[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 191 (Tuesday, October 4, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-24419]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: October 4, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[LA-2-1-5200; FRL-5075-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Louisiana; Alternative Emission Control Plan for Dow Chemical, U.S.A.,
Louisiana Division, Plaquemine, LA
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is announcing final approval of the alternative
emission reduction (bubble) plan for the Dow Chemical Plaquemine
facility as a revision to the Louisiana State Implementation Plan
(SIP). The bubble plan uses the emissions reduction credit (ERC) from a
process modification at the Glycol II expander unit in lieu of
controlling emissions from four volatile organic compounds (VOC)
storage tanks. The bubble plan was reviewed for consistency with the
final Emissions Trading Policy Statement (ETPS) published by the EPA in
the Federal Register on December 4, 1986. The ERC is determined to be
valid for emissions trading.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is effective on November 3, 1994.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are
available for public inspection during normal business hours at the
locations listed below. The interested persons wanting to examine these
documents should make an appointment with the appropriate office at
least two working days in advance.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Programs Branch
(6T-A), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202.
Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460.
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, Air Quality Division,
7290 Bluebonnet, Baton Rouge, LA 70810.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bill Deese or Russell Parr of the EPA
Region 6 Air Programs Branch at (214) 665-7253 and at the EPA Region 6
address.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On October 19, 1983, the Governor of Louisiana submitted a request
to revise the Louisiana SIP to include an alternative emission
reduction plan for the Dow Chemical facility located in Plaquemine,
Iberville Parish. The State submittal contains verification that
adequate public notice was given and a public hearing was held for the
bubble plan. The EPA proposed to approve the bubble plan in a
rulemaking document published on June 21, 1991 (56 FR 28509). Brief
background information about the bubble plan is provided in this final
rulemaking notice; see the proposed rulemaking notice for a more
comprehensive discussion of relevant issues and details.
In June 1977, a process modification instituted at the Glycol II
expander unit reduced actual emissions of VOC from a waste gas vent by
455.1 tons per year (TPY), from 595.7 to 140.6 TPY. The modification
involved adding an additional reactor to the process that reduced the
amount of VOC entering and being emitted from the incinerator. The
bubble plan uses the emissions reduction from the waste gas vent to
offset uncontrolled emissions from four VOC storage tanks. Louisiana
Administrative Code requires emissions from the four VOC storage tanks
be controlled. Allowable emissions from the four tanks are 0.45 TPY,
and total actual emissions from the tanks are 42.33 TPY. The actual
emissions from one of the methanol tanks (8X) is 0.69 TPY greater than
what was presented in the proposal (1.35 TPY as proposed versus 2.04
TPY as approved), due to an increased turnover rate reported by the Dow
Chemical Company after publication of the proposed rulemaking notice.
Of the 455.1 TPY ERC generated from the waste gas vent, 41.88 TPY is
utilized to offset the noncompliance emissions from the four storage
tanks and 5.7 TPY is utilized for improvement in air quality, leaving
407.5 TPY of ERC remaining. The 5.7 TPY improvement in air quality is a
State requirement imposed on Dow Chemical. The entire trade as approved
is summarized in the following table.
ERC from reduction of Emissions from four VOC
vent emissions (-455.1 storage tanks (+41.88 Net air quality
TPY) TPY) benefit (+5.7 TPY)
Remaining ERC\1\
[-407.5 TPY]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emissions (tons/year)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actual Allowable
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Before After Before After
Source bubble bubble Change bubble bubble Change ID
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Storage tanks............. 5.72 5.72 0.0 0.16 5.72 5.56 6L
2.04 2.04 0.0 0.03 2.04 2.01 8X
28.00 28.00 0.0 0.14 28.00 27.86 8S
6.57 6.57 0.0 0.12 6.57 6.45 8T
Waste gas vent............ 595.7 140.6 -455.1 595.7 140.6 -455.1 2L
Air quality benefit....... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.7 5.7
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............... 638.03 182.93 -455.1 596.15 188.63 -407.5\1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\The 407.5 tons per year of remaining ERC has been voided for future use by Dow Chemical as credit. This has
been reflected in the State permit number 1838T(M-2) dated October 16, 1991.
The figures in the table for the waste gas vent have had the ethane
component removed because the EPA policy does not treat ethane as a
VOC. Currently, emissions from three of the VOC storage tanks (6L, 8S
and 8T) are controlled.
Discussion
The State submittal was reviewed for compliance with requirements
of section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 40 CFR part 51, and proposed
and final ETPS published by the EPA on April 7, 1982 (47 FR 15076) and
December 4, 1986 (51 FR 43814), respectively. The EPA Evaluation Report
titled Alternative Emission Control Plan for Dow Chemical, U.S.A., has
been prepared and updated to correspond with circumstances presented in
this final rulemaking notice.
Before the EPA would grant final approval of this bubble, the State
of Louisiana was required to furnish the EPA with the following
assurances specified in the proposed rulemaking: (1) That the State
will document that none of the ERC was ever utilized in former planning
to develop the SIP for the area so the entire 595.7 TPY serves as
baseline; (2) that the State will document that the 407.5 TPY of
remaining ERC designated for the bank is voided; (3) that the State
will submit a revised, more enforceable permit--modeled after the ones
finally issued and approved for Vulcan Materials Company, Geismar
Chemical, and American Cyanamid Company Fortier facility bubbles and,
ultimately, corresponding with the emissions table presented above; (4)
that the State is addressing the post-87 SIP call; (5) that the State
will submit a plan to demonstrate attainment for the area; and (6) that
the State has resources to fulfill the requirements of numbers (4) and
(5). On October 16, 1991, the permit was revised and a copy forwarded
to the EPA. The State of Louisiana provided assurances addressing each
of the six required elements in a letter to the EPA dated September 17,
1991.
Public Comment and EPA Response
Besides responses from the State of Louisiana, the EPA received one
comment on the proposed June 21, 1991, rulemaking in response to
publication of the proposed approval. The Ohio EPA, Division of Air
Pollution Control, submitted the following comment. The comment has
been paraphrased to reflect what the EPA believes is an accurate
summary of the commenters' concerns.
In order for ERC to be valid, the 1977 process change should have
occurred after the SIP baseline year in effect for ozone at the time of
the submittal. This would ensure the emission reduction as surplus. The
proposed rulemaking did not identify the SIP baseline year in effect
when this bubble was submitted to the EPA on October 19, 1983. The EPA
may want to require the affected storage tanks to meet the RACT
regulations in the future ozone SIP without the benefit of the 1977
process change.
EPA Response: The final ETPS of December 4, 1986 (51 FR 43814) sets
out current policy for approving bubbles. The EPA policy differs
depending on whether the bubble is in a nonattainment area with an
approved attainment demonstration (NAWAD) or a nonattainment area
lacking an approved attainment demonstration (NALAD). When this bubble
was submitted to the EPA on October 19, 1983, Plaquemine and Iberville
Parishes were considered NAWAD. With the subsequent SIP call on May 26,
1988, these two parishes were considered part of the Baton Rouge
Metropolitan Statistical Area and, therefore, were converted to NALAD.
The EPA has determined that different requirements should apply to a
pending bubble in a SIP call area, such as this one. Namely, the
existing bubble can continue to use the baseline that was consistent
with the assumptions in the original attainment demonstration. For this
bubble, the EPA interprets the baseline as the emission level
established by the underlying Reasonably Available Control Technology
(RACT) regulation. RACT, in this case, is determined by the regulation
approved by the State of Louisiana in 1980 which requires incineration
(a control device). This control device was already installed when the
process improvement resulting in the additional reduction of VOC was
made in 1977. The additional reductions result from the process
improvement before the incinerator, thereby reducing the amount of VOC
going to the control device.
To be valid for trading purposes, an emission reduction must be
surplus, enforceable, permanent, and quantifiable. First, Dow has shown
that a significant VOC reduction was achieved, beyond what was required
by RACT, by the process modification. Second, the emission reductions
were made enforceable when the State issued to Dow a modified permit
[Permit Number 1838T(M-2)] on October 16, 1991, that delineated the
terms of the emission trade. Third, the emission reductions are
permanent since the process change is permanent. Finally, the ERC's are
quantifiable in that the VOC emissions can be calculated and the
reduction in waste gases produced by the process can be measured.
Therefore, the emission reduction credits associated with this bubble
are valid.
With regard to requiring the affected storage tanks to meet the
RACT regulation in future ozone SIP's, much of this has already been
accomplished. Waste gas vents (emission point 2L) have been rerouted
for recovery by the ethylene recovery unit under State Permit Number
2032. The tanks used for hexane storage (emission points 8S and 8T)
have been replaced by pressurized tanks under State Permit Number 2033.
One of the methanol tank vents (emission point 6L) will be rerouted for
recovery under State Permit Number 2037. Only one methanol tank vent
(emission point 8X) remains uncontrolled as originally proposed.
Emissions from this vent have been revised from 1.37 tons per year to
2.04 tons per year based on an increased turnover rate.
Final Action
The EPA is taking final action to approve the alternative emission
reduction (bubble) plan for the Dow Chemical Plaquemine facility as
submitted by the Governor of Louisiana in a letter dated October 19,
1983, and amended with a permit number 1838T(M-2) dated October 16,
1991, and State assurances provided in a letter from the Louisiana
Department of Environmental Quality dated September 17, 1991.
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.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., the 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, the 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 the EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S.E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct.
1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from
review under Executive Order 12866.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by December 5, 1994. Filing a petition for
reconsideration of this final rule by the Administrator would not
affect the finality of this rule for purposes of judicial review nor
would it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review
may be filed, and would not postpone the effectiveness of this rule.
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, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Note: Incorporation by reference of the State Implementation
Plan for the State of Louisiana was approved by the Director of the
Federal Register on July 1, 1982.
Dated: September 7, 1994.
J.D. Winkle,
Regional Administrator (6A).
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 T--Louisiana
2. Section 52.970 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(62) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.970 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(62) Alternative emission reduction (bubble) plan for the Dow
Chemical facility located in Plaquemine, Iberville Parish, as adopted
by the Louisiana Environmental Control Commission on July 28, 1983,
submitted by the Governor on October 19, 1983, and amended by the
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality with permit number
1838T(M-2) issued on October 16, 1991.
(ii) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Permit number 1838T(M-2) as issued by the Louisiana Department
of Environmental Quality on October 16, 1991.
(ii) Additional material.
(A) Letter dated September 17, 1991, from the Administrator of the
Office of Air Quality at the Louisiana Department of Environmental
Quality to the Chief of the Planning Section at the Air Programs Branch
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency--Region 6, furnishing State
assurances.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 94-24419 Filed 10-3-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
