63658 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 231 / Tuesday, December 2, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[LA35–1–7305a; FRL–5928–2]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans,

Louisiana; Reasonable Available

Control Technology for Emissions of

Volatile Organic Compounds

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: In this action, the EPA is

conditionally approving in part, and

fully approving in part, revisions to the

Louisiana State Implementation Plan

(SIP). The revisions incorporate

regulations to control Volatile Organic

Compound (VOC) emissions from major

stationary sources by means of

Reasonable Available Control

Technology (RACT). The major

stationary source category controlled by

the conditionally approved regulation is

Synthetic Organic Chemical

Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI) batch

processes. The major stationary source

categories controlled by the fully

approved regulations are SOCMI

reactors, SOCMI distillation, and

industrial cleanup solvents. The

intended effect of these rules is to

reduce VOC emissions into the ambient

air and thereby reduce ground-level

ozone concentrations. Both EPA’s full

and conditional approval of these

regulations makes them federally

enforceable.

The full approval of the revisions to

the SIP to control VOC emissions from

the batch processes source category is

contingent upon the State of Louisiana

submitting a revision of the single unit

operation exemptions of the SOCMI

batch processing rule. If the State fails

to submit a revision to the batch

processing rule within one year of the

conditional approval of these SIP

revisions, the conditional approval will

convert to a disapproval.

In the proposed rules section of

today’s Federal Register, the EPA is

proposing and seeking public comment

on the same conditional and final

approvals of the Louisiana SIP that are

discussed in this notice. If adverse

comments are received on these

approvals, the EPA will withdraw the

direct final rule and address the

comments received in a subsequent

final rule, based on the related proposed

rule. No additional opportunity for

public comment will be provided.

DATES: This action is effective on

February 2, 1998 unless adverse or

critical comments are received by

January 2, 1998. If the effective date is

delayed, a timely notice will be

published in the Federal Register.

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, Region 6, Dallas, 1445 Ross

Avenue, Texas 75202–2733, telephone:

(214) 665–7214.

Air Quality Division, Louisiana

Department of Environmental Quality

(LDEQ), 7290 Bluebonnet Boulevard,

Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70810,

telephone: (504) 765–7247.

Documents which are incorporated by

reference are available for public

inspection at the Air and Radiation

Docket and Information Center,

Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Eaton R. Weiler, Air Planning Section

(6PD–L), Multimedia Planning and

Permitting Division, Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross

Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733,

telephone: (214) 665–2174.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. Background of VOC RACT Rule

Requirements

Section 172 of the Clean Air Act (the

Act) as amended in 1990, entitled

Nonattainment Plan Provisions in

General, requires that states adopt

RACT rules for major stationary sources

of VOCs located in ozone nonattainment

areas. The RACT is defined as the

lowest emission limitation that a

particular source is capable of meeting

by the application of control technology

that is reasonably available, considering

technological and economic feasibility

as defined in 44 FR 53761 (September

17, 1979). In accordance with section

108 of the Act, the EPA publishes

Control Technique Guideline (CTG)

documents in order to assist the States

in developing RACT rules for source

categories. The CTGs provide

information on available air pollution

control techniques and provide

recommendations on what the EPA

considers the ‘‘presumptive norm’’ for

RACT.

Sections 182(b)(2) and 182(c) of the

Act as amended in 1990 require States

to adopt RACT rules for three general

groups of major stationary sources of

VOCs located in ozone nonattainment

areas designated as moderate or above.

The first group consists of sources

covered by an existing CTG (a CTG

issued prior to the enactment of the

1990 Act amendments). The second

group consists of sources covered by a

CTG issued after the enactment of the

1990 Act amendments. These CTGs are

referred to as ‘‘post-enactment’’ CTGs.

The third group consists of major

sources not covered by a CTG. These

sources are referred to as ‘‘non-CTG’’

sources.

Under section 302(j), the Act defines

major source as any source which has

the potential to emit 100 tons per year

or more of any air contaminant unless

otherwise expressly provided. Under

section 182(c), a major source is defined

as any source which is located in an

area designated as a serious ozone nonattainment area and has the potential to

emit 50 tons per year or more of VOCs.

Therefore, in the Baton Rouge five

parish serious ozone nonattainment

area, a major source definition is the

potential to emit 50 tons per year or

more of VOCs.

Under section 183 of the Act as

amended in 1990, entitled Federal

Ozone Measures, the EPA is required to

issue CTGs for 13 source categories by

November 15, 1993. Two specific source

categories are listed under section 183:

aerospace coatings and solvents, and

shipbuilding operations. The other 11

categories are listed in 57 FR 18077

(April 28, 1992) and are as follows:

1. SOCMI distillation.

2. SOCMI reactors.

3. Wood furniture.

4. Plastic parts business machines.

5. Plastic parts coating (other).

6. Offset lithography.

7. Industrial wastewater.

8. SOCMI batch processing.

10. Volatile Organic Liquid (VOL) storage

tanks.

11. Clean-up solvents.

To date, CTGs have been published

for four of the thirteen source categories:

SOCMI distillation, SOCMI reactors,

wood furniture, and shipbuilding. As

described in a January 20, 1994

memorandum from John Seitz, Director

of the EPA’s Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, the EPA plans

to make available Alternative Control

Technology (ACT) documents for the

CTG source categories for which CTG

documents have not yet been published.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 231 / Tuesday, December 2, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 63659

These ACT documents provide much of

the same information as the CTG

documents, however, instead of

establishing a presumptive norm for

RACT rule, these documents provide

options for control.

On April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18077), the

EPA interpreted the Act to allow a State

to submit a non-CTG rule by November

15, 1992, or to defer submittal of a

RACT rule for sources that the State

anticipated would be covered by a postenactment CTG. For post-enactment

CTGs, the amended Act requires States

to submit RACT rules in accordance

with the schedule specified in the

corresponding CTG document. If the

EPA failed to issue a CTG by November

15, 1993, the responsibility shifted to

the State to submit a non-CTG RACT

rule for those sources by November 15,

1994.

B. Negative Declarations

In agreement with EPA policy, if there

are no major sources of VOC emissions

in a CTG source category located in a

nonattainment area, the State should

submit a formal statement of the

nonexistence of such major sources, i.e.,

a negative declaration. On April 6 and

June 20, 1994, the State of Louisiana

submitted letters of negative declaration

for the following CTG source categories:

aerospace coatings and solvents,

shipbuilding operations, offset

lithography, plastic parts—business

machines, plastic parts—other, and

wood furniture. The EPA approved

these letters on October 30, 1996, in 61

FR 55894. A CTG document was

published in April 1996, for wood

furniture which lowered the threshold

for a source to be considered major in

the wood furniture source category to 25

tons per year or more in an ozone

nonattainment area. On January 28,

1997, the State of Louisiana submitted

a letter of negative declaration for the

wood furniture category based on the

lower major source threshold.

II. State Submittal

On December 15, 1995, the State of

Louisiana submitted to the EPA five sets

of rules which require six source

categories to apply RACT to VOC

emissions from major stationary sources

located in the Baton Rouge ozone

nonattainment area. In Louisiana, the

following five parishes areas are

designated as serious: Ascension, East

Baton Rouge, Iberville, Livingston, and

West Baton Rouge. The applicable

source categories are VOL tank storage,

SOCMI reactors, SOCMI distillation,

SOCMI batch processes, industrial

wastewater, and industrial cleanup

solvents. The rules also apply to Pointe

Coupee Parish and Calcasieu Parish,

formerly serious and marginal ozone

nonattainment areas, respectively.

These rules were published in the

Louisiana Register on April 20,

September 20, and November 20, 1995.

No action is being taken on the

industrial wastewater portion of the

December 15, 1995, submittal. The EPA

has identified provisions which are

deficient with respect to EPA guidance.

In short, the EPA has concerns with the

rule provisions which are followed to

determine the characteristics of the

wastewater stream, and the testing

requirements for biological treatment

units.

The EPA has previously approved

Louisiana’s RACT rule for VOL tank

storage, 33 Louisiana Administrative

Code (LAC) 2103, on October 22, 1996

(61 FR 57470) as part of the 15% rate

of progress plan submitted to the EPA

on December 15, 1995.

III. Analysis of State Submittal

A. Industrial Cleaning Solvents

Chapter 21 of 33 LAC has been

amended to include Section 2157, (33

LAC 2157) Limiting Volatile Organic

Compound Emissions from Cleanup

Solvent Processing. Section 2157 is

intended to incorporate regulations

which represent RACT for the cleanup

solvents CTG-source category.

Facilities affected are those which

emit or have the potential to emit 50

tons per year or more of VOCs, and

which use solvents in one or more of the

following nine solvent-cleaning

operations: spray gun cleaning, spray

booth cleaning, large manufactured

components cleaning, equipment

cleaning, floor cleaning, line cleaning,

parts cleaning, tank cleaning, and small

manufactured components cleaning.

Geographically, these rules apply to the

five parish Baton Rouge ozone

nonattainment area, and Pointe Coupee

and Calcasieu Parishes.

To assist State agencies in developing

rules to limit emission of VOCs which

result from industrial cleaning with

organic solvents, in February 1994, the

EPA published the ACT document titled

Industrial Cleaning Solvents (EPA–453/

R–94–015). The ACT document does not

provide a model regulation or a

recommended emission limit

representing RACT. The ACT document

does provide considerable information

on feasible RACT options which States

can use to define their own RACT

levels.

The ACT document recommends the

application of an accounting system

which tracks the use, fate, and

associated costs (purchase and disposal)

of the cleanup solvents. The accounting

system should utilize the Unit

Operations System (UOS) approach. A

UOS is defined as the ensemble of

equipment around which a material

balance is performed and includes all

possible points/sources from which

losses to the atmosphere could occur as

a result of them being cleaned.

Completion of the material balance

around a UOS requires measurement of

all input and output VOC-based liquid

solvent streams. The difference between

these streams may be assumed to have

evaporated as solvent emissions. The

UOS ensembles for the nine solventoperations listed above are described in

Appendix C of the ACT document.

Another control option discussed in

the ACT document is to require major

sources to conduct intensive, short-term

studies of solvent types and uses. The

study would review purchase records,

distribution sources, cleanup

operations, recycling records and waste

disposal records. The study would

identify potential VOC usage reductions

such as cleaning solvent changes and

equipment changes.

Utilizing the information gained from

the implementation of the UOS

accounting system, the ACT document

recommends the State require major

sources to submit individual solvent

reduction plans.

Section 2157 of 33 LAC incorporates,

as requirements, the control options

outlined in the above listed ACT

document. The regulation is approvable

as RACT for the cleanup solvents CTGsource category.

Section 2157 of 33 LAC, requires

affected facilities to implement the

following actions: conduct a threemonth intensive study of solvent types

and usage, utilize accounting on a unit

operation system and, submit plans to

the administrative authority to reduce

VOC emissions. As an alternative to

submitting reduction plans, the owner

or operator of affected facilities may

report the controls and/or work

practices deemed to be Maximum

Achievable Control Technology.

These submitted plans become State

enforceable upon approval. A violation

of 33 LAC 2157 occurs if the affected

facility does not meet the state-approved

solvent reduction target.

B. Batch Processes

1. EPA Analysis

Chapter 21 of 33 LAC has been

amended to include Section 2149, (33

LAC 2149) Limiting Volatile Organic

Compound Emissions from Batch

Processing. Section 2149 is intended to

incorporate regulations which represent
63660 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 231 / Tuesday, December 2, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

RACT for the batch processing CTGsource category.

Facilities affected are those which

emit or have the potential to emit 50

tons per year or more of VOCs, and fall

into one of the following Standard

Industrial Classification code categories:

plastic materials and resins (2821),

pharmaceuticals (2833 and 2834), gum

and wood chemicals (2861), cyclic

crudes and intermediates (2865),

industrial organic chemicals (2869), and

agricultural chemicals (2879).

Geographically, these rules apply to the

five parish Baton Rouge ozone

nonattainment area, and Pointe Coupee

and Calcasieu Parishes.

To assist State agencies in developing

rules to limit emission of VOCs which

result from batch processes, in February

1994, the EPA published the ACT

document titled Control of Volatile

Organic Compound Emissions from

Batch Processes (EPA–453/R–93–017).

The ACT document provides a model

regulation representing RACT, as well

as providing considerable information

on emissions, controls, control options,

and costs that States can use in

developing RACT regulations.

In developing a batch processing

RACT regulation, the State of Louisiana

closely followed the model rule

provided in the ACT. The purpose of

most of the changes from the model rule

is to make the regulations more explicit.

All changes are insignificant except the

change to single-unit operation

exemptions as discussed below.

As a change to the model rule’s single

unit operation exemptions, the State

replaced the 500-pound annual

emission exemption with the following

annual emission exemptions for specific

unit operations: 1800 lbs. for reactors,

1200 lbs. for holding tanks, and 8700

lbs. for centrifuges. No justification for

the revised levels of these thresholds

was provided. Furthermore, by deleting

the general single unit operation

exemption and including only three

specific unit operation exemptions, all

other unit operations not listed would

not be exempt for analyses no matter

how low the level of annual emissions.

2. State Commitment of Revision

On June 17, 1997, the LDEQ

submitted a letter committing to revise,

within one year of the date of the

publication of this Federal Register

conditional approval, the single unit

operation exemptions of the batch

processing rule.

The revision would eliminate the

individual process single unit operation

exemptions and set the overall single

unit operation exemption to 500 lb./yr.

or less. The revision would also

incorporate language which more

explicitly defines the control

requirements.

3. EPA Conclusion

With the exception of the single unit

operation exemption as discussed

above, 33 LAC 2149, incorporates as

requirements, the control options

outlined in the above listed ACT

document. With the letter committing to

revise Section 2149(b)(2), single unit

operation exemptions, the regulation is

conditionally approvable as RACT for

the batch processing CTG source

category.

C. SOCMI Distillation and Reactors

Chapter 21 of 33 LAC, has been

amended to include Section 2147, (33

LAC 2147) Limiting Volatile Organic

Compound Emissions from Reactor

Processes and Distillation Operations in

the Synthetic Organic Chemical

Manufacturing Industry. Section 2147 is

intended to incorporate regulations

which represent RACT for both the

SOCMI reactors and SOCMI distillation

source categories.

Facilities affected are those which

emit or have the potential to emit 50

tons per year or more of VOCs, and have

the Standard Industrial Major Code 28

classification, Chemicals And Allied

Products. Geographically, these rules

apply to the five parish Baton Rouge

ozone nonattainment area, and Pointe

Coupee and Calcasieu Parishes.

To assist State agencies in developing

rules to limit emission of VOCs which

result from batch processes, in August

1993 the EPA published the CTG

document entitled Control of Volatile

Organic Compound Emissions from

Reactor Processes and Distillation

Operations Processes in the Synthetic

Organic Chemical Manufacturing

Industry. As well as providing

considerable information on emissions,

controls, and costs that the States can

use in developing RACT regulations, the

CTG provides a model regulation

representing RACT. In developing a

SOCMI distillation and reactor

regulation, the State of Louisiana closely

followed the model rule provided in the

CTG. The purpose of most of the

changes from the model rule is to make

the regulations more explicit. All

changes are unsubstantive except the

change made to the flow rate exemption

as discussed below.

As a change to the model rule flowrate exemption, the State raised the

minimum control flow rate from 0.0085

to 0.011 standard cubic meters per

minute. This change was made to the

model rule to be consistent with the

new source performance standards for

reactor processes, 40 CFR 60.700(c)(4).

In this way, the RACT rule will not be

more stringent than the performance

standards for new sources for reactor

processes. The EPA finds this revision

acceptable.

Section 2149 of 33 LAC incorporates

as requirements, the control options

outlined in the above listed CTG

document. The regulation is approvable

as RACT for the SOCMI reactor and

SOCMI distillation source categories.

IV. Final Action

By this action, the EPA is

conditionally approving in part and

fully approving in part the revisions to

the Louisiana SIP submitted on

December 15, 1995. The EPA is

conditionally approving the revisions to

the SIP to control VOC emissions

utilizing RACT from the SOCMI batch

processing source category. The EPA is

fully approving in the revisions to the

SIP to control VOC emissions utilizing

RACT from the following major source

categories: SOCMI distillation, SOCMI

reactor, and clean-up solvents. The EPA

is also approving the letter of negative

declaration for the wood furniture major

source category from the LDEQ dated

January 21, 1997.

The full approval of the revision to

control VOC emissions utilizing RACT

from the batch processing source

category is contingent upon the State of

Louisiana submitting a revision to the

single unit operation exemptions rule. If

the State fails to submit a revision to the

batch processing rule within one year of

the conditional approval of these SIP

revisions, the conditional approval will

convert to a disapproval.

With the approval of these rules, the

applicable requirements relating to

RACT rules of the 12 of the 13 CTG

source categories have been met. The

industrial wastewater source category is

the only remaining CTG source category

for which no action has been taken. This

source category will be handled in a

separate rulemaking action.

The EPA is publishing this action

without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial

amendment and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in a separate

document in this Federal Register

publication, EPA is proposing to

approve the SIP revision should adverse

or critical comments be filed. This

action will be effective on February 2,

1998, unless, by January 2, 1998,

adverse or critical comments are

received.

If EPA receives such comments, this

action will be withdrawn before the

effective date by publishing a

subsequent action that will withdraw
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 231 / Tuesday, December 2, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 63661

the final action. All public comments

received will be addressed in a

subsequent final rule based the

proposed rule in today’s Federal

Register, which incorporate by reference

the discussion in this direct final action.

The EPA will not institute a second

comment period on this action. Any

parties interested in commenting on this

action should do so at this time. If no

such comments are received, the public

is advised that this action will be

effective February 2, 1998.

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.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) has exempted this regulatory

action from E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. See 5 U.S.C.

603 and 604. Alternatively, 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-forprofit enterprises, and government

entities with jurisdiction over

populations of less than 50,000.

The 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 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

Act, preparation of a 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).

Conditional approvals of SIP

submittals 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

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 Act, preparation

of a 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).

If the conditional approval is

converted to a disapproval under

section 110(k), based on the State’s

failure to meet the commitment, it will

not affect any existing State

requirements applicable to small

entities. Federal disapproval of the State

submittal does not affect its Stateenforceability. Moreover, EPA’s

disapproval of the submittal does not

impose a new Federal requirement.

Therefore, EPA certifies that this

disapproval action does not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities because it does

not remove existing requirements nor

does it substitute a new Federal

requirement.

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 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

General Accounting Office

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added

by the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA

submitted 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 General Accounting

Office prior to publication of this rule in

today’s Federal Register.

This rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

E. 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 February 2, 1998. 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.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the SIP

for the State of Louisiana was approved by

the Director of the Federal Register on July

1, 1982.

Dated: November 10, 1997.

Lynda F. Carroll,

Acting Regional Administrator.

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. 7401–7671q.

Subpart T—Louisiana

2. Section 52.970 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(74) to read as

follows:

§ 52.970 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(74) Revisions to the Louisiana

Department of Environmental Quality

Regulation Title 33, Part III, Chapter 21,
63662 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 231 / Tuesday, December 2, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

Control of Emission of Organic

Compounds, submitted by the Governor

on December 15, 1995.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) LAC, Title 33, Part III, Chapter 21,

Section 2147, Limiting Volatile Organic

Compound Emissions from Reactor

Processes and Distillation Operations in

the Synthetic Organic Chemical

Manufacturing Industry, adopted in the

Louisiana Register on April 20, 1995 (LR

21:380).

(B) LAC, Title 33, Part III, Chapter 21,

Section 2149, Limiting Volatile Organic

Compound Emissions from Batch

Processing, adopted in the Louisiana

Register on April 20, 1995 (LR 21:387).

(C) LAC, Title 33, Part III, Chapter 21,

Section 2151, Limiting Volatile Organic

Compound Emissions from Cleanup

Solvent Processing, adopted in the

Louisiana Register on April 20, 1995 (LR

21:391).

(ii) Additional material.

(A) Letter of negative declaration for

wood furniture dated January 21, 1997,

from the State of Louisiana Department

of Environmental Quality.

3. Section 52.994 is amended by

designating the existing text as

paragraph (a) and adding paragraph (b)

to read as follows:

§ 52.994 Conditional approvals.

* * * * *

(b) Reasonable Available Control

Technology for the Synthetic Organic

Chemical Manufacturing Industry Batch

Processing Source Category. A letter

dated June 17, 1997 from the Assistant

Secretary of the Louisiana Department

of Environmental Quality to the EPA

Regional Administrator commits the

State to make corrections in LAC

33.III.2149.A.2.b to restore the general

single unit operation exemption to 500

pounds per year or less. The State

commits to make the above rule change

within one year from the Federal

Register publication of the conditional

approval of the batch processing

Reasonable Available Control

Technology rule.

[FR Doc. 97–31408 Filed 12–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 64, 70, and 71

[FRL–5928–5]

RIN 2060–AD18

Compliance Assurance Monitoring

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; availability of

guidance document.

SUMMARY: On October 22, 1997 (62 FR

54900), EPA published a final

Compliance Assurance Monitoring Rule

(CAM). The final rule preamble

described a Guidance Development

Process in which the Agency would

develop non-prescriptive examples of

the types of monitoring that can be used

to satisfy part 64 for various types of

control devices and emissions units. In

order to provide an opportunity for

source owners or operators and other

interested parties to submit suggestions,

review drafts and generally clarify the

part 64 requirements, a Draft CAM

Technical Guidance Document is now

available. The Agency emphasizes that

the development of example monitoring

approaches in this guidance document

is intended to assist both regulated

industry and permitting authorities to

streamline permit review in those

instances where a source owner or

operator proposes monitoring based on

one of the examples. These examples

should not be considered as an implied

limitation on the owner or operator’s

ability to propose a different approach

that the owner or operator can

demonstrate satisfies the part 64

requirements or on the permitting

authority’s authority to require

additional monitoring. A final CAM

Technical Guidance Document should

be available by the end of March 1998.

DATES: Comments on the Draft CAM

Technical Guidance Document should

be received no later than January 5,

1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent

to: Dan Bivins, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, MD–19, RTP,

NC 27711, or to:

Bivins.Dan@epamail.epa.gov

The Draft CAM Technical Guidance

Document is available on U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency’s

EMTIC Homepage on the Technology

Transfer Network (via the Internet at

‘‘http://ttnwww.rtpnc.epa.gov/html/

emticwww/index.htm’’, 24 hours a day,

7 days a week , except Monday, 8–12

a.m. EST).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dan

Bivins at (919) 541–5244.

Henry C. Thomas,

Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning

and Standards.

[FR Doc. 97–31576 Filed 12–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 180

[OPP–300589; FRL–5758–7]

Pyrimethanil; Pesticide Tolerance

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes an

import tolerance for residues of the

fungicide 4,6-dimethyl-N-phenyl-2-

pyrimidinamine expressed as

pyrimethanil in or on the raw

agricultural commodity (RAC) wine

grapes at 5.0 ppm. AgrEvo USA

Company submitted a petition to EPA

under the Federal Food, Drug, and

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) as amended by

the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996

(Pub. L. 104-170) requesting the

tolerance.

DATES: This regulation becomes

effective December 2, 1997. Objections

and requests for hearings must be

received by EPA on or before February

2, 1998.

ADDRESSEES: Written objections, and

hearing requests identified by the

docket control number, OPP–300589,

must be submitted to: Hearing Clerk

(1900), Environmental Protection

Agency, Rm. M3708, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460. Fees

accompanying objections and hearing

requests shall be labeled ‘‘Tolerance

Petition Fees’’ and forwarded to: EPA

Headquarters Accounting Operations

Branch, OPP (Tolerance Fees), P.O. Box

360277M, Pittsburgh, PA 15251. A copy

of any objections and hearing requests

filed with the Hearing Clerk identified

by the docket control number, OPP–

300589, must also be submitted to:

Public Information and Records

Integrity Branch, Information Resources

and Services Division (7502C), Office of

Pesticides Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW.,

Washington, DC 20460. In person, bring

a copy of objections and hearing

requests to Rm. 1132, CM #2, 1921

Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA.

A copy of objections and hearing

requests filed with the Hearing Clerk

may also be submitted electronically by

sending electronic mail (e-mail) to: oppdocket@epamail.epa.gov. Copies of

objections and hearing requests must be

submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the

use of special characters and any form

of encryption. Copies of objections and

hearing requests will also be accepted

on disks in Wordperfect 5.1/6.1 file

format or ASCII file format. All copies