[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 9 (Thursday, January 14, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2455-2460]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-664]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[LA-50-1-7401; FRL-6213-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Louisiana: Revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the
Ozone Maintenance Plan for St. James Parish
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the Louisiana
SIP for the St. James Parish ozone maintenance area, submitted by the
State of Louisiana on April 23, 1998. The revision includes: an
adjustment to the volatile organic compound (VOC) emission inventory
for the 1990 base year of the approved maintenance plan, and changes to
the approved contingency plan's triggers and control measures. This
rulemaking action is
[[Page 2456]]
being taken under sections 110, 301 and part D of the Clean Air Act
(the Act).
DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 16, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Mr.
Thomas H. Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section, at the EPA Regional
Office listed below. Copies of the documents relevant to this action
are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the
following locations. Persons interested in examining these documents
should make an appointment with the appropriate office at least 24
hours before the visiting day. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
6, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas,
Texas 75202-2733. Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Office
of Air Quality and Radiation Protection, H. B. Garlock Building, 7290
Bluebonnet Blvd., Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 70810.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lt. Mick Cote, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone
(214) 665-7219.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Clean Air Act as amended in 1977 required areas that were
designated nonattainment based on a failure to meet the ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) to develop SIPs with sufficient
control measures to expeditiously attain and maintain the standard. St.
James Parish was designated under section 107 of the 1977 Clean Air Act
as nonattainment with respect to the ozone NAAQS on September 11, 1978
(40 CFR 81.319). As required by part D and section 110 of the 1977
Clean Air Act, the State of Louisiana submitted an ozone SIP. The EPA
fully approved this ozone SIP on October 29, 1981 (46 FR 53412).
Further, the EPA approved a revision to this ozone SIP on May 5, 1994
(59 FR 23164).
On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were
enacted (Public Law 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C.
7401-7671q). The ozone nonattainment designation for this parish
continued by operation of law according to section 107(d)(1)(C)(i) of
the Act, as amended in 1990 (See 56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991). Since
the State had not yet collected the required three years of ambient air
quality data necessary to petition for redesignation to attainment,
this area was designated as unclassifiable-incomplete data for ozone.
The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) then collected
more than 3 years of ambient monitoring data that showed no violations
of the one-hour ozone NAAQS of .12 parts per million. A violation of
the ozone standard occurs if data show four or more exceedances during
a consecutive 3-year period. Accordingly, on May 25, 1993, Louisiana
requested the redesignation of St. James Parish to attainment with
respect to the ozone NAAQS. This request was accompanied by an ozone
maintenance SIP. Certain approvability issues were raised, and the
State submitted a revised redesignation request and maintenance plan on
December 15, 1994.
Region 6 evaluated the December 1994 submittal, and published its
direct final approval rule in the Federal Register on September 12,
1995 (60 FR 47280). No adverse comments were received on the direct
final, and the attainment designation and maintenance plan approval for
St. James Parish were effective on November 13, 1995. For detailed
information concerning the ozone redesignation and SIP approval process
and the applicable Federal guidance, please review the September 12,
1995, direct final Federal Register rule.
Our office received the Governor's submittal of the April 23, 1998,
SIP revision for St. James Parish on April 30, 1998. The technical
evaluation that follows includes a thorough review of the overwhelming
transport demonstration, the emissions inventory revision, the revised
growth projections, and the revised contingency measures. We have also
reviewed LDEQ's approach to ensure that this action is consistent with
actions taken elsewhere in the Nation.
II. Analysis of the Current Contingency Plan
The ozone monitor in St. James Parish recorded three exceedances of
the one-hour ozone standard in 1995. The approved maintenance plan for
St. James Parish included contingency measures to be adopted and
implemented if future air quality conditions warranted such action.
These future conditions were identified in the contingency plan as
self-generated or transport ozone exceedances. To this end, the State
intended to review any future ozone exceedance to determine whether the
episode was due to local emissions or transport from an upwind source.
If the ozone exceedance was a result of local conditions, then the
contingency measure corresponding to that particular exceedance would
be triggered, and the State would begin the rulemaking process to adopt
the triggered measure into the State's regulations.
The LDEQ discussed with us its belief that the three ozone
exceedances recorded in 1995 were the result of transport from the
Baton Rouge area. Given that St. James Parish did not violate the ozone
standard in 1995, and that the intent of the contingency plan language
was to ensure that the State had the opportunity to review the source
of the ozone exceedances to determine whether a contingency measure was
triggered, EPA agreed to provide LDEQ with the additional time
necessary for completion of a transport demonstration. Further, it was
EPA's position that, if the ozone exceedances were determined to be the
result of transport and not self-generated, implementation of a local
contingency measure would not contribute to local improvements.
On July 31, 1996, LDEQ submitted a trajectory analysis to EPA. This
analysis was intended to demonstrate overwhelming transport from the
Baton Rouge area as the cause of the three 1995 exceedances in St.
James Parish. A September 5, 1996, letter from EPA to LDEQ raised
questions about the demonstration, and suggested three options for the
State to consider to meet its SIP obligation.
The LDEQ opted to use the EPA recommended Urban Airshed Model (UAM)
to demonstrate overwhelming transport. In addition, the LDEQ revised
its contingency plan for St. James Parish to make it consistent with
contingency plans elsewhere in the State and the Nation.
III. Analysis of State Submittal
The revision to the ozone SIP for St. James Parish is comprised of
the following elements: (1) A correction to the 1990 point source
inventory and growth projections, (2) a change to the contingency plan
triggering event from three exceedances of the one-hour ozone standard
to a violation of the one-hour ozone standard (four exceedances in any
consecutive three-year period), and (3) a clarification to the
narrative portion of the contingency plan, which discusses the State's
procedures for evaluation of whether a triggering event has occurred.
A. 1990 Point Source Inventory
The LDEQ compiled a comprehensive inventory of VOCs, oxides of
nitrogen (NOX), and carbon monoxide (CO) to represent
emissions from area, stationary, and mobile sources in St. James
Parish. This inventory was included as part of the December 15,
[[Page 2457]]
1994, redesignation request from the State, and was approved by EPA on
September 12, 1995 (60 FR 47280). The LDEQ later discovered a reporting
error which resulted in a 1,052 ton per year overestimation of the VOC
emissions generated in St. James Parish. A facility named LAJET had
ceased operations prior to 1990, but its VOC emissions were
inadvertently left on the State's emission data base. The EPA regional
office has researched both the State's data base and EPA's Aerometric
Information Retrieval System, and has confirmed that the facility did
cease operations prior to 1990. Both databases have been adjusted to
correct this error.
The LDEQ has corrected the 1990 base year source and emissions
inventory, and submitted it to EPA as a revision to the ozone SIP for
St. James Parish. The revision also includes new growth projections for
each category of source (point, area, mobile) and pollutant (VOCs,
NOX, CO) through 2005.
The EPA agrees with the contents of the revised 1990 base year
inventory, and the projections through 2005 still demonstrate
maintenance of the one-hour ozone standard. The State followed EPA
guidance in projecting growth, and its methodology for growth factor
selection is acceptable. For these reasons, EPA proposes to approve the
revised 1990 base year inventory and projections for St. James Parish
as listed below.
Revised Point Source Emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Company SIC code CO TPY NOX TPY VOC TPY
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
St. James Sugar Cooperative................................. 2061 78 57 78
Colonial Sugar.............................................. 2062 12 76 6
Occidental Chemical......................................... 2812 4 96 2
Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Co............................... 2819 98 11,105 35
Chevron Chemical Co......................................... 2865 63 518 68
Laroche Chemicals........................................... 2869 0 0 27
Faustina.................................................... 2873 274 767 143
Agrico--Uncle Sam Faustina.................................. 2874 2 18 1
Star Enterprise............................................. 2911 321 1,566 1,662
Calciner Industries......................................... 2999 0 305 0
Agrico Faustina............................................. 4911 1 7 0
Transcontinental Gas Pipeline............................... 4922 18 142 6
Agrico--Uncle Sam........................................... 4961 0 20 1
---------------------------------------------------
Totals.................................................. ........... 871 14,677 2,029
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revised Point Source Projected Emissions Reported in Tons per Year
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Growth projections for Growth projections for Growth Projections for
1990-1995 1995 1995-2000 2000 2000-2005 2005
SIC code CO TPY NOX TPY VOC TPY growth --------------------------- growth --------------------------- growth --------------------------
factor CO NOX VOC factor CO NOX VOC factors CO NOX VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
20................................................. 90 133 84 .96 86 128 81 .97 83 124 77 .96 80 119 74
28................................................. 441 12,504 276 .99 437 12,379 273 1.00 437 12,379 273 .99 433 12,255 270
29................................................. 321 1,871 1,662 1.00 321 1,871 1,662 1.01 324 1,890 1,679 .98 318 1,852 1,645
4919............................................... 19 169 7 1.06 20 179 7 1.06 21 190 7 1.03 22 196 7
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.......................................... 871 14,677 2,029 ......... 864 14,557 2,023 ......... 865 14,583 2,036 ......... 853 14,422 1,996
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Revised Emission Budget for St. James Parish in Tons per Year
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 1995 2000 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Source CO............................................. 871 864 865 853
Point Source NOX............................................ 14,677 14,557 14,583 14,422
Point Source VOC............................................ 2,029 2,023 2,036 1,996
Area Source CO.............................................. 93 93 95 95
Area Source NOX............................................. 36 36 37 37
Area Source VOC............................................. 435 436 444 445
Mobile Source Nonroad CO.................................... 2,386 2,393 2,438 2,442
Mobile Source Nonroad NOX................................... 1,397 1,401 1,427 1,430
Mobile Source Nonroad VOC................................... 551 552 563 564
Mobile Source CO............................................ 6,315 5,048 4,064 3,582
Mobile Source NOX........................................... 1,250 1,117 1,026 989
Mobile Source VOC........................................... 763 576 515 493
---------------------------------------------------
Total CO................................................ 9,665 8,398 7,462 6,972
===================================================
Total NOX............................................... 17,360 17,111 17,073 16,878
===================================================
Total VOC............................................... 3,778 3,587 3,558 3,498
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 2458]]
B. St. James Parish Ozone Contingency Plan
Section 175A of the Act requires that an ozone maintenance plan
include contingency provisions, as necessary, to promptly correct any
violation of the one-hour ozone standard that occurs after
redesignation of the area to attainment. The existing contingency plan
for St. James Parish includes measures to be adopted prior to a
recorded violation of the one-hour ozone standard. This more stringent
approach identified VOC offsets and applicable reasonably available
control technology (RACT) regulations to be adopted, based on two and
three recorded ozone exceedances, respectively.
The approved contingency plan requires a review of the exceedance
to determine whether the cause is due to local emissions or emissions
transported from other areas. It was our interpretation that if the
source of the exceedance was transport, no contingency measure would
need to be implemented. If the source of the exceedances was determined
to be local, then appropriate measures were identified for
implementation.
The LDEQ submitted UAM results as part of its April 23, 1998, SIP
revision. This UAM demonstration was developed in accordance with the
EPA's Guideline For Regulatory Application of The Urban Airshed Model
(July 1991), and the September 1, 1994, general transport guidance
document entitled Ozone Attainment Dates for Areas Affected by
Overwhelming Transport. This guidance identified modeling criteria for
demonstrations from downwind areas where ozone transport makes it
practically impossible for the area to attain the standard by its own
attainment date.
The UAM demonstration submitted to EPA as part of the April 23,
1998, SIP revision indicates that ozone formed in the Baton Rouge
nonattainment area in 1995 and was transported to St. James Parish,
causing separate exceedances of the ozone standard. The EPA has
evaluated this UAM demonstration and agrees that overwhelming transport
from the Baton Rouge area was responsible for the three ozone
exceedances recorded in St. James Parish in 1995. Further, a
determination of transport for these 1995 ozone exceedances relieves
LDEQ from any requirement to implement VOC offsets or any additional
RACT in St. James Parish, since the source of the exceedances was not
located within the parish. Please see the technical support document
available from the EPA Regional Office listed above for a detailed
evaluation of the UAM demonstration.
The LDEQ has revised its existing contingency plan to base the
triggering event on a localized violation of the one-hour ozone
standard (four exceedances in a consecutive three-year period).
Additionally, the revised contingency plan identifies a menu of one or
more contingency measures to be adopted if a future violation is
recorded and determined to be due to local conditions. The menu
includes:
1. Limiting VOC emissions from filling of gasoline storage vessels;
2. Limiting VOC emissions from graphic arts for rotogravure and
flexographic processes;
3. Limiting VOC emissions for Synthetic Organic Chemical
Manufacturing Industry reactor processes and distillation operations;
4. Limiting VOC emissions from batch processing;
5. Limiting VOC emission from cleanup solvent processing;
6. Limiting VOC emissions from industrial wastewater; and/or,
7. Implementing a 1.1 to 1 offset ratio for permits.
If it is determined, within 120 days after the recorded violation,
that the recorded violation is not due to transport from an upwind
area, the Secretary of LDEQ then has six months to select an
appropriate measure, and an additional 20 months for implementation of
that contingency measure to be completed. The selected contingency
measure, therefore, will be implemented within 30 months of the
recorded violation.
These contingency measures and the schedule for implementation
satisfy the requirements of section 175A(d) of the Act, and EPA is
today proposing approval of the revised contingency plan for St. James
Parish.
C. One Hour Ozone Standard Revocation
On July 18, 1997, EPA finalized a revision to the NAAQS for ozone
which changed the standard from 0.12 parts per million (ppm) averaged
over one hour, to 0.08 ppm, averaged over eight hours. The EPA revoked
the one hour standard based on an area's attainment of the one hour
ozone standard. The revocation of the one hour standard was based on
quality assured air monitoring data for the years 1994-1996.
On July 16, 1997, President Clinton issued a directive to
Administrator Browner on implementation of the new ozone standard, as
well as the current one hour ozone standard (62 FR 38421). In that
directive the President laid out a plan for how the new ozone and
particulate matter standards, as well as the current one hour standard,
are to be implemented. A December 29, 1997, memorandum entitled
``Guidance for Implementing the 1-Hour Ozone and Pre-Existing PM10
NAAQS,'' signed by Richard D. Wilson, EPA's Acting Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, reflected that directive. The
purpose of the guidance reflected in the memorandum is to ensure that
the momentum gained by States to attain the one hour ozone NAAQS was
not lost when moving toward implementing the eight hour ozone NAAQS.
The guidance document explains that maintenance plans will remain
in effect for areas where the one hour standard is revoked; however,
those maintenance plans may be revised to withdraw certain contingency
measure provisions that have not been triggered or implemented prior to
EPA's determination of attainment and revocation. Where the contingency
measure is linked to the one hour ozone standard or air quality ozone
concentrations, the measures may be removed from the maintenance plan.
Measures linked to non-air quality elements, such as emissions
increases or vehicle miles traveled, may be removed if the State
demonstrates that removing the measure will not affect an area's
ability to attain the eight hour ozone standard.
After the one hour standard is revoked for an area, EPA believes it
is permissible to withdraw contingency measures designed to correct
exceedances or violations of that standard. Since such measures were
designed to address future violations of a standard that no longer
exists, it is no longer necessary to retain them. Furthermore, EPA
believes that future attainment and maintenance planning efforts should
be directed toward attaining the eight hour ozone NAAQS. As part of the
implementation of the eight hour ozone standard, the State's ozone air
quality will be evaluated and eight hour attainment and nonattainment
designations will be made.
The final revocation action was published on June 5, 1998 (63 FR
31013). St. James Parish was included as an area whose air quality data
qualified it for having the one-hour ozone standard revoked, and as
such the State now has the option to withdraw any non-triggered
contingency measure from the SIP. If EPA approves the UAM demonstration
and the revision to the SIP, the State could withdraw any or all non-
triggered contingency measures. However, the State has decided to go
further than required and continue to
[[Page 2459]]
include contingency measures in the revised maintenance plan for St.
James Parish.
D. Proposed Rulemaking Action
The EPA has reviewed the SIP submittal for consistency with the
Act, applicable EPA regulations and EPA policy, and is proposing to
approve this April 23, 1998, UAM demonstration and SIP submittal to
revise the ozone maintenance plan for St. James Parish under sections
110(k)(3), 301(a), and part D of the Act.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and
regulatory requirements.
IV. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory
Planning and Review.''.
B. Executive Order 12875
Under Executive Order 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 that EPA provide to 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 any written communications from the
governments, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875 requires that EPA
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 Executive Order 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.
D. Executive Order 13084
Under Executive Order 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 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, 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. The rule does not involve or
impose any requirements that affect Indian tribes. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to
this rule.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et. seq., 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 proposed 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 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 Act, preparation of a flexibility analysis
would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of
state action. The Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs
on such grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 256-66
(1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
F. Unfunded Mandates
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995,
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.
The EPA has determined that the proposed action 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 preexisting
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 2460]]
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 18, 1998.
Jerry Clifford,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 99-664 Filed 1-13-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
