36852 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 130 /Wednesday, July 8, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

Port, and LT(jg) M.A. Woodruff, Project

Counsel, Eighth Coast Guard District

Legal Office.

Background and Purpose

The hazardous condition requiring

this regulation is a result of severe

shoaling within the Baptiste Collette

Bayou Channel. The U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers is currently dredging this

channel thereby restricting navigation.

A safety zone is needed to protect

vessels transiting the area. This

regulation is issued pursuant to 33

U.S.C. 1225 and 1231 as set out in the

authority citation for all of Part 165.

Regulatory Evaluation

This temporary rule is not a

significant regulatory evaluation under

Section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866

and is not significant under the

‘‘Department of Transportation

Regulatory Policies and Procedures’’ (44

FR 11040; February 26, 1979). The Coast

Guard expects the economic impact of

this rule to be so minimal that a full

regulatory evaluation is unnecessary.

This regulation will only be in effect for

a short period of time, and the impacts

on routine navigation are expected to be

minimal.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Coast Guard

must consider whether this regulation

will have a significant economic impact

on a substantial number of small

entities. ‘‘Small entities’’ include

independently owned and operated

small businesses that are not dominant

in their field and that otherwise qualify

as ‘‘small business concerns’’ under

section 3 of the Small Business Act (15

U.S.C. 632). Since the impact of this

regulation on non-participating small

entities is expected to be minimal, the

Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C.

605(b) that this regulation will not have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

This regulation will only be in effect for

several hours and the impacts on small

entities are expected to be minimal.

Collection of Information

This rule contains no collection of

information requirements under the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.).

Federalism

The Coast Guard has analyzed this

rule under the principles and criteria

contained in Executive Order 12612 and

has determined that it does not have

sufficient federalism implications to

warrant the preparation of a Federalism

Assessment.

Environment

The Coast Guard considered the

environmental impact of this proposal

and concluded that under figure 2–1,

paragraph (34)(g) of Commandant

Instruction M16475.1C, this proposal is

categorically excluded from further

environmental documentation.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation

(water), Reporting and record keeping

requirements, Safety measures, Vessels,

Waterways.

Regulation: In consideration of the

foregoing, Subpart F of Part 165 of

Chapter 33, Code of Federal

Regulations, is amended as follows:

PART 165—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 165

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1225 and 1231; 50

U.S.C. 191; and 33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1,

6.04–6, and 160.5; 49 CFR 1.46.

2. A new § 165.T08–024 is added to

read as follows:

§ 165.T08–024 Safety Zone:

(a) Location. The following area is a

safety zone: Baptiste Collette Bayou

Channel, Lower Mississippi River, Mile

11.5, Left Descending Bank, Above Head

of Passes in the vicinity of Venice,

Louisiana extending the entire width of

the channel.

(b) Effective date. This section

becomes effective on May 9, 1998,

commencing at 5:00 p.m. local time. It

will be terminated when the U.S. Army

Corps of Engineers completes dredging

operations on August 2, 1998.

(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with

the general regulations in § 165.23 of

this part, no vessel may operate within

the safety zone contrary to this

regulation.

(2) The Baptiste Collette Channel is

restricted to vessels with drafts of five

feet or less. All vessels shall comply

with this draft restriction unless

otherwise directed in Marine

Information Broadcasts.

(3) A one way traffic pattern is in

effect and being regulated by the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers M/V BRETON

or as directed in Marine Information

Broadcasts.

(4) All vessels shall observe a no

meeting or passing zone while transiting

Baptiste Collette or as directed in

Marine Information Broadcasts.

(5) The west side (red) of the channel

is closed from marker #6 to the sea

buoy/entrance buoy. Passing will only

be allowed on the east side (green) of

the channel and only at the top of each

hour or as directed by the U.S. Army

Corps of Engineers M/V BRETON.

Dated: May 8, 1998.

G.D. Marsh,

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the

Port.

[FR Doc. 98–18117 Filed 7–7–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MO 049–1049a; FRL–6118–3]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; State of

Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: This final action approves

revised Missouri rule 10 CSR 10–6.030

as a revision to the Missouri State

Implementation Plan (SIP). This rule

revision was submitted by the state of

Missouri to incorporate the most current

EPA guidance on capture efficiency

methods for volatile organic compound

emission control systems.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective

on September 8, 1998 without further

notice, unless the EPA receives adverse

comment by August 7, 1998. If adverse

comment is received, the EPA will

publish a timely withdrawal of the

direct final rule in the Federal Register

and inform the public that the rule will

not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

Kim Johnson, Environmental Protection

Agency, Air Planning and Development

Branch, 726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas

City, Kansas 66101. Copies of the

documents relevant to this action are

available for public inspection during

normal business hours at the:

Environmental Protection Agency, Air

Planning and Development Branch, 726

Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas

66101; and the EPA Air & Radiation

Docket and Information Center, 401 M

Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kim

Johnson at (913) 551–7975.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

revision to Missouri rule 10 CSR 10–

6.030 incorporates capture efficiency

methods as identified in the EPA’s

February 7, 1995, memorandum

entitled, ‘‘Revised Capture Efficiency

Guidance for Control of Volatile Organic
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 130 /Wednesday, July 8, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 36853

Compound Emissions,’’ and the EPA’s

January 9, 1994, technical document

entitled, ‘‘Guidelines for Determining

Capture Efficiency.’’ Capture efficiency

is the measure of the fraction of all

organic vapors generated by a process

that are directed to an abatement or

recovery device. Capture efficiency and

destruction efficiency need to be

determined in order to calculate the

overall control efficiency of any control

device.

The EPA’s Revised Capture Efficiency

Guidance Document is the result of a

12-month EPA study of alternatives

with potential to reduce capture

efficiency testing costs. This guidance

document reduces costs by

recommending protocols, presenting

criteria by which alternative procedures

can be approved, and establishing the

reporting requirements for using

alternative procedures. Guidelines are

also included for selecting and testing

representative process lines at a facility

and for testing multiple lines in

combination.

This rule amendment also

incorporates specific methods to

determine capture efficiency for

automobile and light-duty truck topcoat

operations entitled, ‘‘Protocol for

Determining the Daily Volatile Organic

Compound Emission Rate of

Automobile and Light-Duty Truck

Topcoat Operations,’’ as amended by

Section 23–Determining Spraybooth

VOC Capture Efficiency dated March 8,

1996.

I. Final Action

The EPA is taking final action to

approve as a revision to the SIP the

amendment to rule 10 CSR 10–6.030,

‘‘Sampling Methods for Air Pollution

Sources,’’ submitted by the state of

Missouri on December 17, 1996.

The EPA is publishing 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, the EPA is publishing a

separate document that will serve as the

proposal to approve the SIP revision

should relevant adverse comments be

filed. This rule will be effective

September 8, 1998 without further

notice unless the Agency receives

relevant adverse comments by August 7,

1998.

If the EPA receives such comments,

then the EPA will publish a document

withdrawing the final rule and

informing 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. The EPA will not

institute a second comment period on

the proposed rule. Only parties

interested in commenting on the

proposed rule should do so at this time.

If no such comments are received, the

public is advised that this rule will be

effective on September 8, 1998 and no

further action will be taken on the

proposed rule.

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.

II. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13045

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this regulatory action

from Executive Order 12866 review.

The final rule is not subject to

Executive Order 13045, entitled

‘‘Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks,’’ because it is not an

‘‘economically significant’’ action under

Executive Order 12866.

B. Regulatory Flexibility

The Regulatory Flexibility Act

generally requires an agency to conduct

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any

rule subject to notice and comment

rulemaking requirements unless the

agency certifies that the rule will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

Small entities include small businesses,

small not-for-profit enterprises, and

small governmental jurisdictions. This

final rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities.

SIP approvals under section 110 and

subchapter I, Part D of the Clean Air Act

(CAA) do not create any new

requirements but simply approve

requirements that the state is already

imposing. Therefore, because the

Federal SIP approval does not create

any new requirements, I certify that this

action will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Moreover, due

to the nature of the Federal-state

relationship under the CAA, preparation

of a flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The CAA

forbids the EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds

(Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 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, the 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, the 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 the 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

Comptroller General

The Congressional Review Act, 5

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides

that before a rule may take effect, the

agency promulgating the rule must

submit a rule report, which includes a

copy of the rule, to each House of the

Congress and to the Comptroller General

of the United States. The EPA will

submit a report containing this rule and

other required information to the U.S.

Senate, the U.S. House of

Representatives, and the Comptroller

General of the United States prior to

publication of the rule in the Federal

Register. 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 CAA,

petitions for judicial review of this

action must be filed in the United States

Court of Appeals for the appropriate

circuit by September 8, 1998. Filing a

petition for reconsideration by the

Administrator of this final rule does not

affect the finality of this rule for the
36854 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 130 /Wednesday, July 8, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

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, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Volatile organic

compounds.

Dated: June 12, 1998.

William Rice,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region VII.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations 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 AA—Missouri

2. Section 52.1320 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(106) to read as

follows:

§ 52.1320 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(106) On December 17, 1996, the

Missouri Department of Natural

Resources submitted a revised rule

pertaining to capture efficiency.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Revised regulation 10 CSR 10–

6.030 entitled, ‘‘Sampling Methods for

Air Pollution Sources,’’ effective

November 30, 1996.

[FR Doc. 98–17973 Filed 7–7–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[DC038–2009a, MD058–3026a, VA083–

5035a; FRL–6120–6]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans; District

of Columbia, Virginia, Maryland; 1990

Base Year Emission Inventory for the

Metropolitan Washington, DC Ozone

Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to

the District of Columbia (the District),

the State of Maryland and the

Commonwealth of Virginia State

Implementation Plans (SIP) which

pertain to the 1990 base year ozone

emission inventory for the Washington,

DC–MD–VA Consolidated Metropolitan

Statistical Area (CMSA). This area,

commonly referred to as the

Metropolitan Washington, D.C. area, is

classified as a serious ozone

nonattainment area. These SIP revisions

were prepared by the District, the

Commonwealth of Virginia and the

State of Maryland with the assistance of

the Metropolitan Washington Council of

Governments and were submitted for

the purpose of revising the 1990

baseline of volatile organic compound

(VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOx)

emissions that contribute to ozone

nonattainment problems in the

Metropolitan Washington, D.C. area.

The intended effect of this action is to

approve amendments to the 1990 base

year ozone emission inventory for the

Metropolitan Washington, D.C. area in

accordance with the Clean Air Act.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective

on September 8, 1998 without further

notice, unless EPA receives adverse

comment by August 7, 1998. If adverse

comment is received, EPA will publish

a timely document withdrawing this

rule.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

David L. Arnold, Chief, Ozone & Mobile

Sources Branch, Mailcode 3AP21,

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,

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III, 1650 Arch Street,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103; the

District of Columbia Department of

Health, Air Quality Division, 2100

Martin Luther King Ave., S.E.,

Washington, DC 20020; the Maryland

Department of the Environment, 2500

Broening Highway, Baltimore, Maryland

21224; and the Virginia Department of

Environmental Quality, 629 East Main

Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christopher Cripps, (215) 814–2179, at

EPA Region III address, or via e-mail at

cripps.christopher@epamail.epa.gov.

While information may be requested via

e-mail, comments must be submitted in

writing to the above Region III address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Under the Clean Air Act (the Act),

States have the responsibility to

inventory emissions contributing to

national ambient air quality standard

nonattainment, to track these emissions

over time, and to ensure that control

strategies are being implemented that

reduce emissions and move areas

towards attainment. The 1990 base year

emissions inventory is the primary

inventory from which the periodic

inventory, the rate-of-progress (ROP)

target level and projection inventories,

and the modeling inventory are derived.

The Act requires ozone nonattainment

areas designated as moderate, serious,

severe, and extreme to submit a plan

within three years of 1990 to reduce

VOC emissions by 15 percent within six

years after 1990 (15% ROP plan). The

baseline level of emissions, from which

the 15 percent reduction is calculated,

is determined by adjusting the base year

VOC inventory to exclude biogenic

emissions and to exclude certain

emission reductions not creditable

towards the 15% plan. The Act further

requires ozone nonattainment areas

designated as serious, severe, and

extreme to submit a plan within four

years of 1990 to reduce VOC emissions

by a further nine percent in the period

between six and nine years after 1990

(post-1996 ROP plan). The Act allows

reductions in NOx emissions after 1990

to be substituted for VOC reductions in

the post-96 ROP plan. When NOx

reductions are substituted, the baseline

level of emissions, from which the NOx

reduction percentage is calculated, is

determined by adjusting the base year

NOx inventory to exclude certain

emission reductions not creditable

towards the 15% plan. Further

information on these inventories and

their purpose can be found in the

following documents issued by EPA:

Emission Inventory Requirements for

Ozone State Implementation Plans,

Environmental Protection Agency,

Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Research Triangle Park,

North Carolina, March 1991

Guidance on the Adjusted Base Year

Emissions Inventory and the 1996

Target for 15 Percent Rate of Progress

Plans, Environmental Protection

Agency, Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, Research

Triangle Park, North Carolina,

October 1992.

Guidance on the Post ’96 Rate-ofProgress Plan (RPP) and Attainment

Demonstration (Corrected version of

February 18, 1994), Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Air

Quality Planning and Standards,

Research Triangle Park, North

Carolina, February 18, 1994.