[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 143 (Monday, July 27, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 40054-40058]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-19932]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 70

[FRL-6128-9]
RIN 2060-AF70


Extension of Operating Permits Program Interim Approval 
Expiration Dates

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Appendix A of the operating permits 
regulations codified in part 70 of chapter I of title 40 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations. Those regulations were originally promulgated on 
July 21, 1992. These amendments to Appendix A extend up to June 1, 2000 
all operating permits program interim approvals. This action will allow 
the program revisions necessary to correct interim approval 
deficiencies to be combined with program revisions necessary to 
implement the revisions to part 70 that are anticipated to be 
promulgated in December 1999.

DATES: The direct final revisions to Appendix A will become effective 
on September 10, 1998. The direct final revisions will become effective 
without further notice unless EPA receives relevant adverse comments on 
or before August 26, 1998. Should the Agency receive such comments, it 
will publish a timely withdrawal and will inform the public that this 
rule will not take effect. For those programs whose interim approval 
dates are amended by this action, interim approval will expire on June 
1, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments should be submitted (in duplicate, if 
possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (6102), 
Attention Docket Number A-93-50 (see docket section below), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 
20460. The EPA requests that a separate copy also be sent to the 
contact person listed below.
    Docket. Supporting material used in developing the proposal and 
final regulatory revisions is contained in Docket Number A-93-50. This 
docket is available for public inspection and copying between 8:30 a.m. 
and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, at the address listed above, or 
by calling (202) 260-7548. The Docket is located at the above address 
in Room M-1500, Waterside Mall (ground floor). A reasonable fee may be 
charged for copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roger Powell, Mail Drop 12, United 
States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning 
and Standards, Information Transfer and Program Integration Division, 
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711 (telephone 919-541-5331, 
e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#dfafb0a8bab3b3f1adb0b8baad9fbaafbef1b8b0a9"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="89f9e6feece5e5a7fbe6eeecfbc9ecf9e8a7eee6ff">[email protected]</span></a>).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A companion proposal to this direct final 
rule is being published in today's Federal Register. If relevant 
adverse comments are timely received by the date specified in this 
rule, EPA will publish a document informing the public that this rule 
will not take effect and the comments will be addressed in a subsequent 
final rule based on the proposed rule. If no relevant adverse comments 
on this direct final rule are timely filed, then the direct final rule 
will become effective on September 10, 1998, and no further action will 
be taken on the companion proposal published today.

I. Background

    On August 29, 1994 (59 FR 44460) and August 31, 1995 (60 FR 45530), 
EPA proposed revisions to the part 70 operating permits regulations. 
Primarily, the proposals addressed changes to the system for revising 
permits. A number of other less detailed proposed changes were also 
included. Altogether, State and local permitting authorities will have 
a complex package of program revisions to prepare in response to these 
changes once promulgated. The part 70 revisions are anticipated to take 
place in December 1999.
    Contemporaneous with permitting authorities revising their programs 
to meet the revised part 70, many programs have been granted interim 
approval which will require permitting authorities to prepare program 
revisions

[[Page 40055]]

to correct those deficiencies identified in the interim approval 
action. The preamble to the August 31, 1995 proposal noted the concern 
of many permitting authorities over having to revise their programs 
twice; once to correct interim approval deficiencies, and again to 
address the revisions to part 70. In the August 1995 preamble, the 
Agency proposed that States with interim approval ```* * * should be 
allowed to delay the submittal of any program revisions to address 
program deficiencies previously listed in their notice of interim 
approval until the deadline to submit other changes required by the 
proposed revisions to part 70'' (60 FR 45552). The Agency also proposed 
``* * * to exercise its discretion under proposed Sec. 70.4(i)(1)(iv) 
to provide States 2 years to submit program revisions in response to 
the proposed part 70 revisions * * *'' (60 FR 45551).

II. Discussion

A. Purpose of Interim Approval Extensions

    On October 31, 1996 (61 FR 56368), EPA amended Sec. 70.4(d)(2) to 
allow the Administrator to grant extensions to interim approvals so 
permitting authorities could take advantage of the opportunity to 
combine program revisions as proposed August 31, 1995. The Agency does 
not believe, however, that the August 31, 1995 blanket proposal to 
extend all interim approval program revision submittal dates until up 
to 2 years after part 70 is revised is appropriate. Program 
deficiencies that caused granting of interim approval of permitting 
programs vary from a few problems that can be easily corrected to 
complex problems that will require regulatory changes and, in some 
cases, legislative action. Where an undue burden will be encountered by 
developing two program revisions, combining program revisions and thus 
granting a longer time period for submission of the program revision to 
correct interim approval deficiencies is warranted. Where no such 
burden will occur, the Agency encourages permitting authorities to 
proceed with correcting their interim approval program deficiencies and 
not wait for the revised part 70.
    Due to controversial issues yet to be resolved, the revisions to 
part 70 have been delayed beyond the date contemplated by the August 
31, 1995 proposal. For permitting authorities to be able to combine 
program revisions, an agency's program interim approval cannot expire. 
The Agency must therefore extend any interim approval that may expire 
before the part 70 revisions are promulgated.

B. Original Action

    In the original October 31, 1996 action addressing this subject, 
all interim approvals granted prior to the date of issuance of a 
memorandum announcing EPA's position on this issue (memorandum from 
Lydia N. Wegman to Regional Division Directors, ``Extension of Interim 
Approvals of Operating Permits Programs,'' June 13, 1996) were extended 
by 10 months. This action was to encourage permitting authorities to 
proceed with program revisions within their interim approval 
timeframes, rather than wait for the revised part 70. The June 1996 
memorandum is in the docket for this action.
    The reason for this automatic extension was that permitting 
authorities, upon reading the August 1995 proposed action, may have 
delayed their efforts to develop program revisions to address interim 
approval deficiencies because they believed the proposed policy to 
extend interim approvals until revised part 70 program revisions are 
due would be adopted for all programs. The EPA has been informed that 
this was the case in many States. Approximately 10 months passed since 
the August 1995 proposal until the June 1996 memorandum was issued. The 
additional 10-month extension to all interim approvals offset any time 
lost in permitting authority efforts to develop program revisions 
addressing interim approval deficiencies. This 10-month extension was 
not applicable to application submittal dates for the second group of 
sources covered by a source-category limited interim 
approval.<SUP>1</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Several States have been granted source-category limited 
interim approvals. Under that type approval, a subset of the part 70 
source population is to submit permit applications during the first 
year of the program. The application submittal period for the 
remaining sources begins upon full approval of the program. The 
Agency concludes this second group of sources should still submit 
permit applications during a period beginning on the original 
expiration date of a State's interim approval as opposed to any 
extension of that date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Process for Combining Program Revisions

    As noted in the June 1996 memorandum, where the permitting 
authority applies for it after part 70 is revised, EPA may grant a 
longer extension to an interim approval so that the program revision to 
correct interim approval program deficiencies may be combined with the 
program revision to meet the revised part 70. Such a request must be 
made within 30 days of promulgation of the part 70 revisions. This will 
make it possible for EPA to take a single rulemaking action to adopt 
new interim approval deadlines for all programs for which such an 
application has been made.
    As required by Sec. 70.4(f)(2), program revisions addressing 
interim approval deficiencies must be submitted to EPA no later than 6 
months prior to the expiration of the interim approval. The dates for 
permitting authorities to submit their combined program revisions to 
address both the revised part 70 and the interim approval deficiencies 
will be 6 months prior to the interim approval expiration dates which 
will be set through a future rulemaking.
    The longer extension allowing combining of program revisions to 
meet both the revised part 70 and interim approval deficiencies will be 
based on the promulgation date of the revisions to part 70. If only 
regulatory changes to a program are needed to meet the revised part 70, 
the extension may be for up to 18 months after the part 70 revisions. 
If legislative changes are needed to a program to meet the revised part 
70, the extension may be for up to 2 years. As previously noted, the 
program revision submittal date will be 6 months prior to expiration of 
the extended interim approval.

III. Interim Approval Extensions

    The June 13, 1996 memorandum and the October 31, 1996 action 
anticipated promulgation of the part 70 revisions no later than early 
1997. As a result of not being able to promulgate the revisions to part 
70 by early 1997, on August 29, 1997, EPA extended interim approvals a 
second time (62 FR 45732). In that action, EPA anticipated the part 70 
revisions would be promulgated by mid-summer 1998 and thus extended all 
interim approvals that would have expired before October 1, 1998 up 
until that date. This would have provided the necessary time for 
agencies to apply to combine their program revisions and EPA to take 
action on those requests.
    It now appears that resolution of issues will not take place until 
late 1998. Promulgation is now anticipated for December 1999.
    The EPA believes that the action to extend interim approvals in 
this rulemaking is necessary because of further delays in promulgation 
of the part 70 revisions. Due to these delays, all interim approvals 
will expire before part 70 is revised, thus denying these agencies the 
opportunity to combine program revisions. The EPA is aware that many 
States have been expecting to be able to combine the program revision

[[Page 40056]]

correcting their interim approval deficiencies with the program 
revision to address the revised part 70. The Agency estimates that it 
may take until June 1, 2000 to receive all State requests for combining 
program revisions and to take the necessary rulemaking action to grant 
the final extension to those interim approvals. This action, therefore, 
moves all interim approval expiration dates up to June 1, 2000.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

    The docket for this regulatory action is A-93-50. The docket is an 
organized and complete file of all the information submitted to, or 
otherwise considered by, EPA in the development of this rulemaking. The 
principal purposes of the docket are: (1) to allow interested parties a 
means to identify and locate documents so that the parties can 
effectively participate in the rulemaking process, and (2) to serve as 
the record in case of judicial review (except for interagency review 
materials). The docket is available for public inspection at EPA's Air 
Docket, which is listed under the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

B. Executive Order (E.O.) 12866

    Under E.O. 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency must 
determine whether each regulatory action is ``significant,'' and 
therefore subject to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review 
and the requirements of the Order. The Order defines ``significant'' 
regulatory action as one that is likely to lead to a rule that may:
    1. Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, 
adversely and materially affecting a sector of the economy, 
productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or 
safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities.
    2. Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency.
    3. Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligation of recipients 
thereof.
    4. Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
E.O. 12866.
    Pursuant to the terms of E.O. 12866, it has been determined that 
this action is not a ``significant'' regulatory action because it does 
not substantially change the existing part 70 requirements for States 
or sources; requirements which have already undergone OMB review. 
Rather than impose any new requirements, this action only extends an 
existing mechanism. As such, this action is exempted from OMB review.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Compliance

    Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 
U.S.C. 605(b), the Administrator certifies that this action will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. In developing the original part 70 regulations, the Agency 
determined that they would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Similarly, the same conclusion 
was reached in an initial regulatory flexibility analysis performed in 
support of the proposed part 70 revisions (a subset of which 
constitutes the action in this rulemaking notice). This action does not 
substantially alter the part 70 regulations as they pertain to small 
entities and accordingly will not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The OMB has approved the information collection requirements 
contained in part 70 under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 
Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control number 2060-
0243. The Information Collection Request (ICR) prepared for part 70 is 
not affected by the action in this rulemaking notice because the part 
70 ICR determined burden on a nationwide basis, assuming all part 70 
sources were included without regard to the approval status of 
individual programs. The action in this rulemaking notice, which simply 
provides for an extension of the interim approval of certain programs, 
does not alter the assumptions of the approved part 70 ICR used in 
determining the burden estimate. Furthermore, this action does not 
impose any additional requirements which would add to the information 
collection requirements for sources or permitting authorities.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), P.L. 
104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with Federal mandates that may 
result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in the 
aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 1 
year.
    The EPA has determined that the action in this rulemaking notice 
does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of 
$100 million or more for State, local, and tribal governments, in the 
aggregate, or the private sector, in any 1 year. Although the part 70 
regulations governing State operating permit programs impose 
significant Federal mandates, this action does not amend the part 70 
regulations in a way that significantly alters the expenditures 
resulting from these mandates. Therefore, the Agency concludes that it 
is not required by section 202 of the UMRA of 1995 to provide a written 
statement to accompany this regulatory action.

F. 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. 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).

G. Applicability of Executive Order 13045

    Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that EPA determines (1) 
``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866, 
and (2) the environmental health or safety risk addressed by the rule 
has a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action 
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health 
or safety effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    This final rule is not subject to E.O. 13045, entitled ``Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not an economically significant 
regulatory action as defined by Executive Order 12866, and it does not 
address an environmental health or

[[Page 40057]]

safety risk that would have a disproportionate effect on children.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Fugitive emissions, 
Hydrocarbons, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Volatile 
organic compounds.

    Dated: July 17, 1998.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, of 
the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as set forth below.

PART 70--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 70 continues to read as follows:

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

    2. Appendix A of part 70 is amended by the following:
    a. Adding a sentence to the end of paragraph (dd) under California;
    b. Replacing the end date of the third sentence with ``June 1, 
2000'' in paragraph (a) under Texas; and
    c. Replacing the end date of each paragraph with ``June 1, 2000'' 
as follows: Paragraph (a) under Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, 
Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, 
Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, 
Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, 
North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virgin 
Islands, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming; Paragraphs 
(a), (b), and (c) under Alabama and Nevada; Paragraphs (a), (b), (c), 
(d)(1), and (d)(2) under Arizona, Paragraphs (a) through (cc) and (ee) 
through (hh) under California; paragraphs (a) and (e) under Tennessee; 
and paragraphs (a) through (i) under Washington.
Alabama
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (b) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (c) * * * June 1, 2000.
Alaska
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Arizona
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (b) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (c) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (d)(1) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (d)(2) * * * June 1, 2000.
Arkansas
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
California * * *
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (b) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (c) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (d) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (e) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (f) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (g) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (h) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (i) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (j) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (k) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (l) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (m) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (n) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (o) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (p) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (q) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (r) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (s) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (t) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (u) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (v) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (w) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (x) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (y) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (z) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (aa) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (bb) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (cc) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (dd) * * * Interim approval expires on June 1, 2000.
    (ee) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (ff) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (gg) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (hh) * * * June 1, 2000.
Colorado
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Connecticut
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Delaware
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
District of Columbia
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Florida
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Georgia
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Hawaii
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Idaho
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Illinois
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Indiana
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Kentucky
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Maine
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Maryland
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Massachusetts
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Michigan
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Minnesota
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Montana
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Nevada
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (b) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (c) * * * June 1, 2000.
New Hampshire
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
New Jersey
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
New York
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
North Carolina
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
North Dakota
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Oklahoma
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *

[[Page 40058]]

Rhode Island
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Tennessee
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
    (e) * * * June 1, 2000.
Texas
    (a) * * * Interim approval will expire June 1, 2000. * * *
* * * * *
Vermont
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Virgin Islands
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Virginia
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Washington
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (b) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (c) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (d) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (e) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (f) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (g) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (h) * * * June 1, 2000.
    (i) * * * June 1, 2000.
West Virginia
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Wisconsin
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.
* * * * *
Wyoming
    (a) * * * June 1, 2000.

[FR Doc. 98-19932 Filed 7-24-98; 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>