[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 18 (Thursday, January 28, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 4296-4298]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-1912]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[TX-71-1-7311a; FRL-6222-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Texas; Multiple Air Contaminant Sources or Properties
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action approves the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision to 30 TAC Chapter 101, Section 101.2(b) concerning Multiple
Air Contaminant Sources. The SIP revision was submitted by the Governor
to EPA on January 10, 1996. The revision to the rule eliminates the
50,000 population limitation and is now applicable statewide to all
counties regardless of population. The revision also limits the use of
the provision to a property under the control of a single entity which
has been or will be divided and placed under the control of separate
entities, creating a new property line configuration for properties
operated, or intended to be operated, as an integrated plant or plants
where individual facilities are owned by separate entities, but all
facilities are under the control of a single entity. The approval of
these Texas SIP revisions make the revisions federally enforceable.
DATES: This rule is effective on March 29, 1999 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comment by March 1, 1999. If we receive
such comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register informing the public that this rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Mr.
Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), at the EPA Region 6
Office listed below. Copies of the documents relevant to this action
are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the
following locations. Interested persons wanting to examine these
documents should make an appointment with the appropriate office at
least two working days in advance.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Planning Section
(6PD-L), Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC), Office of
Air Quality, 12100 Park Circle, Austin, Texas 78753.
Documents which are incorporated by reference are available for
public inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW.,Washington,
DC 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Ken Boyce, Air Planning Section
(6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700,
Dallas, Texas 75202, telephone: (214) 665-7259.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The original 1967 regulation regarding multiple air contaminant
sources allowed two or more property holders in an area to petition to
have their properties designated as a single entity for the purpose of
controlling air emissions. The rule applies to properties which are
contiguous except for intersecting roads, railroads, rights-of-way,
canals, and watercourses which are considered a part of the area for
purposes of this provision. The rule required that the petition
describe the manner in which the combined emissions will be
administered and it shall name the responsible party or parties. In
1972, the regulation was limited in applicability to counties with a
population less than 50,000 as determined by the most recent census.
The amendment to the rule eliminates the 50,000 population
limitation and it limits the use of the provision to properties under
the control of a single entity. The proposal would require the parties
dividing ownership to establish which of them is responsible for
emissions related impacts. Also, the definition of an eligible facility
is further narrowed to exclude property previously divided by a canal,
bayou, waterway, or public right-of-way.
II. Analysis of State Submission
The EPA had no adverse comments regarding the proposed rule change,
provided that each petition be accompanied by a statement indicating
ownership, control, and clarified responsibility. In its response to
comments, Texas agreed that the petition would clearly indicate
ownership, control, and responsibility.
III. Final Action
The EPA is approving the revisions to the Texas SIP regarding
Multiple Air Contaminant Sources or Properties. The EPA is publishing
this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a
noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comments.
However, the proposed section of this Federal Register publication, EPA
is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to
approve the SIP revision should relevant adverse comments be filed.
This rule will be effective on March 29, 1999 unless EPA receives
adverse comment by March 1, 1999. If adverse or critical comments are
received, EPA 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.
If EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn before
the effective date by publishing a subsequent action that will withdraw
the final action. All public comments received will be addressed in a
subsequent final rule based on the 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 March 29, 1999 and no further action will be taken on
the proposed rule.
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 Orders (E.O.) 12866 and 13045
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this regulatory
action from review under Executive Order E.O. 12866, entitled
``Regulatory Planning 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
[[Page 4297]]
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must 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.''
This 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 3(b) of E.O. 13084
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
Executive Order 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 Executive Order 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 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 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 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. This action 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 (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 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
Act, preparation of 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, 255-66 (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 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.
The 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. The 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 Act, petitions for judicial review
of this action 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, Carbon monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
[[Page 4298]]
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and record
keeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: December 18, 1998.
Jerry Clifford,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
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 et seq.
Subpart SS--Texas
2. Section 52.2270 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(112) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.2270 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(112) Revision to the Texas State Implementation Plan submitted by
the Governor on January 10, 1996.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) General
Rules (30 TAC Chapter 101), Section 101.2(b), adopted by TNRCC on
December 13, 1995, effective January 8, 1996.
(B) TNRCC Docket No. 95-0849-RUL issued December 13, 1995, for
adoption of amendments to 30 TAC Chapter 101, Section 101.2(b),
regarding Multiple Air Contaminant Sources or Properties and revision
to the SIP.
(ii) Additional materials.
A letter from the Governor of Texas dated January 10, 1996,
submitting revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 101, Section 101.2(b), for
approval as a revision to the SIP.
[FR Doc. 99-1912 Filed 1-27-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
