[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 45 (Friday, March 7, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10455-10457]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5644]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[OR59-7274, OR60-7275; FRL-5696-6]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Oregon
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approves revisions
to the State of Oregon Implementation Plan for two source-specific
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) volatile organic
compound (VOC) emissions standards: Cascade General, Inc., a ship
repair yard in Portland, Oregon; and, White Consolidated, Inc. (doing
business as Schrock Cabinet Co.), a wood cabinet manufacturing facility
in Hillsboro, Oregon. These revisions are required by the Clean Air Act
(CAA) and were submitted to EPA on November 20, 1996.
DATES: This action is effective on May 6, 1997 unless adverse or
critical comments are received by April 7, 1997. 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 Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. Documents incorporated by reference
are available for public inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center, EPA, 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, Office of Air Quality
(OAQ-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101, and the Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality, 811 S.W. Sixth Avenue, Portland,
Oregon 97204-1390.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denise Baker, Office of Air Quality
(OAQ-107), EPA Region 10, Seattle, Washington, (206) 553-8087.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 172(a)(2) and (b)(3) of the CAA, as amended in 1977 (1977
Act), required sources of VOC to install, at a minimum, RACT in order
to reduce emissions of this pollutant. EPA has defined RACT as the
lowest emission limit that a particular source is capable of meeting by
the application of control technology that is reasonably available,
considering technological and economic feasibility (44 FR 53761,
September 17, 1979). EPA has developed Control Technology Guidelines
(CTGs) for the purpose of informing State and local air pollution
control agencies of air pollution control techniques available for
reducing emissions of VOC from various categories of sources. Each CTG
contains recommendations to the States of what EPA calls the
``presumptive norm'' for RACT. This general statement of agency policy
is based on EPA's evaluation of the capabilities of, and problems
associated with, control technologies currently used by facilities
within individual source categories. EPA has recommended that the
States adopt requirements consistent with the presumptive norm level.
On March 3, 1978, the entire Portland-Vancouver Interstate Air
Quality Maintenance Area was designated by EPA as a non-attainment area
for ozone. The Portland-Vancouver Interstate Air Quality Maintenance
Area contains the urbanized portions of three counties in Oregon
(Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington) and one county (Clark) in the
State of Washington.
The 1977 Act required States to submit plans to demonstrate how
they would attain and maintain compliance with national ambient air
standards for those areas designated non-attainment. The 1977 Act
further required these plans to demonstrate compliance with primary
standards no later than December 31, 1982. An extension up to December
31, 1987, was possible if the State could demonstrate that, despite
implementation of all reasonably available control measures, the
December 31, 1982, date could not be met.
On October 7, 1982, EPA approved the Portland-Vancouver area ozone
attainment plan, including an extension of the attainment date to
December 31, 1987 (47 FR 44262).
On June 15, 1988, pursuant to Section 110(a)(2)(H) of the pre-
amended CAA, former EPA Regional Administrator Robie Russell notified
the State of Oregon by letter that the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
for the Portland-Vancouver area was substantially inadequate to provide
for timely attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS). In that letter, EPA identified specific actions needed to
correct deficiencies in State regulations representing RACT for sources
of VOC. Further, the CAA, as amended in 1990 (amended Act), also
requires States to correct deficiencies. In amended Section
182(a)(2)(A), Congress statutorily
[[Page 10456]]
adopted the requirement that ozone non-attainment areas fix their
deficient RACT rules for ozone. Areas designated non-attainment before
the effective date of the amendments, and which retained that
designation and were classified as marginal or above as of the
effective date, are required to meet the RACT fix-up requirement. Under
Section 182(a)(2)(A), States with such non-attainment areas 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 amendments, and as that section was interpreted
in the pre-amendment guidance. The SIP call letter interpreted that
guidance and indicated corrections necessary for specific non-
attainment areas. The Portland part of the Portland-Vancouver non-
attainment area is classified as marginal. Therefore, this area is
subject to the RACT fix-up requirement and the May 15, 1991, deadline.
On May 15, 1991, the State of Oregon submitted Oregon
Administrative Rules (OAR) 340-22-100 through 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 to
the Oregon SIP (58 FR 50848). Part of these amended rules included a
requirement for RACT for non-CTG sources.
On November 20, 1996, the State of Oregon submitted to EPA source-
specific RACT VOC emissions standards for Cascade General, Inc., a ship
repair yard in Portland, Oregon; and, White Consolidated, Inc. (doing
business as Schrock Cabinet Co.), a wood cabinet manufacturing facility
in Hillsboro, Oregon.
The RACT determination for Cascade General modifies their existing
permit to contain surface coating performance standards and special
conditions for solvent clean-up operations. The permit now provides
specific limits for VOC emissions from five different coating types
used in ship painting operations (refer to condition 19, Page 2 of 3,
of addendum #2 to operating permit #26-3224, issued by the Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality).
White Consolidated's RACT determination places limits on the VOC
content of coatings used in the finishing steps of wood cabinet
production and VOC handling methods used in solvent related cleaning.
(For more specific information, see conditions 11, 12, and 13, Pages 5
and 6, of addendum #2 to operating permit #34-2060, issued by the
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.)
This Federal Register document approves the rule revision as an
amendment to the Oregon SIP.
II. This Action
EPA is approving the revision to the State of Oregon Implementation
Plan submitted on November 20, 1996, as an amendment. The RACT
determinations for Cascade General, Inc., and White Consolidated, Inc.,
meet all of the applicable requirements of the Act as determined by
EPA.
EPA is not approving the entire permit, but only the conditions
necessary for implementation and enforcement of the RACT requirement in
OAR 340-22-104(5), (6), and (7). Since the RACT requirements are
contained in the approved SIP, the source specific RACT limits will
remain in effect, even if the Oregon permit expires as a matter of
State law.
The EPA is publishing this action 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, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision
should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be
effective May 6, 1997 unless by April 7, 1997, adverse or critical
comments are received.
If the 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 be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a
proposed rule. The 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 May 6, 1997.
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 Review
A. Executive Order 12866
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a
July 10, 1995, memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation. 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
[[Page 10457]]
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 General Accounting Office
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. section 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 May 6, 1997. 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, 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: February 21, 1997.
Jane S. Moore,
Acting Regional Administrator.
Part 52, 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. 7401-7671q.
Subpart MM--Oregon
2. Section 52.1970 is amended by adding paragraph (c) (117) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1970 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(117) On November 20, 1996, the Director of the Oregon Department
of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) submitted source-specific Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT) determinations to EPA as SIP
revisions for VOC emissions standards.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Two letters dated November 20, 1995, from Director of the
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) submitting SIP
revisions for RACT determinations for VOC emissions for: Cascade
General, Inc., a ship repair yard in Portland, Oregon, Permit No. 26-
3224 (issued to the Port of Portland), dated October 4, 1995; and,
White Consolidated, Inc. (doing business as Schrock Cabinet Co.), a
wood cabinet manufacturing facility in Hillsboro, Oregon, Permit No.
34-2060, dated August 1, 1995.
[FR Doc. 97-5644 Filed 3-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
