[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 49 (Monday, March 15, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12759-12762]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-6254]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[TX99-1-7389a; FRL-6239-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas;
Reasonably Available Control Technology for Emissions of Volatile
Organic Compounds (VOCs) From Wood Furniture Coating Operations and
Ship Building and Repair Operations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the EPA, are taking direct final action to include rules
in the Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP). These rules control
emissions of VOCs from Wood Furniture Coating Operations and Ship
Building and Repair Operations. Texas submitted these rules in a letter
dated April 13, 1998, to meet the Federal Clean Air Act's (the Act)
requirements for Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT).
DATES: This direct final rule is effective on May 14, 1999 unless we
receive adverse comments by April 14, 1999. If we receive such
comments, we 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: 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, Dallas, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Texas 75202-2733, telephone: (214) 665-7214.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Office of Air
Quality, 12124 Park 35 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, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20460.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Guy R. Donaldson, Air Planning
Section (6PD-L), Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division,
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas,
Texas 75202-2733, telephone: (214) 665-7242.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
What Action Is EPA Taking?
We are approving revisions to Texas rules for the control of VOC
emissions from Wood Furniture Coating Operations and from Ship Building
and Repair Operations. These facilities emit VOCs, primarily during
painting and solvent clean up operations. Texas based these rules on
the EPA Control Technique Guidelines (CTGs) for these source
categories. The approval of these rules means that we agree Texas is
implementing RACT on these source categories as required by section
182(b)(2)(A) and (C), and section 183 of the Act. Texas also is
requiring that coating of offshore oil and gas platforms coated at
shipbuilding/ship repair facilities meet the limits in the CTG. This
approval will incorporate these rules into the Texas SIP. The authority
for our approval of these rules is found in section 110, Part D and
section 301 of the Act.
What Are the Clean Air Act's RACT Requirements?
Section 172 of the Act contains general requirements for States to
implement RACT in areas that do not meet the National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS). Section 182(b)(2) of the Act contains more
specific requirements for moderate and above ozone nonattainment areas.
In particular, 182(b)(2)(A) requires States to implement RACT on each
category of VOC source covered by a CTG issued after enactment of the
1990 Clean Air Act Amendments.
On April 27, 1996, we issued a CTG for ship building and repair
operations. On May 20, 1996, we issued a CTG for Wood furniture
manufacturing operations. The State of Texas was then required to
implement RACT requirements in its moderate and above ozone
nonattainment areas based on the information in these CTGs.
A related requirement of the Act in 182(b)(2)(C) calls for States
to implement RACT on major sources of VOCs in ozone nonattainment area.
The Act defines a major source as a facility that emits more than 100
tons/year in a marginal or moderate ozone nonattainment area, 50 tons/
year in a serious ozone nonattainment area or 25 tons/year in a severe
ozone nonattainment area. Texas submitted and we approved (61 FR 5589)
declarations that, outside of the Houston ozone nonattainment area,
there are no major shipbuilding and repair sources in ozone
nonattainment areas. In the same Federal Register, we approved a
declaration that, outside of the Dallas/Fort Worth nonattainment area,
there were no major wood furniture manufacturing operations in ozone
nonattainment areas in Texas.
A CTG, however, can call for control of sources that emit less than
a major source level of emissions if control of smaller sources is
technically and economically feasible. The wood furniture CTG indicates
that sources emitting as little as 25 tons/year can be controlled at
reasonable cost even in serious or moderate ozone nonattainment area.
Thus, the Texas rule calls for the control of wood furniture
manufacturing operations that emit more than 25 tons/year in all of the
ozone nonattainment areas in Texas.
Texas has chosen to implement the shipbuilding and repair CTG in
the
[[Page 12760]]
Beaumont/Port Arthur and Houston/Galveston areas because these
operations would only be expected to occur in the coastal areas. The
shipbuilding and repair CTG outlines reasonable controls based on the
major source definition for a nonattainment area. Thus in the Beaumont/
Port Arthur area, only facilities emitting more than 100 tons/year are
required to implement controls. Texas chose to implement the rules in
Beaumont, in spite of the previous declaration that there were no major
source ship building and repair facilities. In Houston, ship building
and repair facilities that emit as little as 25 tons/year must be
controlled.
Why Regulate VOCs?
Oxygen in the atmosphere reacts with VOCs and Oxides of Nitrogen
(NOX) to form ozone, a key component of urban smog. Inhaling
even low levels of ozone can trigger a variety of health problems
including chest pains, coughing, nausea, throat irritation, and
congestion. It also can worsen bronchitis and asthma. Exposure to ozone
can also reduce lung capacity in healthy adults.
What Is a SIP?
Section 110 of the Act requires States to develop air pollution
regulations and control strategies to ensure that state air quality
meets the NAAQS established by the EPA. These ambient standards are
established under section 109 of the Act and they address six criteria
pollutants: carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, lead, particulate
matter and sulfur dioxide.
Each state must submit these regulations and control strategies to
us for approval and incorporation into the federally enforceable SIP.
Each State has a SIP designed to protect air quality. These SIPs can be
extensive, containing State regulations or other enforceable documents
and supporting information such as emission inventories, monitoring
networks, and modeling demonstrations.
What Is a Control Technique Guideline?
A CTG is a document issued by EPA that includes information
regarding technology and costs of various emissions control techniques
that States can use to establish RACT. Each CTG contains a
``presumptive norm'' for RACT for a specific source category. Where
applicable, States should adopt rules consistent with the presumptive
norm. If a State adopts rules consistent with the presumptive norm, we
will approve the rules as RACT. States may choose to develop their own
RACT requirements on a case by case basis, considering the economic and
technical circumstances of an individual source. If we agree with the
State's technical and economic analysis for a particular source, we can
approve source specific RACT requirements that differ from the
presumptive norm in the CTG.
Section 183 of the Clean Air Act Amendments called for EPA to issue
11 CTGs. One of these CTGs was the Wood Furniture CTG. In addition,
section 183(b)(4) specifically directed EPA to issue a CTG for the
control of emissions from ship building and repair operations.
What Do the State's Rules Require?
Texas generally followed the presumptive norm in the CTGs. The
requirements for ship building and repair and wood furniture coating
can be found in the TNRCC's rules for Surface Coating Processes located
at 30 TAC 115.420-115.429. These rules establish limits for the amount
of VOCs that marine coatings and wood furniture coatings can contain
when applied which are identical to those contained in the CTGs.
The rules for wood furniture coating also establish new work
practices as recommended by the CTG. For wood furniture coating
operations, the rules generally prohibit the use of conventional air
spray guns. Instead facilities must use, where possible, paint
application equipment that will result in a lower percentage of paint
over spray. Less over spray will result in lower emissions of VOCs.
We reviewed the State's requirements against the recommendations in
the CTGs and agree that RACT is being implemented for wood furniture
operations and ship building. For further information regarding our
review, please see the Technical Support Document located in the docket
for this action.
Do These State Rules, Which EPA Is Now Approving, Apply to Me?
These rules are intended to reduce VOC emissions in areas that do
not meet NAAQS for ozone. Consequently, these rules apply to facilities
located in the Dallas/Fort Worth (moderate), El Paso (serious),
Beaumont/Port Arthur (moderate) and Houston/Galveston (severe) ozone
nonattainment areas.
Specifically, these rules apply to you if you are an owner or
operator of a wood furniture coating operation that emits, when
uncontrolled, more than 25 tons/year of VOCs, and you are located in
Dallas, Denton, Tarrant, Collin, Hardin, Jefferson, Orange, Brazoria,
Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery, Waller or
El Paso Counties. If you emit less than 25 tons/year VOCs when
uncontrolled, you will need to continue to comply with Texas' existing
rules for wood furniture coating contained at 115.421(a)(13).
These rules apply to you if you are the owner or operator of a ship
building operation or ship repair operation that emits more than 100
tons/year of VOC, when uncontrolled, in Hardin, Jefferson or Orange
counties. Also, these rules apply to you if you are the owner or
operator of a ship building operation or ship repair operation that
emits, when uncontrolled, more than 25 tons/year in Brazoria, Chambers,
Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery, or Waller Counties.
What Does Federal Approval of a State Regulation Mean to Me?
Enforcement of the State regulation before and after it is
incorporated into the federally approved SIP is primarily a state
function. However, once the regulation is federally approved, the EPA
and the public may take enforcement action against violators of these
regulations if the state fails to do so.
What Is the Federal Approval Process for a SIP?
In order for State regulations to be incorporated into the
federally enforceable SIP, States must formally adopt the regulations
and control strategies consistent with State and Federal requirements.
This process generally includes a public notice, a public hearing, a
public comment period, and a formal adoption by a state-authorized
rulemaking body.
Once a State rule, regulation, or control strategy is adopted, the
State may submit the adopted provisions to us and request that these
provisions be included in the federally enforceable SIP. We must then
decide on an appropriate Federal action, provide public notice on this
action, and seek additional public comment regarding this action. If
adverse comments are received, we must address them prior to a final
action.
All State regulations and supporting information approved by the
EPA under section 110 of the Act are incorporated into the federally
approved SIP. Records of these SIP actions are maintained in the Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) at Title 40, part 52, entitled ``Approval
and Promulgation of Implementation Plans.'' The actual State
regulations which were approved are not reproduced in their entirety in
the CFR but are ``incorporated by reference,'' which means that we have
approved a given State regulation with a specific effective date.
[[Page 12761]]
What Is the Process for EPA's Approval of This SIP Revision?
We are publishing this rule without prior proposal because we view
this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse comment.
However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal Register
publication, we are publishing a separate document that will serve as
the proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are filed.
This rule will be effective on May 14, 1999 without further notice
unless we receive adverse comment by April 14, 1999. If we receive
adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. We
will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on
the proposed rule. We will not institute a second comment period on
this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this
time.
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 will be
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and
regulatory requirements.
Administrative Requirements
Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled
``Regulatory Planning and Review.''
B. Regulatory Flexibility
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 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
Clean Air 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.
See Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42
U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
C. 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 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 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.
D. 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. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2). This rule will be effective May 14, 1999.
E. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership
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, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by
consulting, E.O. 12875 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 any 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.
F. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
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, or EPA consults with those
governments. If the EPA complies by consulting, E.O. 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, E.O. 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
[[Page 12762]]
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 new requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.
G. 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.
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 May 14, 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, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: March 1, 1999.
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 of 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)(117) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.2270 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(117) Revisions to the Texas State Implementation Plan submitted to
the EPA in a letter dated April 13, 1998. These revisions address
Reasonably Available Control Technology for Wood Furniture coating
operations and Ship Building and Repair. The revisions also address
coating of oil and gas platforms at ship building and repair
facilities.
(i) Incorporation by Reference.
(A) Revisions to Regulation V, as adopted by the Commission on
March 18, 1998, effective April 7, 1998, sections 115.10. Definitions--
Introductory Paragraph, 115.420 Surface Coating Definitions, 115.420(a)
General Surface Coating Definitions, 114.420(a)(1)-115.420(a)(10),
115.420(b) Specific surface coating definitions--Introductory
Paragraph, 115.420(b)(1), 115.420(b)(2), 115.420(b)(2)(A),
115.420(b)(2)(B), 115.420(b)(3)-115.420(b)(9), 115.420(b)(10),
115.420(b)(10)(A)-115.420(b)(10)(E), 115.420(b)(10)(F),
115.420(b)(10)(F)(i)-115.420(b)(10)(F)(vii), 115.420(b)(10)(G),
115.420(b)(11), 115.420(b)(12), 115.420(b)(12)(A)-115.420(b)(12)(FF),
115.420(b)(13), 115.420(b)(13)(A), 115.420(b)(13)(A)(i),
115.420(b)(13)(A)(ii), 115.420(b)(13)(B), 115.420(b)(13)(B)(i)-
115.420(b)(13)(B)(ix), 115.420(b)(14), 115.420(b)(15), 115.420(15)(A),
115.420(15)(A)(i)-115.420(15)(A)(xi), 115.420(15)(B),
115.420(15)(B)(i)-115.420(15)(B)(xix), 115.421(a), 115.421(a)(8),
115.421(a)(8)(B), 115.421(a)(8)(B)(i)-115.421(a)(8)(B)(ix),
115.421(a)(13), 115.421(a)(13)(A), 115.421(a)(13)(A)(i)-
115.421(a)(13)(A)(vii), 115.421(a)(13)(A)(viii), 115.421(a)(13)(A)(ix),
115.421(a)(14), 115.421(a)(14)(A), 115.421(a)(14)(A)(i),
115.421(a)(14)(A)(ii), 115.421(a)(14)(A)(iii),
115.421(a)(14)(A)(iii)(I)- 115.421(a)(14)(A)(iii)(III),
115.421(a)(14)(A)(iv)-115.421(a)(14)(A)(vi), 115.421(a)(14)(B),
115.421(a)(15), 115.421(a)(15)(A),115.421(a)(15)(B),
115.421(a)(15)(B)(i), 115.421(a)(15)(B)(ii), 115.421(b), 115.422.
Control Requirements--Introductory Paragraph, 115.422(2), 115.422(3),
115.422(3)(A), 115.422(3)(B), 115.422(3)(C), 115.422(3)(C)(i),
115.422(3)(C)(ii), 115.422(3)(C)(ii)(I), 115.422(3)(C)(ii)(II),
115.422(3)(C)(iii)-115.422(3)(C)(v), 115.422(3)(C)(vi),
115.422(3)(C)(vi)(I), 115.422(3)(vi)(II), 115.422(3)(D), 115.422(3)(E),
115.422(3)(E)(i), 115.422(3)(E)(ii), 115.422(4), 115.422(4)(A)-
115.422(4)(C), 115.422(5), 115.422(5)(A), 115.422(5)(B), 115.423(a),
115.423(a)(1), 115.423(a)(2), 115.423(b), 115.423(b)(1), 115.423(b)(2),
115.426(a), 115.426(a)(1), 115.426(a)(1)(B), 115.426(a)(1)(B)(i),
115.426(a)(1)(B)(ii), 115.426(a)(2), 115.426(a)(2)(A),
115.426(a)(2)(A)(i), 115.426(b), 115.426(b)(1), 115.426(b)(1)(B),
115.426(b)(2), 115.426(b)(2)(A), 115.426(b)(2)(A)(i), 115.427(a),
115.427(a)(1), 115.427(a)(1)(B), 115.427(a)(1)(C), 115.427(a)(3),
115.427(a)(3)(A), 115.427(a)(3)(B), 115.427(a)(3)(D)-115.427(a)(3)(I),
115.427(b), 115.427(b)(4), 115.429(a), and 115.429(b).
(B) Certification Dated March 18, 1998 that these are true and
correct copies of revisions to 30 TAC Chapter 115 and the SIP.
[FR Doc. 99-6254 Filed 3-12-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
