecticut State citation Title/Subject Date Date Federal Register 52.370 Comments/description

adopted by approved by citation

State EPA

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

* * * * * * *

22a-174-20.................. Control of organic 11/18/93 3/10/99 [Insert FR citation (c)(75) Changes to subsection

compound emissions. from published date]. 22a-174-20(s), 20(v),

and 20(ee).

* * * * * * *

22a-174-32.................. Reasonably Available 11/18/93 3/10/99 [Insert FR citation (c)(76) Conditional approval

Control Technology for from published date]. of the addition of

Volatile Organic non-CTG VOC RACT

Compounds. requirements.

* * * * * * *

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

[FR Doc. 99-2977 Filed 3-9-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P