26462 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 92 /Wednesday, May 13, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MD067–3025a; FRL–6012–5]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans;

Maryland; Definition of the Term

‘‘Major Stationary Source of VOC’’

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision

submitted by the State of Maryland.

This revision pertains to amendments to

Maryland’s definition of the term major

stationary source of volatile organic

compounds (VOC). This action is being

taken in accordance with the SIP

submittal and revision provisions of the

Act.

DATES: This final rule is effective July

13, 1998 unless on or before June 12,

1998, adverse or critical comments are

received. If adverse comments are

received EPA will publish a timely

withdrawal in the Federal Register and

inform the public that the rule did not

take effect.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

David L. Arnold, Chief, Ozone and

Mobile Sources Section, Mailcode

3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut

Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

19107. Copies of the documents relevant

to this action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the Air Protection Division,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III, 841 Chestnut Building,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107 and

the Maryland Department of the

Environment, 2500 Broening Highway,

Baltimore, Maryland, 21224.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Maria A. Pino, (215) 566–2181, at the

EPA Region III address above, or via email at pino.maria@epamail.epa.gov.

While information may be requested via

e-mail, any comments must be

submitted in writing to the EPA Region

III address above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Description of the State’s Submittal

On July 12, 1995, the Maryland

Department of the Environment

submitted amendments to its air quality

regulations to EPA as a SIP revision.

The July 12, 1995 submittal contains

amendments to the definition of the

term ‘‘major stationary source of VOC’’

and Maryland’s major source VOC

reasonably available control technology

(RACT) regulation, COMAR

26.11.19.01B(4) and 26.11.19.02G,

respectively. Maryland revised its

definition by lowering the major source

size ‘‘threshold’’ in the Maryland

portion of the Washington, DC ozone

nonattainment area, Calvert, Charles,

Frederick, Montgomery, and Prince

George’s Counties, and by requiring

RACT on these newly defined major

sources. This action pertains only to

Maryland’s revisions to COMAR

26.11.19.01B(4), the definition of the

term ‘‘major stationary source of VOC.’’

Revisions to Maryland’s major source

VOC RACT regulation are the subject of

a separate rulemaking action.

Maryland’s July 1995 submittal

lowers the major source size

‘‘threshold’’ in the Maryland portion of

the Washington, DC ozone

nonattainment area from 50 to 25 tons

per year (TPY) of VOC as is already

required in the Baltimore ozone

nonattainment area. The term ‘‘major

stationary source of VOC,’’ COMAR

26.11.19.01B(4), has been amended,

therefore, to mean any stationary source

with the potential to emit: (a) 25 TPY of

VOC or more in the City of Baltimore

and Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Calvert,

Carroll, Cecil, Charles, Frederick,

Harford, Howard, Montogomery, and

Prince George’s Counties, and (b) 50

TPY in the remainder of the State.

As required by 40 CFR 51.102, the

State of Maryland has certified that

public hearings with regard to these

proposed revisions were held in

Maryland on December 15, 1994 in

Baltimore, Maryland.

EPA’s Evaluation

Maryland’s July 12, 1995 SIP revision

submittal contains revisions to lower

the major source size ‘‘threshold’’ for

the Maryland portion of the

Washington, DC serious ozone

nonattainment area, Calvert, Charles,

Frederick, Montgomery, and Prince

George’s Counties, and required RACT

on these newly defined major sources.

These revisions are needed as part of

Maryland’s plan to meet the Clean Air

Act’s rate-of-progress (ROP)

requirements in the Maryland portion of

the Washington, DC ozone

nonattainment area. Under the Clean

Air Act’s ROP provisions, in section

182, any ozone nonattainment area

classified as serious or worse is required

to reduce emissions of VOCs by three

percent per year from 1990 until the

area’s attainment date for the 1-hour

National Ambient Air Quality Standard

(NAAQS) for ozone. One of the control

measures Maryland is using to reduce

VOC emissions in the Washington, DC

nonattainment area is RACT on VOC

sources with the potential to emit

between 25 and 50 TPY.

This revision strengthens the

Maryland SIP and will result in VOC

emission reductions. EPA is, therefore,

approving this revision to the Maryland

SIP.

EPA is approving this rule without

prior proposal because the Agency

views this as a noncontroversial

amendment and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in the proposed

rules section of this Federal Register

publication, EPA is publishing a

separate document that will serve as the

proposal to approve the SIP revision

should adverse or critical comments be

filed. This rule will be effective July 13,

1998 without further notice unless the

Agency receives relevant adverse

comments by June 12, 1998.

If EPA receives such comments, then

EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of

the final rule and inform the public that

the rule did not take effect. All public

comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on the proposed rule. EPA will

not institute a second comment period

on the proposed rule. Only 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 rule will be effective

on July 13, 1998 and no further action

will be taken on the proposed rule.

Final Action

EPA is approving Maryland’s July 12,

1995 revisions to the definition of the

term ‘‘major stationary source of VOC,’’

COMAR 26.11.19.01B(4), and

incorporating those revisions into the

Maryland SIP.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any state

implementation plan. Each request for

revision to the state implementation

plan shall be considered separately in

light of specific technical, economic,

and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 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
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 92 /Wednesday, May 13, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 26463

final rule on small entities. 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-for-profit

enterprises, and government entities

with jurisdiction over populations of

less than 50,000.

SIP approvals under section 110 and

subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air 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, the

Administrator certifies that it does not

have a significant impact on any small

entities affected. Moreover, due to the

nature of the Federal-State relationship

under the CAA, preparation of a

flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA,

427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2).

C. Unfunded Mandates

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘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 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 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 pre-existing 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

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. 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 Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this action, pertaining to revisions to

Maryland’s definition of the term

‘‘major stationary source of VOC,’’ must

be filed in the United States Court of

Appeals for the appropriate circuit by

July 13, 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,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone.

Dated: April 24, 1998.

Thomas Voltaggio,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

40 CFR part 52, is amended as

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart V—Maryland

2. Section 52.1070 is amended by

adding paragraphs (c)(128) to read as

follows:

§ 52.1070 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(128) Revisions to the Maryland State

Implementation Plan submitted on July

12, 1995 by the Maryland Department of

the Environment:

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Letter of July 12, 1995 from the

Maryland Department of the

Environment transmitting additions and

deletions to Maryland’s State

Implementation Plan, pertaining to

volatile organic compound regulations

in Maryland’s air quality regulations,

Code of Maryland Administrative

Regulations (COMAR) 26.11.

(B) Revisions to COMAR

26.11.19.01B(4), definition of the term

‘‘Major stationary source of VOC,’’

adopted by the Secretary of the

Environment on April 13, 1995, and

effective on May 8, 1995.

(ii) Additional material.

(A) Remainder of the July 12, 1995

Maryland State submittal pertaining to

COMAR 26.11.19.01B(4), definition of

the term ‘‘Major stationary source of

VOC.’’

[FR Doc. 98–12719 Filed 5–12–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[FRL–6001–3]

Approval of Section 112(l) Authority for

Hazardous Air Pollutants;

Perchloroethylene Air Emission

Standards for Dry Cleaning Facilities;

State of California; South Coast Air

Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 112(l) of

the Clean Air Act (CAA) and through

the California Air Resources Board, the

South Coast Air Quality Management

District (SCAQMD) requested approval

to implement and enforce its ‘‘Rule

1421: Control of Perchloroethylene

Emissions from Dry Cleaning Systems’’

(Rule 1421) in place of the ‘‘National

Perchloroethylene Air Emission

Standards for Dry Cleaning Facilities’’

(dry cleaning NESHAP) for area sources

under SCAQMD’s jurisdiction. The

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

has reviewed this request and has found

that it satisfies all of the requirements

necessary to qualify for approval. Thus,

EPA is hereby granting SCAQMD the

authority to implement and enforce

Rule 1421 in place of the dry cleaning

NESHAP for area sources under

SCAQMD’s jurisdiction.

DATES: This rule is effective on July 13,

1998 without further notice, unless EPA

receives relevant adverse comments by

June 12, 1998. If EPA receives such