Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Delaware; Definitions of VOCs and Exempt Compounds

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[DE041-1019a; FRL-6238-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

Delaware; Definitions of VOCs and Exempt Compounds

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

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

Delaware State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revisions consist of

amendments to the definitions of the terms ``volatile organic

compounds'' (VOCs), and ``exempt compounds.'' EPA is approving these

revisions because they make Delaware's definitions consistent with the

federal definition of VOCs.

DATES: This rule is effective on May 10, 1999 without further notice,

unless EPA receives adverse written comment by April 12, 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 David L. Arnold, Chief,

Ozone and Mobile Sources Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, 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; and Delaware

Department of Natural Resources & Environmental Control, 89 Kings

Highway, Dover, Delaware 19901.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose Quinto, (215) 814-2182, or by e-

mail at [email protected]. While information may be obtained

via e-mail, comments must be submitted in writing in accordance with

the procedures provided above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On December 28, 1998, the State of Delaware submitted formal

revisions to its SIP. The revisions consist of amending the SIP's

definitions of the terms ``VOCs'' and ``exempt compounds'' to be

consistent with the federal definition of VOC found at 40 CFR 51.100

(s)(1).

II. Summary of SIP Revision

Delaware REGULATION 1--DEFINITIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE PRINCIPLES,

Section 2--Definitions, * * * VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS is amended by

adding twenty-four additional organic compounds to the list of

compounds exempted from the definition of VOCs because those compounds

have been determined to be of negligible photochemical reactivity.

Regulation 24--CONTROL OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND EMISSIONS, Section

2--Definitions,* * * s. ``Exempt Compounds'' is amended to reference

the list of negligibly photochemically reactive compounds found in

REGULATION 1. The revisions to these Delaware regulations is approvable

because these compounds have been determined by the Environmental

Protection Agency to have negligible photochemical reactivity and

therefore do not participate in chemical reactions that contribute to

the formation of ozone, commonly referred to as smog.

The following are the twenty-four organic compounds that have been

added to Delaware's list of compounds exempt from the definition of

VOCs in accordance with 40 CFR 51.100(s)(1):

1. Parachlorobenzotrifluoride (PCBTF),

2. Cyclic, branched, or linear completely methylated siloxanes,

3. Acetone,

4. Perchloroethylene (tetrachloroethylene),

5. HCFC-225ca (3, 3-dichloro-1, 1, 1, 2, 2-pentafluoropropane),

6. HCFC-225cb (1, 3-dichloro-1, 1, 2, 2, 3-pentaflouropropane),

7. HFC-43-10mee (1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5-decafluoropentane),

8. HFC-32 (difluoromethane),

9. HFC-161 (ethylfluoride),

10. HFC-236fa (1, 1, 1, 3, 3, 3-hexafluoropropane),

11. HFC-245ca (1, 1, 2, 2, 3-pentafluoropropane),

12. HFC-245ea (1, 1, 2, 3, 3-pentafluoropropane),

13. HFC-245eb (1, 1, 1, 2, 3-pentafluoropropane),

14. HFC-245fa (1, 1, 1, 3, 3-pentafluoropropane),

15. HFC-236ea (1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 3-hexafluoropropane),

16. HFC-365mfc (1, 1, 1, 3, 3-pentafluorobutane),

17. HCFC-31 (chlorofluoromethane),

18. HCFC-151a (1-chloro-1-fluoroethane),

19. HCFC-123a (1, 2-dichloro-1, 1, 2-trifluoroethane),

20. 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4-nonafluoro-4-methoxy-butane

(C4F9OCH3),

21. 2-(difluoromethoxymethyl)-1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 3, 3-heptafluoropropane

((CF3)2CFCF2OCH3),

22. 1-ethoxy-1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4-nonafluorobutane

(C4F9OC2H5),

23. 2-(ethoxydifluoromethyl)-1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 3-heptafluoropropane

((CF3)2CFCF2OC2H5

), and

24. Methyl acetate.

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 SIP revision if adverse comments are

filed. This rule will be effective on May 10, 1999 without further

notice unless EPA receives

[[Page 12086]]

adverse comment by April 12, 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 the SIP revisions submitted on December 28, 1998

by the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental

Control to amend REGULATION 1--DEFINITIONS AND ADMINISTRATIVE

PRINCIPLES, Section 2-Definitions, * * * VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS and

REGULATION 24--CONTROL OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS, Section 2--

Definitions,* * * s. ``Exempt compounds.''

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 OMB 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

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, E.O. 13084 requires EPA to provide to OMB, 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,

E.O. 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 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

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.

[[Page 12087]]

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 approving Delaware's definitions of VOCs

and exempted compounds 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, Ozone, Volatile

organic compounds.

Dated: February 25, 1999.

Thomas J. Maslany,

Acting 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 I--Delaware

2. In Sec. 52.420, the entry for Regulation 1, Section 2; and

Regulation 24, Section 2 in the ``EPA-Approved Regulations in the

Delaware SIP'' table in paragraph (c) is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 52.420 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) EPA approved regulations.

EPA-Approved Regulations in the Delaware SIP

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

State

State citation Title/subject effective EPA Approval date Comments

date

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

Regulation 1 Definitions and Administrative Principles

* * * * *

Section 2........................ Definitions......... 10/11/98 3/11/99 64 FR 12087. Some terms not in

SIP due to subject

matter.

* * * * *

Regulation 24 Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions

* * * * *

Section 2........................ Definitions......... 10/11/98 3/11/99 64 FR 12087. The revised

definition of

``Exempt

compounds''.

* * * * *

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

[FR Doc. 99-5663 Filed 3-10-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P