[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 189 (Thursday, September 30, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52654-52657]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-25422]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 lohman.denny@epa.gov.
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
