[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 16 (Tuesday, January 26, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3852-3855]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-1762]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[MD079-3035a; FRL-6218-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; Control of VOCs From the Manufacture of Explosives and
Propellant
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Maryland. This revision imposes reasonably
available control technology (RACT) requirements for volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) from sources that manufacture explosives and
propellant. The intent of this action is to approve Maryland's request
to amend its SIP to include RACT requirements to control VOCs from the
manufacture of explosives and propellant.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective without further notice on
March 29, 1999 unless by February 25, 1999, adverse or critical
comments are received by EPA. If EPA receives such comments, it will
publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal
Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Comments may 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; the Air and Radiation Docket
and Information Center, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460; and the Maryland Department of the
Environment, 2500 Broening Highway, Baltimore, Maryland 21224.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul T. Wentworth at (215) 814-2183,
or by e-mail at wentworth.paul@epa.gov. While information may be
requested via e-mail, comments must be submitted in writing to the
above EPA Region III address.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On August 28, 1998, the State of Maryland submitted a formal
revision to its SIP, which consists of amendments to COMAR 26.11.19
Control of Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific Processes. The
revision consists of the addition of a new regulation at COMAR
26.11.19.25 Control of Volatile Organic Compounds from Explosives and
Propellant Manufacturing to establish RACT for VOCs from the
manufacture of explosives and propellant. This revision was submitted
to satisfy the requirements of sections 182 and 184 of the Clean Air
Act to implement RACT on major sources of VOCs.
[[Page 3853]]
II. Summary of the SIP Revision
The new regulation COMAR 26.11.19.25 Control of Volatile Organic
Compounds from Explosives and Propellant Manufacturing applies to
sources which manufacture explosives and propellant. The carrier for
some of the raw materials used in the manufacture of explosives and
propellant and the medium in which those raw materials are mixed
contain VOCs. The majority of the VOC emissions are from the mixing and
drying operations. The only currently known existing source of VOC
emissions from the manufacture of explosives and propellant is located
at the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Indian Head, Maryland.
COMAR 26.11.19 Control of Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific
Processes applies statewide as does COMAR 26.11.19.25. The specific
provisions found in COMAR 26.11.19.25 Control of Volatile Organic
Compounds from Explosives and Propellant Manufacturing are summarized
below:
A. Applicability
This regulation applies to a person who owns or operates existing
equipment at a premise that has a potential to emit 25 tons or more of
VOC per year from all explosives and propellant manufacturing equipment
at the premises.
It also applies to a person who constructs, owns, or operates new
equipment that has or will have total actual VOC emissions of 50 pounds
or more per day. It must be noted that the applicability provisions of
COMAR 26.11.19.25 pertaining to new equipment are imposed in addition
to any applicable new source review (NSR) permitting requirements of
the Federal Clean Air Act and the Maryland SIP. These provisions of
COMAR 26.11.19.25 do not replace any applicable NSR requirements.
B. Definitions
COMAR 26.11.19.25 includes definitions of the following terms:
Existing equipment, Explosives and propellant manufacturing equipment,
New equipment, and Nitramine propellant manufacturing equipment.
C. General Requirements
Pursuant to COMAR 26.11.19.25 (C)(1), a person who owns or operates
existing explosives and propellant manufacturing equipment subject to
this regulation shall: (a) Install a VOC control device, having a VOC
destruction or removal efficiency of 85 percent or more overall, on all
active nitramine propellant mixing equipment that has a capacity of 150
gallons or more; (b) prepare and submit for approval by the Maryland
Department of the Environment by not later than September 1, 1997, a
good operating practices manual that when implemented will minimize VOC
emissions from all other existing explosive, propellant, and nitramine
propellant manufacturing equipment; and (c) implement the good
operating practices within 30 days after approval by the Department.
Pursuant to COMAR 26.11.19.25(C)(2), a person who constructs, owns,
or operates new equipment subject to this regulation shall reduce
emissions from the new equipment by 85% or more, overall. It must be
noted that these provisions of COMAR 26.11.19.25 pertaining to new
equipment are imposed in addition to any applicable new source review
(NSR) permitting requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act and the
Maryland SIP. These provisions of COMAR 26.11.19.25 do not replace any
applicable NSR requirements.
D. Reporting and Testing Requirements
A person who is subject to this regulation shall:
(1) By no later than October 1, 1997, submit to the Department:
(a) A VOC emissions inventory for calendar year 1990 and for each
subsequent year through calendar year 1996 for all explosive and
propellant manufacturing equipment at the premises, and
(b) Complete permit to construct application for the control device
required in subsection C(1)(a) of the regulation;
(2) Not later than 90 days after the control device required in
section C(1)(a) of this regulation has been installed must perform a
stack test to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of
subsection C of this regulation; and
(3) Submit to the Department a stack test report within 60 days
after completing the test.
EPA has determined that the control requirements contained in these
revisions to the subject rule constitutes an acceptable level of RACT
on major sources manufacture explosives and propellants. EPA is
approving 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 adverse or
critical comments be filed. This rule will be effective March 29, 1999
without further notice unless by February 25, 1999, adverse or critical
comments are received. If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will
publish a timely withdrawal of the direct 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. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this rule. Only
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
rule will be effective on March 29, 1999 and no further action will be
taken on the proposed rule.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving the addition of COMAR 26.11.19.25 Control of
Volatile Organic Compounds from Explosives and Propellant Manufacturing
submitted by the State of Maryland on August 28, 1998 as a revision to
the Maryland SIP.
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 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.
[[Page 3854]]
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 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.
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 to approve COMAR 26.11.19.25 Control of
Volatile Organic Compounds from Explosives and Propellant Manufacturing
as a revision to the Maryland SIP must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by March 29, 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, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: December 30, 1998.
Thomas Voltaggio,
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 V--Maryland
2. Section 52.1070 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(141) to read
as follows:
[[Page 3855]]
Sec. 52.1070 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c)* * *
(141) Revisions to the Maryland State Implementation Plan submitted
on August 28, 1998 by the Maryland Department of the Environment.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Letter of August 28, 1998 from the Maryland Department of the
Environment transmitting revisions to COMAR 26.11.19 pertaining to the
control of VOCs from special processes. The revision adds a new
regulation at COMAR 26.11.19.25 for the control of VOC compounds from
explosives and propellant manufacturing adopted by the Secretary of the
Environment on July 15, 1997 and effective August 11, 1997.
(B) Revisions to COMAR 26.11.19 entitled Volatile Organic Compounds
from Specific Processes: The addition of new regulation COMAR
26.11.19.25 Control of Volatile Organic Compounds from Explosives and
Propellant Manufacturing.
(ii) Additional Material: Remainder of August 28, 1998 Maryland
State submittal pertaining to COMAR 26.11.19.25 to control VOCs from
sources that manufacture explosives and propellants.
[FR Doc. 99-1762 Filed 1-25-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
