[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 184 (Friday, September 22, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55287-55290]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-8113]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0543; FRL-8217-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Wisconsin

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to the Wisconsin State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone. In these revisions, the State has 
incorporated changes EPA made to its definition of volatile organic 
compound (VOC) and its VOC control requirements for yeast 
manufacturing. As a result of EPA's approval, five chemical compounds 
will no longer be considered VOCs. The changes to VOC control 
requirements match the EPA maximum achievable control technology (MACT) 
limits for yeast manufacturers.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective November 21, 2006, 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by October 23, 2006. If adverse 
comments are received, EPA 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: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2006-0543, by one of the following methods:
    <bullet> www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    <bullet> E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e8858787868d91c682878086a88d9889c68f879e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c9a4a6a6a7acb0e7a3a6a1a789acb9a8e7aea6bf">[email protected]</span></a>.
    <bullet> Fax: (312) 886-5824.
    <bullet> Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, 
(AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    <bullet> Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant 
Section, (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 
accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation, and 
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed 
information. The Regional Office's official hours of business are 
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal 
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2006-0543. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information, the disclosure of 
which is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov 
or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' 
system, which means that EPA will not know your identity or contact 
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you 
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through 
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured 
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket 
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic 
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact 
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you 
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties 
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to 
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special 
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or 
viruses. For additional instructions on submitting comments, go to 
Section I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Certain other 
material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only 
in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either 
electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This Facility is 
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 
legal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Matt Rau, Environmental 
Engineer, at (312) 886-6524 before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Rau, Environmental Engineer, 
Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), EPA Region 5, 
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6524, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#abd9cade85c6cadfdfc3cedcebcedbca85ccc4dd"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c4b6a5b1eaa9a5b0b0aca1b384a1b4a5eaa3abb2">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information 
section is arranged as follows:

I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
II. What Is EPA Approving?
III. What Is the Background for This Action?
IV. What Is EPA's Analysis of the State Submission?
V. What Are the Environmental Effects of This Action?
VI. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.

I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    A. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through 
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the 
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or 
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as 
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the 
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as 
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information 
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. 
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with 
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments, 
remember to:
    <bullet> Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other 
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and 
page number).
    <bullet> Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives 
and substitute language for your requested changes.
    <bullet> Describe any assumptions and provide any technical 
information and/or data that you used.
    <bullet> If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how 
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced.
    <bullet> Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and 
suggest alternatives.

[[Page 55288]]

    <bullet> Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the 
use of profanity or personal threats.
    <bullet> Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period 
deadline identified.

II. What Is EPA Approving?

    EPA is approving revisions to Wisconsin's VOC definitions for five 
compounds and VOC control requirements for yeast manufacturing 
facilities. Wisconsin added NR 400.02(162)(a)45 to 48, which excludes 
the four VOC compounds from the definition of VOCs: 1,1,1,2,2,3,3-
heptafluoro-3-methoxy-propane; 3-ethoxy-1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6-
dodecafluoro-2-(trifluoromethyl) hexane; 1,1,1,2,3,3,3-
heptafluoropropane; and methyl formate (HCOOCH<INF>3</INF>). Sources of 
the compounds listed under NR 400.02(162)(a) do not have to follow any 
of these VOC requirements when using the compounds.
    In addition, Wisconsin has added NR 400.02(162)(b), which states 
that t-butyl acetate will no longer be subject to VOC emission or 
content limits. Sources using t-butyl acetate will still need to follow 
VOC recordkeeping, emission reporting, and inventory requirements.
    Wisconsin has also revised its VOC control requirements for yeast 
manufacturing facilities. This includes the addition of NR 
424.05(2)(c), which creates the requirement that sources must comply 
with the emissions limits for at least 98 percent of all fermentation 
batches over a rolling 12 month period.

III. What Is the Background for This Action?

    Wisconsin's requested revisions to the VOC definitions adopt 
changes that EPA made on November 29, 2004. In the first action (69 FR 
69298), EPA added four chemicals to the list of excluded compounds at 
40 CFR 51.100(s)(1), on the basis that these compounds make a 
negligible contribution to tropospheric ozone formation. These are: 
1,1,1,2,2,3,3-heptafluoro-3-methoxy-propane; 3-ethoxy-
1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6-dodecafluoro-2-(trifluoromethyl) hexane; 
1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane; and methyl formate.
    In the second action (69 FR 69304), EPA modified the definition of 
VOC at 40 CFR 51.100(s)(5) to exclude t-butyl acetate as a VOC for 
purposes of VOC emission limitations or VOC content requirements. While 
EPA determined that t-butyl acetate has a negligible contribution to 
tropospheric ozone formation, it also concluded that the compound 
should still be subject to all recordkeeping, emissions reporting, 
modeling, and inventory VOC requirements.
    Wisconsin also requested VOC control requirement revisions to match 
yeast manufacturing limits. The May 21, 2001 national emission 
standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for nutritional yeast 
manufacturing (66 FR 27876) set limits on VOC emissions. The yeast 
NESHAP limits VOC emissions as a surrogate for emissions of 
acetaldehyde, a hazardous air pollutant that is also a VOC. The limits 
affect both VOC concentration limits and a percent-of-batches minimum. 
At least 98 percent of the batches on a 12-month rolling average must 
meet the VOC concentration limit.

IV. What Is EPA's Analysis of the State Submission?

    The changes to Wisconsin's definition of VOC parallel the revisions 
to 40 CFR 51.100(s)(1), the de-listing of four compounds formerly 
considered VOCs and to 40 CFR 51.100(s)(5), the modification of the 
definition of VOC concerning t-butyl acetate.
    EPA revised the VOC emission limits for nutritional yeast 
manufacturing facilities in 40 CFR 63 subpart CCCC (63.2130-2192). 
Wisconsin revised and added sections to its rules that make the same 
revisions. Emission limit compliance is required for at least 98 
percent of batches over a rolling 12-month period.
    The requested revisions match changes made to federal regulations. 
Therefore, the modifications are approvable as revisions to Wisconsin's 
SIP.

V. What Are the Environmental Effects of This Action?

    Volatile organic compounds are precursors to ozone formation. 
Complex photochemical reactions involving VOCs form tropospheric ozone.
    Ozone decreases lung function, causing chest pain and coughing. It 
can aggravate asthma, reduce lung capacity, and increase risk of 
respiratory diseases like pneumonia and bronchitis. Children playing 
outside and healthy adults who work or exercise outside also may be 
harmed by elevated ozone levels. Ozone also reduces vegetation growth 
in economically important agricultural crops and wild plants.
    EPA has determined that the five compounds make a negligible 
contribution to ozone formation. Thus, the compounds are no longer 
considered to be VOCs and the exemptions will not harm the air quality. 
In fact if sources switch from a VOC compound to one of the compounds 
being removed from the VOC list, ozone formation may be reduced.
    Exposure to HAPs at sufficient concentration and duration may 
increase the risk of cancer and other serious health effects. These 
health effects include damage to the immune system and neurological, 
reproductive, developmental, and respiratory health problems. Drinking 
water can be contaminated by HAPs. In addition, some HAPs can enter the 
food chain through the exposure of crops and animals. The VOC limits 
placed on yeast manufacturing facilities will limit HAP emissions.

VI. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

    EPA is approving, through direct final rulemaking, revisions to the 
Wisconsin ozone regulations. As a result of EPA's approval of 
Wisconsin's SIP submission, four compounds are no longer considered to 
be VOCs and a fifth compound is not subject to VOC content and emission 
limits but will still be subject to other requirements. The VOC control 
requirements for yeast manufacturing facilities were also revised.
    We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we 
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse 
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal 
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will 
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse 
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective November 21, 
2006 without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written 
comments by October 23, 2006. If we receive such comments, we will 
withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a 
subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public 
comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule 
based on the proposed action. The EPA will not institute a second 
comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action 
should do so at this time. If we do not receive any comments, this 
action will be effective November 21, 2006.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Executive Order 12866; Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.

[[Page 55289]]

Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use

    Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action 
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning 
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that 
this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 
601 et seq.).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state 
law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that 
required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).

Executive Order 13175 Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal 
Governments

    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (59 
FR 22951, November 9, 2000).

Executive Order 13132 Federalism

    This action also does not have Federalism implications because it 
does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the 
relationship between the national government and the states, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a 
Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the 
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air 
Act.

Executive Order 13045 Protection of Children From Environmental Health 
and Safety Risks

    This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 
et seq.).

Congressional Review Act

    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. 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).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 21, 2006. 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, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Volatile organic 
compounds.

    Dated: August 23, 2006.
Jerri-Anne Garl,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, of title 40 
of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart YY--Wisconsin

0
2. Section 52.2570 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(114) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.2570  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (114) On April 11, 2006, Wisconsin submitted revised regulations 
that match 40 CFR 51.100(s)(1), as amended at 69 FR 69298. As a result, 
the compounds, 1,1,1,2,2,3,3-heptafluoro-3-methoxy-propane, 3-ethoxy-
1,1,1,2,3,4,4,5,5,6,6,6-dodecafluoro-2-(trifluoromethyl)hexane, 
1,1,1,2,3,3,3-heptafluoropropane, and methyl formate, are added to the 
list of ``nonphotochemically reactive hydrocarbons'' or ``negligibly 
photochemically reactive compounds'' in NR 400.02(162)(a)45. to 48. 
Companies producing or using the four compounds will no longer need to 
follow the VOC rules for these compounds. Section NR 400.02(162)(b) was 
added for the compound t-butyl acetate. It is not considered a VOC for 
emission limits and content requirements. T-butyl acetate will still be 
considered a VOC for the recordkeeping, emissions reporting, and 
inventory requirements. Wisconsin also added and modified sections of 
NR 424.05, its VOC control requirements for yeast manufacturing 
facilities. Wisconsin's requirements are the same as the federal 
requirements in the national emission standards for hazardous air 
pollutants for nutritional yeast manufacturing.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.

[[Page 55290]]

    (A) Wisconsin Administrative Code Sec.  NR 400: Air Pollution 
Control Definitions, Section 2: Definitions, Subsection 162: ``Volatile 
organic compound,'' and Sec.  NR 424: Control of Organic Compound 
Emissions from Process Lines, Section 5: Yeast Manufacturing, 
Subsection 2: Emission Limitations, and Subsection 5: Test Methods and 
Procedures. The regulations were effective on January 1, 2006.
[FR Doc. 06-8113 Filed 9-21-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>