Document ID: EPA-R02-OAR-2005-NJ-0001-0015
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Reasonably Available Control Technology for Oxides of Nitrogen for a Specific Source in the State of New Jersey
Posted Date: 2006-05-16T04:00Z

[Federal Register: March 14, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 49)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 13019-13021]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr14mr06-13]                         

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[Region 2 Docket No. EPA-R02-OAR-2004-NJ-0001, FRL-8040-4]

 
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Reasonably 
Available Control Technology for Oxides of Nitrogen for a Specific 
Source in the State of New Jersey

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is approving a revision to 
the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone submitted by the State of 
New Jersey. This SIP revision consists of a source-specific reasonably 
available control technology (RACT) determination for controlling 
oxides of nitrogen from the cogeneration facility operated by Schering 
Corporation. This action approves of the source-specific RACT 
determination that was made by New Jersey in accordance with provisions 
of its regulation to help meet the national ambient air quality 
standard for ozone. The intended effect of this action is to approve 
source-specific emission limitations required by the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be effective April 13, 2006.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Regional 
Material in EDocket (RME) Docket ID Number EPA-R02-OAR-2004-NJ-0001. 
All documents in the docket are listed in the Regional Material in 
EDocket (RME) index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, once in the 

system, select ``quick search,'' then key in the appropriate RME Docket 
identification number. Publicly available docket materials are 
available either electronically in Regional Material in EDocket or in 
hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region II Office, Air 
Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-
1866. Copies of the documents relevant to this action are also 
available for public inspection during normal business hours, by 
appointment at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, 
Environmental Protection Agency, Room B-108, 1301 Constitution Avenue, 
NW., Washington, DC; and the New Jersey Department of Environmental 
Protection, Office of Air Quality Management, Bureau of Air Pollution 
Control, 401 East State Street, CN027, Trenton, New Jersey 08625.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Ruvo, Air Programs Branch, 
Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, 
New York 10007-1866, (212) 637-4014 (ruvo.richard@epa.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

    EPA is approving a revision to the New Jersey State Department of 
Environmental Protection's (New Jersey's) ozone State Implementation 
Plan (SIP) submitted on March 31, 2005. This SIP revision relates to 
New Jersey's source-specific reasonably available

[[Page 13020]]

control technology (RACT) determination for controlling oxides of 
nitrogen (NOX) from the Schering Corporation's (Schering) 
heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) with duct burner for the 
cogeneration facility located in Union, New Jersey. The reader is 
referred to the proposed rulemaking on this action (July 1, 2005, 70 FR 
38068) for additional details.

II. What Comments Were Received and What Is EPA's Response?

    EPA's July 1, 2005 proposed rule provided a 30-day public comment 
period. During this period, EPA received two comment letters on the 
proposal to approve New Jersey's NOX RACT determination. 
EPA's response immediately follows a summary of each public comment.
    Comments: Schering submitted a comment letter which provided a 
chronology of events regarding the operation and regulatory status of 
the HRSG. Schering's letter requested approval to operate the HRSG in 
the same manner that EPA and New Jersey approved Schering to operate a 
similar HRSG at the same cogeneration facility in 1998.
    Response: By submitting the source-specific RACT determination to 
New Jersey and EPA for review and approval, Schering in essence has 
already formally made the request to operate the HRSG in a way similar 
to another unit at the facility. Therefore, EPA is satisfying 
Schering's request by proceeding with this action on the source-
specific SIP revision.
    Comments: A concerned citizen commented EPA is doing nothing to 
make New Jersey's air cleaner. The comments were not directed at 
Schering as a specific source or at any specific NOX 
emission limitation at Schering. In addition, the comments did not 
include any supporting information or justification on how EPA can make 
the air cleaner.
    Response: EPA acknowledges the citizen's support for clean air. 
However, no specific information or supporting justification relevant 
to the NOX RACT determination for Schering was provided for 
EPA to reconsider the proposed approval. For the reasons in this 
section, and in the July 1, 2005 proposal, EPA is approving the 
NOX emission limitation for Schering, consistent with the 
RACT requirements of the Clean Air Act. With respect to the citizen's 
comment that EPA is doing nothing to clean the air in New Jersey, EPA 
is championing a host of programs including the Clean Air Interstate 
Rule, the Clean Air Mercury Rule, and diesel retrofit programs for 
trucks and buses. These and other programs, in cooperation with the 
State of New Jersey, will help to clean the air and to meet the 
national ambient air quality standards in New Jersey and across the 
country.

III. What Are EPA's Conclusions?

    EPA has determined New Jersey's SIP revision for New Jersey's 
NOX RACT determination for Schering's HRSG with duct burner 
is consistent with New Jersey's NOX RACT regulation and 
EPA's guidance. EPA has determined that the NOX emission 
limits identified in New Jersey's Conditions of Approval document 
represents RACT for Schering's HRSG with duct burner. More 
specifically, EPA approves the current Conditions of Approval document 
which includes an alternative emission limit for the HRSG/duct burner 
when operating in the fresh air fired mode and when firing natural gas. 
The limit will be the lower of 0.17 lbs/MMBtu, or 115% of the average 
of three one-hour stack tests, each performed over a consecutive 60-
minute period. Accordingly, EPA is approving the New Jersey SIP 
revision for an alternative RACT emission limit determination for 
Schering's HRSG with duct burner.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under Executive Order 12866 
(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' and therefore is not subject to review by the 
Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also 
not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations 
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 
28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves state law as meeting 
Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond 
those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies 
that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule approves pre-existing 
requirements under state law and does not impose any additional 
enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain 
any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also does not have tribal implications 
because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more 
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and 
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also 
does not have Federalism implications because it does not have 
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between 
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), 
because it merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal 
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of 
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule 
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children 
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 
23, 1997), because it is not economically significant. In reviewing SIP 
submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they 
meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence 
of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary 
consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP 
submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with 
applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in 
place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 
the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection 
burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) 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. 
A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in 
the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 
5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under

[[Page 13021]]

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 May 15, 2006. 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, Intergovernmental 
relations, Nitrogen dioxides, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: February 22, 2006.
Alan J. Steinberg,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.

0
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart FF--New Jersey

0
2. Section 52.1570 is amended by adding new paragraph (c)(80) to read 
as follows:

Sec.  52.1570  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (80) Revision to the New Jersey State Implementation Plan (SIP) for 
ozone concerning the control of nitrogen oxides from the Schering 
Corporation's CoGEN II cogeneration facility located in Union County 
submitted by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 
(NJDEP), dated March 31, 2005.
    (i) Incorporation by reference:
    (A) Conditions of Approval, Alternative Maximum Emission Rate For 
NOX, Schering Corporation, Union, Union County, New Jersey 
facility identification number 40084 approved March 9, 2005.

[FR Doc. 06-2428 Filed 3-13-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P