Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 7, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 20455

1The East St. Louis moderate ozone

nonattainment area consists of Madison, Monroe,

and St. Clair counties.

(2) Rule 359, adopted on June 28,

1994.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 96–11204 Filed 5–6–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[IL18–7–7024a; FRL–5436–1]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plan; Illinois

AGENCY: United States Environmental

Protection Agency (USEPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: On October 21, 1993, the

Illinois Environmental Protection (IEPA)

submitted to USEPA volatile organic

compound (VOC) rules that were

intended to satisfy part of the

requirements of section 182(b)(2) of the

Clean Air Act (Act) amendments of

1990. Rules submitted at that time

include control requirements for certain

major sources in the East St. Louis

nonattainment area not covered by a

Control Technique Guideline (CTG)

document. These major non-CTG VOC

rules apply to sources which emit (at

maximum capacity) 100 tons of VOC per

year. These rules provide an

environmental benefit due to the

imposition of additional control

requirements. This rulemaking action

approves, in final, Illinois’ rules for

major non-CTG sources in the East St.

Louis nonattainment area. The rationale

for the conditional approval is set forth

in this final rule; additional information

is available at the address indicated

below. Elsewhere in this Federal

Register, USEPA is proposing approval

of and soliciting public comment on this

requested revision to the Illinois State

Implementation Plan (SIP). If adverse

comments are received on this direct

final rule, USEPA will withdraw the

final rule and address the comments

received in a new final rule. Unless this

final rule is withdrawn, no further

rulemaking will occur on this requested

SIP revision.

DATES: This final rule is effective July 8,

1996 unless adverse comments are

received by June 6, 1996. If the effective

date is delayed, timely notice will be

published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments can be

mailed to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,

Regulation Development Section, Air

Programs Branch (AR–18J), Air and

Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

Copies of the SIP revision request are

available for inspection at the following

address: (It is recommended that you

telephone Steven Rosenthal at (312)

886–6052 before visiting the Region 5

office.) U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation

Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Steven Rosenthal, Air Programs Branch

(AR–18J) (312) 886–6052.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Under the Act as amended in 1977,

ozone nonattainment areas were

required to adopt reasonably available

control technology (RACT) for sources

of VOC emissions. USEPA issued three

sets of control technique guidelines

(CTGs) documents, establishing a

‘‘presumptive norm’’ for RACT for

various categories of VOC sources. The

three sets of CTGs were (1) Group I—

issued before January 1978 (15 CTGs);

(2) Group II—issued in 1978 (9 CTGs);

and (3) Group III—issued in the early

1980’s (5 CTGs). Those sources not

covered by a CTG were called non-CTG

sources. USEPA determined that the

area’s SIP-approved attainment date

established which RACT rules the area

needed to adopt and implement. Those

areas (including the East St. Louis area)

that sought an extension of the

attainment date under section 172(a)(2)

to as late as December 31, 1987, were

required to adopt RACT for all CTG

sources and for all major (100 tons per

year or more of VOC emissions) nonCTG sources.

Section 182(b)(2) of the Act as

amended in 1990 (amended Act)

requires States to adopt reasonably

available control technology (RACT)

rules for all areas designated

nonattainment for ozone and classified

as moderate or above. There are three

parts to the section 182(b)(2) RACT

requirement: (1) RACT for sources

covered by an existing CTG—i.e., a CTG

issued prior to the enactment of the

amended Act of 1990; (2) RACT for

sources covered by a post-enactment

CTG; and (3) RACT for all major sources

not covered by a CTG. These section

182(b)(2) RACT requirements are

referred to as the RACT ‘‘catch-up’’

requirements.

The amended Act requires USEPA to

issue CTGs for 13 source categories by

November 15, 1993. A CTG was

published by this date for two source

categories—Synthetic Organic Chemical

Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI)

Reactors and Distillation; however, the

CTGs for the remaining source

categories have not been completed. The

amended Act requires States to submit

rules for sources covered by a postenactment CTG in accordance with a

schedule specified in a CTG document.

Accordingly, States must submit a

RACT rule for SOCMI reactor processes

and distillation operations before March

23, 1995. Illinois has submitted a rule,

covering these SOCMI sources, which

will be the subject of a separate

rulemaking action.

The USEPA developed a CTG

document as Appendix E to the General

Preamble for the Implementation of

Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments

of 1990. (57 FR 18070, 18077, April 28,

1992). In Appendix E, USEPA

interpreted the Act to allow a State

either 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 post-enactment CTG, based

on the list of CTGs USEPA expected to

issue to meet the requirement in section

183. Appendix E states that if USEPA

fails to issue a CTG by November 15,

1993 (which it did for 11 source

categories), the responsibility shifts to

the State to submit a non-CTG RACT

rule for those sources by November 15,

1994. In accordance with section

182(b)(2), implementation of that RACT

rule should occur by May 31, 1995.

Most of these 11 categories are covered

by Illinois’ ‘‘generic’’ major non-CTG

rules that are the subject of this

document.

On October 21, 1993, IEPA submitted

VOC rules for the East St. Louis ozone

moderate nonattainment area 1 and a

revision to these major non-CTG control

requirements was submitted to USEPA

on May 26, 1995. Most of those rules,

including those which deal with source

categories covered by CTGs, (and the

related test methods, definitions and

recordkeeping requirements) were

approved by USEPA on September 9,

1994 (59 FR 46562). This document

deals with those major non-CTG rules

for the East St. Louis area which are

intended to largely satisfy the major

non-CTG control requirements of

sections 182(a)(2)(A) and 182(b)(2).

However, this October 21, 1993,

submittal exempts bakeries and sewage

treatment plants from these major nonCTG regulations. Major non-CTG

regulations are, therefore, required for

any major bakeries and industrial

wastewater treatment plants in the East

St. Louis area.
20456 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 7, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

Evaluation of Rules

Subparts PP, QQ, RR and TT in Part

219 consist of ‘‘generic’’ major non-CTG

rules for sources, in the East St. Louis

ozone nonattainment area, not

specifically covered by another rule.

Compliance with these rules was

required by May 15, 1992. These rules

are generally consistent with the

Chicago Federal Implementation Plan

that was promulgated by USEPA on

June 29, 1990 (55 FR 26818) and

codified at 40 CFR § 52.741, and/or

USEPA RACT guidance. The discussion

below clarifies certain aspects of these

non-CTG rules, including parts of these

rules that differ from previously

approved ‘‘generic’’ non-CTG VOC

rules.

Sections 926, 946, 966, and 986

specify the control requirements for the

rules. Subsection (a) of each of these

Sections requires an overall 81 percent

reduction from each emission unit. An

(Illinois Pollution Control) Board Note

has been added to each subsection to

clarify what is intended by the term

‘‘emission unit.’’ A further clarification

of the Board Note has been provided in

a June 16, 1993, letter from Dennis

Lawler, IEPA.

Subparts PP, QQ, RR and TT do not

apply to sources that are not major (that

is, emit less than 100 tons VOC per year

at maximum capacity) and exempt

emission units with less than 1 ton VOC

per year or 2.5 tons VOC per year

(depending upon the subpart) if the total

emissions from such emission units do

not exceed 5 tons VOC per year. Subpart

UU contains the recordkeeping and

reporting requirements for the non-CTG

requirements in Subparts PP, QQ, RR,

and TT and Section 219.990 (in Subpart

UU) contains the recordkeeping and

reporting requirements for exempt

emission units. Although Section

219.990 refers to emission units which

are exempt, it should be noted that the

owner or operator of an emission unit

which is exempt because the source is

not major would need to submit records

for the entire source to demonstrate that

maximum theoretical emissions from all

non-CTG and unregulated CTG

operations are below the applicable

cutoff. In those cases where one or more

(but not all) emission units are exempt

(as in 219.920(c), 219.940(c), 219.960(c),

and 219.980(c)), records must be

submitted documenting that each such

emission unit is exempt.

Illinois’ major non-CTG VOC rules in

Subparts PP, QQ, RR, and TT require

applicable sources to comply with one

of the following: (1) Emission capture

and control techniques which achieve

an overall reduction in uncontrolled

VOC emissions of at least 81 percent

from each emission unit, or (2) For

coating lines, the daily-weighted

average VOC content shall not exceed

3.5 pounds (lbs) VOC per gallon (gal) of

coating, or (3) an equivalent alternative

control plan which has been approved

by the Agency and the USEPA in a

federally enforceable permit or as a SIP

revision.

On December 17, 1992, (57 FR 59928)

USEPA approved Illinois’ existing

Operating Permit program as satisfying

USEPA’s June 28, 1989, (54 FR 27274)

five criteria regarding Federal

enforceability. One of the criteria is that

permits may not be issued that make

less stringent any SIP limitation or

requirement. USEPA’s December 17,

1992, notice states that operating

permits issued by Illinois in

conformance with the five criteria

(including the prohibition against States

issuing operating permit limits less

stringent than the regulations in the SIP)

discussed in this notice will be

considered federally enforceable. This

notice also states Illinois’ operating

permit program allows USEPA to deem

an operating permit not ‘‘federally

enforceable.’’

On July 21, 1992, USEPA

promulgated a new part 70 of chapter 1

of title 40 of the Code of Federal

Regulations. See 57 FR 32250. Part 70

contains regulations, required by Title V

of the Act, that specify the minimum

elements of State operating permit

programs. Part 70 is, therefore, an

appropriate basis for evaluating the

acceptability of Illinois’ use of federally

enforceable State operating permits

(FESOP) and Title V permits in its VOC

rules.

Section 70.6(a)(1)(iii) states:

If an applicable implementation plan

allows a determination of an alternative

emission limit at a part 70 source, equivalent

to that contained in the plan, to be made in

the permit issuance, renewal, or significant

modification process, and the State elects to

use such process, any permit containing such

equivalency determination shall contain

provisions to ensure that any resulting

emissions limit has been demonstrated to be

quantifiable, accountable, enforceable, and

based on replicable procedures.

USEPA has therefore determined that

the option for alternative control plans,

submitted on October 21, 1993 (with a

revision submitted on May 26, 1995), in

subsections 219.926(c), 219.946(b),

219.966(b), and 219.986(c), is

approvable because it requires that any

alternative must be equivalent to the

underlying SIP requirements (consistent

with part 70) and USEPA can deem a

permit containing an alternative control

plan to be not ‘‘federally enforceable’’ if

it determines that a permit is not

quantifiable or practically enforceable or

a permit relaxes the SIP. The underlying

SIP, to which any equivalent alternative

control plan would be compared, has

federally enforceable control

requirements, test methods, and

recordkeeping and reporting

requirements. In addition, a September

13, 1995, letter from IEPA contains the

specific procedures for USEPA review

and approval.

Subsections 219.620(a)(1)(B),

219.920(a)(2), 219.940(a)(2),

219.960(a)(2), and 219.980(a)(2) allow

sources to avoid the applicability of

specified major non-CTG rules,

provided a source has a federally

enforceable permit that limits emissions

to below the applicable cutoff through

capacity or production limitations.

These subsections are approvable

because USEPA can deem a permit to be

‘‘not federally enforceable’’ in a letter to

IEPA. Upon issuance of such a letter,

the source is no longer protected by the

permit referenced in the subject

subsections. The source would then be

subject to the SIP requirements if its

emissions exceed the applicable cutoff.

This is consistent with USEPA’s

December 17, 1992, approval of Illinois’

operating permit program which states:

‘‘In approving the State operating

program USEPA is determining that

Illinois’ program allows USEPA to deem

an operating permit not ‘federally

enforceable’ for purposes of limiting

potential to emit and to offset

creditability.’’ (57 FR 59928, 59930).

IEPA has agreed to this approach and

specified the applicable procedures in a

March 26, 1993, letter to USEPA. In

summary, these subsections are

approvable because USEPA can

invalidate the protection provided by an

operating permit by deeming such

operating permit to be ‘‘not federally

enforceable’’ in a letter to IEPA.

Final Rulemaking Action

For the reasons discussed above,

USEPA approves the major non-CTG

VOC RACT rules in Part 219 (for the

East St. Louis ozone nonattainment

area) that were submitted on October 21,

1993 and May 26, 1995.

Because USEPA considers this action

noncontroversial and routine, we are

approving it without prior proposal. The

action will become effective on July 8,

1996. However, if we receive adverse

comments by June 6, 1996, then USEPA

will publish a document that withdraws

this final action. If no request for a

public hearing has been received,

USEPA will address the public

comments received in a new final rule

on the requested SIP revision based on
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 89 / Tuesday, May 7, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 20457

the proposed rule located in the

proposed rules section of this Federal

Register. If a public hearing is

requested, USEPA will publish a

document announcing a public hearing

and reopening the public comment

period until 30 days after the public

hearing. At the conclusion of this

additional public comment period,

USEPA will publish a final rule

responding to the public comments

received and announcing final action.

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action by the Regional

Administrator under the procedures

published in the Federal Register on

January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214–2225), as

revised by an October 4, 1993,

memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro,

former Acting Assistant Administrator

for the Office of Air and Radiation. A

July 10, 1995, memorandum from Mary

D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for

the Office of Air and Radiation explains

that the authority to approve/disapprove

SIPs has been delegated to the Regional

Administrators for Table 3 actions. The

Office of Management and Budget has

exempted this regulatory action from

Executive Order 12866 review.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting, allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. USEPA

shall consider each request for revision

to the SIP in light of specific technical,

economic, and environmental factors

and in relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’) (signed

into law on March 22, 1995) requires

that the USEPA prepare a budgetary

impact statement before promulgating a

rule that includes a Federal mandate

that may result in expenditure by State,

local, and tribal governments, in

aggregate, or by the private sector, of

$100 million or more in any one year.

Section 203 requires the USEPA to

establish a plan for obtaining input from

and informing, educating, and advising

any small governments that may be

significantly or uniquely affected by the

rule.

Under section 205 of the Unfunded

Mandates Act, the USEPA must identify

and consider a reasonable number of

regulatory alternatives before

promulgating a rule for which a

budgetary impact statement must be

prepared. The USEPA must select from

those alternatives the least costly, most

cost-effective, or least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives

of the rule, unless the USEPA explains

why this alternative is not selected or

the selection of this alternative is

inconsistent with law.

Because this final rule is estimated to

result in the expenditure by State, local,

and tribal governments or the private

sector of less then $100 million in any

one year, the USEPA has not prepared

a budgetary impact statement or

specifically addressed the selection of

the least costly, most cost-effective, or

least burdensome alternative. Because

small governments will not be

significantly or uniquely affected by this

rule, the USEPA is not required to

develop a plan with regard to small

governments. This rule only approves

the incorporation of existing state rules

into the SIP. It imposes no additional

requirements.

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., USEPA must

prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. (5 U.S.C. 603

and 604.) Alternatively, USEPA 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.

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, 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 regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of the State action. The

Clean Air Act forbids USEPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v. USEPA.,

427 U.S. 246, 256–66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this action must be filed in the United

States Court of Appeals for the

appropriate circuit by July 8, 1996.

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,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: February 7, 1996.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting Regional Administrator.

For the reasons stated in the

preamble, 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 7671q.

Subpart O—Illinois

2. Section 52.720 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(127) to read as

follows:

§ 52.720 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(127) On October 21, 1993, and May

26, 1995, Illinois submitted volatile

organic compound control regulations

for incorporation in the Illinois State

Implementation Plan for ozone.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Illinois Administrative Code Title

35: Environmental Protection, Subtitle

B: Air Pollution, Chapter I: Pollution

Control Board, Subchapter c: Emissions

Standards and Limitations for

Stationary Sources, Part 219: Organic

Material Emissions Standards and

Limitations for Metro East Area, Subpart

PP: 219.920, 219.923, 219.927, 219.928;

Subpart QQ: 219.940, 219.943, 219.947,

219.948; Subpart RR: 219.960, 219.963,

219.967, 219.968; Subpart TT: 219.980,

219.983, 219.987, 219.988; and Subpart

UU. These Subparts were adopted on

September 9, 1993, Amended at 17 Ill.

Reg. 16918, effective September 27,

1993.

(B) Illinois Administrative Code Title

35: Environmental Protection, Subtitle

B: Air Pollution, Chapter I: Pollution

Control Board, Subchapter c: Emissions

Standards and Limitations for

Stationary Sources, Part 219: Organic

Material Emissions Standards and

Limitations for Metro East Area, Subpart

PP: 219.926; Subpart QQ: 219.946;

Subpart RR: 219.966; and Subpart TT:

219.986. These Subparts were adopted

on April 20, 1995, Amended at 19 Ill.

Reg. 6958, effective May 9, 1995.

[FR Doc. 96–11202 Filed 5–6–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P