[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 183 (Thursday, September 19, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 49289-49294]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-23791]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 70
[AD-FL-5611-5]
Clean Air Act Interim Approval of Operating Permits Program;
Delegation of Sections 111 and 112 Standards; State of Maine
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA proposes source category-limited interim approval of
the Operating Permits Program submitted by Maine for the purpose of
complying with Federal requirements for an approvable State program to
issue operating permits to all major stationary sources, and to certain
other sources. EPA is also proposing to approve Maine's authority to
implement hazardous air pollutant requirements.
DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by
October 21, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Donald Dahl, Air Permits,
CAP, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region I, JFK Federal
Building, Boston, MA 02203-2211. Copies of the State's submittal and
other supporting information used in developing the proposed interim
approval are available for inspection during normal business hours at
the following location: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1,
One Congress Street, 11th floor, Boston, MA 02203-2211.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donald Dahl, CAP, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 1, JFK Federal Building, Boston, MA 02203-
2211, (617) 565-4298.
I. Background and Purpose
A. Introduction
As required under title V of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments
(sections 501-507 of the Clean Air Act (``the Act'')), EPA has
promulgated rules which define the minimum elements of an approvable
State operating permits program and the corresponding standards and
procedures by which the EPA will approve, oversee, and withdraw
approval of State operating permits programs (see 57 FR 32250 (July 21,
1992)). These rules are codified at 40 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) Part 70. Title V requires States to develop, and submit to EPA,
programs for issuing these operating permits to all major stationary
sources and to certain other sources.
The Act requires that States develop and submit these programs to
EPA by November 15, 1993, and that EPA act to
[[Page 49290]]
approve or disapprove each program within 1 year after receiving the
submittal. The EPA's program review occurs pursuant to section 502 of
the Act and the Part 70 regulations, which together outline criteria
for approval or disapproval. Where a program substantially, but not
fully, meets the requirements of Part 70, EPA may grant the program
interim approval. Additionally, where a state can demonstrate to the
satisfaction of EPA that reasons exist to justify granting a source
category-limited interim approval, EPA may so exercise its authority. A
program with a source category-limited interim approval is one that
substantially meets the requirements for Part 70 and that applies to at
least 60% of all affected sources which account for 80% of the total
emissions in the state. If EPA has not fully approved a program by 2
years after the November 15, 1993 date, or by the end of an interim
program, it must establish and implement a Federal program.
B. Federal Oversight and Sanctions
If EPA were to finalize this proposed interim approval, it would
extend for two years following the effective date of final interim
approval. During the interim approval period, the State of Maine would
be protected from sanctions, and EPA would not be obligated to
promulgate, administer and enforce a Federal permits program for the
State of Maine. Permits issued under a program with interim approval
have full standing with respect to Part 70, and the 1-year time period
for submittal of permit applications by subject sources begins upon the
effective date of interim approval, as does the 3-year time period for
processing the initial permit applications except for source category-
limited interim approval.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Note that states may require applications to be submitted
earlier than required under section 503(c). See Chapter 140,
Appendix C.3. of Maine's rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following final interim approval, if the State of Maine failed to
submit a complete corrective program for full approval by the date 6
months before expiration of the interim approval, EPA would start an
18-month clock for mandatory sanctions. If the State of Maine then
failed to submit a corrective program that EPA found complete before
the expiration of that 18-month period, EPA would apply sanctions as
required by section 502(d)(2) of the Act, which would remain in effect
until EPA determined that the State of Maine had corrected the
deficiency by submitting a complete corrective program. If, six months
after application of the first sanction, the State of Maine still has
not submitted a corrective program that EPA finds complete, a second
sanction will be required.
If, following final interim approval, EPA were to disapprove the
State of Maine's complete corrective program, EPA would be required
under section 502(d)(2) to apply sanctions on the date 18 months after
the effective date of the disapproval, unless prior to that date the
State of Maine had submitted a revised program and EPA had determined
that it corrected the deficiencies that prompted the disapproval. If,
six months after EPA applies the first sanction, the State of Maine has
not submitted a revised program that EPA has determined corrected the
deficiencies that prompted disapproval, a second sanction will be
required.
Moreover, if EPA has not granted full approval to the State of
Maine's program by the expiration of an interim approval and that
expiration occurs after November 15, 1995, EPA must promulgate,
administer and enforce a Federal permits program for the State of Maine
upon interim approval expiration.
II. Proposed Action and Implications
A. Analysis of State Submission
The analysis contained in this document focuses on specific
elements of Maine's title V operating permits program that must be
corrected to meet the minimum requirements of 40 CFR Part 70. The full
program submittal, technical support document (TSD), dated July 5, 1996
entitled ``Technical Support Document--Maine Operating Permits
Program,'' which contains a detailed analysis of the submittal, and
other relevant materials are available for inspection as part of the
public docket. The docket may be viewed during regular business hours
at the address listed above.
1. Title V program support materials. Maine's title V program was
submitted by the State on October 23, 1995 (PROGRAM). The submittal was
found to be administratively complete on December 29, 1995. The PROGRAM
consisted of a Governor's letter, program description, Attorney
General's legal opinion, license regulations and enabling legislation,
program documentation, and a detailed license fee demonstration. On
June 24, 1996, Maine submitted a supplement to their PROGRAM, which
included a supplemental opinion from the Attorney General's Office and
a clarification from DEP on several aspects of the PROGRAM.
2. Title V operating permit regulations and implementation. Maine's
regulations implementing Part 70 include Department of Environmental
Protection, Bureau of Air Quality Control Regulation, Chapters 100 and
140.2 The Maine PROGRAM, including the operating license
regulations, substantially meets the requirements of 40 CFR Part 70,
including Secs. 70.2 and 70.3 with respect to applicability,
Secs. 70.4, 70.5 and 70.6 with respect to permit content and
operational flexibility, Secs. 70.7 and 70.8 with respect to public
participation and review by affected states and EPA, and Sec. 70.11
with respect to requirements for enforcement authority. Although the
regulations substantially meet Part 70 requirements, there are program
deficiencies that are outlined in section II.B. below as Interim
Approval issues. Those Interim Approval issues are more fully discussed
in the TSD. The ``Issues'' section of the TSD also contains a detailed
discussion of elements of Part 70 that are not explicitly contained in
Maine's program regulations, but which are satisfied by other elements
of Maine's program submittal or other Maine State law. Also discussed
in the TSD are certain elements of Maine's title V regulation that are
in need of a legal interpretation and which EPA is interpreting to be
consistent with Part 70 with the understanding that Maine shares such
interpretation. Those elements include: (1) What constitutes an
increase of a regulated pollutant in the definition of ``modification
or modified source;'' (2) license modification procedures when
replacing pollution control equipment; (3) the process for adjusting
test methods; (4) the due date for license renewal applications; (5)
what types of changes are allowed to occur off permit; (6) State
limitations on emission trading under operational flexibility; (7) how
a source looses its application shield for failure to submit additional
information; (8) the enforcement consequences for a source operating
using a general permit for which it does not qualify; and (9) the
liability of the original licensees until DEP approves a license
transfer and the timing of applications for license transfers. EPA
understands that Maine will implement its program consistent with EPA's
interpretations, and will base this interim approval on these
[[Page 49291]]
interpretations unless Maine comments to the contrary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The DEP regulations use the term ``license'' where EPA's
regulations use the term ``permit.'' In an attempt to be consistent
with the underlying regulations, this document will generally use
the term ``license'' when describing the state regulation and the
term ``permit'' when describing the federal regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Variances. Pursuant to 38 M.R.S.A. Sec. 587 the Maine DEP has the
authority to issue a variance under certain circumstances from air
pollution control requirements imposed by State law. Additionally
pursuant to 38 M.R.S.A. Secs. 590(3) and (6) the DEP has authority
under state law to include in an air license compliance schedules up to
24 months and to grant allowances for excess emissions during cold
start-ups and planned shutdowns. Each of these authorities could be
interpreted to provide for variances under state law from the
obligation to comply with air pollution control requirements that
correspond to federal applicable requirements in the Part 70 permit.
The EPA regards Maine's variance provisions as wholly external to the
program submitted for approval under Part 70 and consequently is
proposing to take no action on these provisions of State law. The EPA
has no authority to approve provisions of State law that are
inconsistent with the Act. The EPA does not recognize the ability of a
permitting authority to grant relief from the duty to comply with a
federally enforceable Part 70 permit, except where such relief is
granted through procedures allowed by Part 70. A Part 70 permit may be
issued or revised (consistent with Part 70 procedures), to incorporate
those terms of a variance that are consistent with applicable
requirements. A Part 70 permit may also incorporate, via Part 70 permit
issuance or revision procedures, the schedule of compliance set forth
in a variance. However, EPA reserves the right to pursue enforcement of
applicable requirements notwithstanding the existence of a compliance
schedule in a DEP license. This is consistent with 40 CFR
70.5(c)(8)(iii)(C), which states that a schedule of compliance ``shall
be supplemental to, and shall not sanction noncompliance with, the
applicable requirements on which it is based.'' Additionally, the Maine
Attorney General's Opinion specifically addresses these variance
provisions and clarifies that were DEP to grant a variance and seek to
modify the operating license to incorporate the variance as a Part 70
permit term, EPA would have the opportunity to object if the variance
were not in compliance with the applicable requirements of the Act. See
Legal Opinion of Andrew Ketterer, Maine Attorney General, November 13,
1995, at pages 3-4.
3. Permit fee demonstration. Section 502(B)(3) of the Act requires
that each permitting authority collect fees sufficient to cover all
reasonable direct and indirect costs required to develop and administer
its title V operating permit program. Each title V program submittal
must contain either a detailed demonstration of fee adequacy or a
demonstration that the fees collected exceed $25 per ton of actual
emissions per year, adjusted from the August, 1989 consumer price index
(``CPI'').
As part of its PROGRAM, Maine submitted a detailed fee
demonstration. Maine has demonstrated that PROGRAM costs will be $1.7
million dollars per year and that the State will collect 2.1 million
dollars from title V sources. EPA has reviewed Maine's fee
demonstration and believes that DEP has made reasonable assumptions
concerning permit processing costs, license oversight, and resource
demands to support the program. DEP has specifically enumerated its
expected fee revenues from Part 70 sources in the State to support its
income projections. Therefore, Maine has demonstrated that the State
will collect sufficient permit fees to meet EPA requirements. For more
information, see the detailed fee demonstration of Maine's title V
Program in the docket supporting this action.
4. Provisions implementing the requirements of other titles of the
act. a. Authority and/or commitments for section 112 implementation.
Maine has demonstrated in its title V program submittal adequate legal
authority to implement and enforce all section 112 requirements through
the title V permit. This legal authority is contained in Maine's
enabling legislation, regulatory provisions defining ``applicable
requirements,'' and the requirement that a title V permit must
incorporate all applicable requirements. EPA has determined that this
legal authority is sufficient to allow Maine to issue permits that
assure compliance with all section 112 requirements and to carry out
all section 112 activities. In addition, given Maine's commitments
regarding implementation of the State's title V program, EPA has
determined that the State will issue permits that assure compliance
with all section 112 requirements, and will carry out all section 112
activities. For further discussion of this subject, please refer to the
April 13, 1993 guidance memorandum titled ``Title V Program Approval
Criteria for Section 112 Activities,'' signed by John Seitz, Director
of the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
b. Implementation of 112(g) upon program approval. On February 14,
1995, EPA published an interpretive notice (see 60 FR 8333) that
postpones the effective date of section 112(g) until after EPA has
promulgated a rule addressing the requirements of that provision. The
section 112(g) interpretive notice explains that EPA is still
considering whether the effective date of section 112(g) should be
delayed beyond the date of promulgation of the Federal rule so as to
allow States time to adopt rules implementing the Federal rule, and
that EPA will provide for any such additional delay in the final
section 112(g) rulemaking. Unless and until EPA provides for such an
additional postponement of the effective date of section 112(g), Maine
must be able to implement section 112(g) during the period between
promulgation of the Federal section 112(g) rule and adoption of
implementing State regulations for section 112(g) requirements. EPA
believes that Maine can utilize the provisions found in Section 140.6
governing the licensing of new or reconstructed HAP sources to serve as
a procedural vehicle for implementing the section 112(g) rule and
making these requirements Federally enforceable between promulgation of
the Federal section 112(g) rule and adoption of implementing State
regulations for section 112(g). Maine has generally patterned these
provisions on EPA's most recent proposals for implementing section
112(g) of the Act. For this reason, EPA is proposing to approve Maine's
preconstruction permitting program found in Section 140.6 under the
authority of title V and Part 70 solely for the purpose of implementing
section 112(g) during the transition period between title V approval
and adoption of a State rule implementing EPA's section 112(g)
regulations.
Since the approval would be for the single purpose of providing a
mechanism to implement section 112(g) during the transition period, the
approval would be without effect if EPA decides in the final section
112(g) rule that sources are not subject to the requirements of the
rule until State regulations are adopted and Maine's Section 140.6
needs to be revised to accord with EPA's final section 112(g) rule.
Also, since the approval would be for the limited purpose of allowing
the State sufficient time to adopt regulations, EPA proposes to limit
the duration of the approval to 18 months following promulgation by EPA
of its section 112(g) rule. Finally, since Maine has already adopted
program regulations imposing MACT on the types of changes addressed
under section 112(g), Maine may be in a position to fully implement
section 112(g) immediately upon final promulgation of section 112(g)
rule,
[[Page 49292]]
without further modification of Chapter 140, if Maine's current
regulation corresponds to EPA's final 112(g) rule.
c. Program for straight delegation of sections 111 and 112
standards. The Part 70 requirements for approval of a State operating
permit program, specified in 40 CFR 70.4(b), encompass section
112(l)(5) requirements for approval of a program for delegation of the
hazardous air pollutant program General Provisions, Subpart A, of 40
CFR Parts 61 and 63, promulgated under section 112 of the Act, and MACT
standards as promulgated by EPA as they apply to Part 70 sources.
Section 112(l)(5) requires that a State's program contain adequate
legal authorities, adequate resources for implementation, and an
expeditious compliance schedule, which are also requirements under Part
70. The Maine Department of Environmental Protection provided a
supplemental request on June 24, 1996, for delegation of non-part 70
sources and along with the PROGRAM submitted information regarding
adequate legal authorities, adequate resources for implementation, and
an expeditious compliance schedule. Therefore, EPA is also proposing to
grant approval under section 112(l)(5) and 40 CFR Sec. 63.91 of Maine's
mechanism for receiving delegation for both major and area sources of
section 112 standards that are unchanged from the Federal standards as
promulgated (straight delegation) and section 112 infrastructure
programs such as those programs authorized under sections 112(i)(5),
112(g), 112(j), and 112(r). In addition, EPA is reconfirming the
delegation of 40 CFR Parts 60 and 61 standards currently delegated to
Maine as indicated in Table I.3 The original delegation agreement
between EPA and Maine was set forth in a letter to Henry E. Warren on
September 30, 1982. For future delegation of Part 60 standards Maine
will use the process as outlined in letter from James Brooks to Gerald
C. Potamis, dated June 24, 1996. Please note EPA has withdrawn
delegation of the following NESHAPs at Maine's request: Subpart L
``Benzene-Coke By Product Recovery,'' Subpart Q ``Radon-DOE,'' Subpart
Y ``Benzene Storage Vessels,'' Subpart T ``Radon Disposal of Uranium,''
Subpart BB ``Benzene Transfer Operations,'' and Subpart FF ``Benzene
Waste Operations.'' Maine requested the withdrawal because there
currently are no applicable sources in the State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Please note that federal rulemaking is not required for
delegation of section 111 standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is proposing to delegate all applicable future 40 CFR Part 61
and 63 standards pursuant to the following mechanism unless otherwise
requested by Maine.4 Maine will accept future delegation of
standards using incorporation by reference. The details of this
delegation mechanism will be set forth in a future Memorandum of
Agreement between EPA and Maine. This program will apply to both
existing and future standards for both major and area sources. In
addition, Maine has indicated that for some section 112 standards it
may choose to submit a more stringent State rule or program for EPA
approval under section 112(l). EPA will need to take public notice and
comment for any section 112 delegation other than straight delegation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The radionuclide National Emission Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants (NESHAP) is a section 112 regulation and, therefore,
also an applicable requirement under the State operating permits
program for part 70 sources. There is not yet a Federal definition
of ``major source'' for radionuclide sources. Therefore, until a
major source definition for radionuclide is promulgated, no source
would be a major section 112 source solely due to its radionuclide
emissions. However, a radionuclide source may, in the interim, be a
major source under Part 70 for another reason, thus requiring a Part
70 permit. The EPA will work with the State in the development of
its radionuclide program to ensure that permits are issued in a
timely manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. Implementation of Title IV of the Act. Maine makes a commitment
in Attachment H of its Program submittal to revise its regulations as
necessary in order to implement the Acid Rain provisions.
e. New source review requirements. Maine's program submittal
included definitions under Chapter 100 and licensing requirements under
Chapters 115 and 140 designed to implement preconstruction new source
review (NSR) permitting requirements for new and modified major and
minor sources of air pollutants. This action under Title V of the Act
and 40 CFR Part 70 is not an approval of these NSR provisions into the
Maine State implementation plan (SIP), nor does EPA take any position
under the Act in this action on the adequacy of Chapters 100, 115, and
140 to the extent they modify NSR requirements currently approved into
the SIP. EPA will act on these provisions under section 110 of the Act
after Maine requests EPA to approve them into the SIP.5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Note that the Attorney General's opinion at several points
appears to assume that EPA will be approving all of Maine's
licensing program into the SIP. See Attorney General's Opinion at
pages 3, 10, 11, and 19. As discussed further in the TSD, DEP has
not requested EPA to approve all of these license requirements in
the SIP, and some licensing provisions that relate primarily to
operating requirements as opposed to new or modified sources may not
be appropriate for approval into the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Proposed Action
The scope of Maine's Part 70 program covers all Part 70 sources
within the state of Maine, except any sources of air pollution over
which an Indian Tribe has jurisdiction. See, e.g., 59 FR 55813, 55815-
18 (Nov. 9, 1994). The term ``Indian Tribe'' is defined under the Act
as ``any Indian tribe, band, nation, or other organized group or
community, including any Alaska Native village, which is Federally
recognized as eligible for the special programs and services provided
by the United States to Indians because of their status as Indians.''
See section 302(r) of the CAA; see also 59 FR 43956, 43962 (Aug. 25,
1994); 58 FR 54364 (Oct. 21, 1993). EPA is not taking any position in
this action on whether any Federally recognized tribe in Maine has
jurisdiction over sources of air pollution.
Requirements for approval of an operating permit program, specified
in 40 CFR 70.4(b), encompass section 112(l)(5) requirements for
approval of a program for delegation of section 112 standards as
promulgated by EPA as they apply to Part 70 sources. Maine has also
demonstrated it has the authority and capacity to implement and enforce
section 112 standards for non-Part 70 sources. As discussed above,
Maine's submittal meets the requirements for EPA approval of delegation
of section 112 standards. Therefore, EPA is also proposing to grant
approval under section 112(l)(5) and 40 CFR Sec. 63.91 of the State's
mechanism for receiving delegation of section 112 standards that are
unchanged from Federal standards as promulgated. Maine will be
incorporating by reference section 112 standards for both major and
area sources.
The EPA is proposing to grant source category-limited interim
approval to the operating permits program submitted by Maine on October
24, 1995. Maine has proposed to permit 74% of its Title V sources which
emit 89% of the total emissions of all Title V sources within the first
three years of program approval. If promulgated, the State must make
the following changes in its rule to receive full approval:
1. Maine does not allow for ``section 502(b)(10)'' changes at a
title V source. See 40 CFR Sec. 70.4(b)(12)(i). In an August 29, 1994
(59 FR 44572) rulemaking proposal, EPA proposed to eliminate section
502(b)(10) changes as a mechanism for implementing operational
flexibility. However, the Agency solicited comment on the rationale for
this proposed elimination. If EPA should conclude, during a final
rulemaking, that section 502(b)(10)
[[Page 49293]]
changes are no longer required as a mechanism for operational
flexibility, then Maine will not be required to address 502(b)(10)
changes in its rule.
2. Maine's rules do not require the DEP to process a ``Part 70
Minor Change'' within 90 days of receiving an application. See 40 CFR
Sec. 70.7(e)(2)(iv). A ``Part 70 Minor Change'' is similar to a minor
permit modification under Part 70, except for the exclusion of
construction projects which are excluded in the State's rule. A ``Part
70 Minor Change,'' as defined by the State, includes a provision
allowing facilities to implement a proposed permit modification upon
application and prior to DEP's review. Maine must revise its program
regulations to require that DEP process all Part 70 minor changes
within 90 days of receiving the application to avoid the possibility of
a source operating indefinitely based on an unreviewed proposed permit
modification.
3. Section 140.7 contains provisions for a ``Part 70 Minor
Revisions.'' This permitting track allows Maine to process emission
increases under 4 tons per year of one regulated pollutant or under 8
tons per year total for all regulated pollutants without EPA, affected
state, or public review. This provision is inconsistent with the most
nearly analogous permit modification requirements in EPA's current
rule, which require minor permit modifications to receive at least
affected state and EPA review. On August 31, 1995, EPA proposed changes
in the Part 70 permit modification procedures that might accommodate
such changes. (See 60 FR 45530, 45538). If EPA amends Part 70 to allow
for such changes, then Maine may not need to revise this provision
depending on whether netting transactions can qualify under the 4 and 8
ton per year thresholds. Under EPA's current rule, however, Maine must
revise its program regulations to make Part 70 Minor Revisions
consistent with EPA's minor permit modification process at 40 CFR
Sec. 70.7(e)(2).
4. In Section 140.5(B)(6)(j), Maine allows a source under certain
circumstances to continue to emit up to the previously licensed level
for up to 24 months after the license is amended, potentially not in
compliance with applicable requirements. Maine must revise its program
regulations to limit this section to requirements enforceable only by
the State, as provided in Section 140.5(A)(6)(m). As discussed above in
connection with Maine's statutory variance authorities, EPA is required
to object to any permit terms not in compliance with applicable
requirements, including any such terms incorporated into a license,
pursuant to Section 140.4(B)(6)(j), being issued as a title V permit.
5. Appendix B of Chapter 140 contains a list of activities which
the State plans on treating as insignificant. Section B(1) of this
Appendix allows for any activity with emissions less than 1 ton per
year of any pollutant or 4 tons per year of all pollutants to be
treated as insignificant. In addition, Section B(2) incorporates
emission level thresholds for HAPs which are equal to or in many cases
far less than one ton per year. It is possible to interpret these two
sections to allow an activity emitting one ton per year of even a very
potent HAP to be treated as insignificant under Section B(1), even if
it emits in excess of any lower threshold set under Section B(2). EPA
understands this is a result DEP did not intend. Moreover, Sections
B(1) and B(2) could be read to allow a permittee to treat a combination
of up to four tons per year of HAPs to be treated as insignificant, as
long as no one HAP exceeded the thresholds in Section B(2). EPA has
required insignificant activities to emit no more than one ton per year
of HAPs. DEP must revise Appendix B to limit insignificant HAP
emissions to one ton per year for single HAPs and one ton per year for
a combination of HAPs.
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Request for Public Comments
The EPA is requesting comments on all aspects of this proposed
interim approval. Copies of the State's submittal and other information
relied upon for the proposed interim approval are contained in a docket
maintained at the EPA Regional Office. The docket is an organized and
complete file of all the information submitted to, or otherwise
considered by, EPA in the development of this proposed interim
approval. The principal purposes of the docket are:
(1) to allow interested parties a means to identify and locate
documents so that they can effectively participate in the approval
process, and
(2) to serve as the administrative record in the event of judicial
review. The EPA will consider any comments received by October 21,
1996.
B. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from
Executive Order 12866 review.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The EPA's actions under section 502 of the Act do not create any
new requirements, but simply address operating permits programs
submitted to satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR Part 70. Because this
action does not impose any new requirements, it does not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.
D. 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
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.
EPA has determined that the action promulgated today 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
Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local,
or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this
action.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70
Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control,
Intergovernmental relations, Operating permits, and Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Dated: September 8, 1996.
John P. DeVillars,
Regional Administrator, Region I.
Table I to the preamble--Reconfirmation of Part 60 and 61 Delegations
Part 60 Subpart Categories
D Fossil-Fuel Fired Steam Generators
Da Electric Utility Steam Generators
Db Industrial-Commercial-Institutional
Steam Generating Units
Dc Small Industrial-Commercial-
Institutional Steam Generating Units
E Incinerators
Ea Municipal Waste Combustors
F Portland Cement Plants
G Nitric Acid Plants
[[Page 49294]]
H Sulfuric Acid Plants
I Asphalt Concrete Plants
J Petroleum Refineries
K Petroleum Liquid Storage Vessels
Ka Petroleum Liquid Storage Vessels 5/18/
78
Kb Volatile Organic Liquid Storage
Vessels 7/23/84
L Secondary Lead Smelters
M Secondary Brass and Bronze Production
Plants
N Basic Oxygen Process Furnaces Primary
Emissions
O Sewage Treatment Plants
P Primary Copper Smelters
Q Primary Zinc Smelters
R Primary Lead Smelters
S Primary Aluminum Reduction
T Phosphate Fertilizer Wet Process
U Phosphate Fertilizer-Superphosphoric
Acid
V Phosphate Fertilizer-Diammonium
Phosphate
W Phosphate Fertilizer-Granular Triple
Superphosphate
X Phosphate Fertilizer-Granular Triple
Superphosphate Storage
Y Coal Preparation Plants
Z Ferroalloy Production Facilities
AA Steel Plants--Electric Arc Furnaces
BB Kraft Pulp Mills
CC Glass Manufacturing
DD Grain Elevators
EE Surface Coating of Metal Furniture
GG Stationary Gas Turbines
HH Lime Manufacturing Plants
KK Lead-Acid Battery Manufacturing
LL Metallic Mineral Processing Plants
NN Phosphate Rock Plants
PP Ammonium Sulfate Manufacturing
QQ Graphic Arts-Rotogravure Printing
RR Tape and Label Surface Coatings
SS Surface Coating: Large Appliances
TT Metal Coil Surface Coating
UU Asphalt Processing--Roofing
VV Equipment Leaks of VOC in SOCMI
WW Beverage Can Surface Coating
XX Bulk Gasoline Terminals
BBB Rubber Tire Manufacturing
DDD VOC Emissions From Polymer
Manufacturing Industry
FFF Flexible Vinyl and Urethan Coating
and Printing
GGG Equipment Leaks of VOC in Petroleum
Refineries
HHH Synthetic Fiber Production
III VOC From SOCMI Air Oxidation Unit
JJJ Petroleum Dry Cleaners
NNN VOC From SOCMI Distillation
OOO Nonmetallic Mineral Plants
QQQ VOC From Petroleum Refinery
Wastewater Systems
SSS Magnetic Tape Coating
VVV Polymeric Coating of Supporting
Substrates
Part 61 Subpart Categories
C Beryllium
E Mercury
F Vinyl Chloride
J Equipment Leaks of Benzene
M Asbestos
V Equipment Leaks (Fugitive Emission
Sources)
[FR Doc. 96-23791 Filed 9-18-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
