[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 117 (Monday, June 19, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31915-31917]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-14852]



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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52

[TX-37-1-6323a; FRL-5161-9]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Texas; Alternative Emission Control Plan For Shell Oil Company, Deer 
Park, TX

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this action, the EPA is approving the alternative emission 
reduction (bubble) plan for the Shell Oil Company's Deer Park 
manufacturing complex as a revision to the Texas State Implementation 
Plan (SIP). The bubble plan uses the emission reduction credit (ERC) 
from volatile organic compound (VOC) reductions at an analyzer vent in 
lieu of controlling VOC emissions from three vacuum vents. The bubble 
plan was reviewed for consistency with the EPA's Emissions Trading 
Policy Statement (ETPS) published in the Federal Register on December 
4, 1986.

DATES: This action will become effective on August 18, 1995 unless 
adverse or critical comments are received by July 19, 1995. If the 
effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the 
Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Mr. 
Guy Donaldson, Acting Chief, Planning Section, at the EPA Regional 
Office listed below. Copies of the documents relevant to this action 
are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the 
following locations. The interested persons wanting to examine these 
documents should make an appointment with the appropriate office at 
least twenty-four hours before the visiting day.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Programs Branch 
(6T-A), 1445 Ross Avenue, suite 700, Dallas, TX 75202-2733.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Docket and 
Information Center, 401 M Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20460.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, 12124 Park 35 Circle, 
Austin, Texas 78753.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Leila Yim Surratt or Mr. Herb 
Sherrow, Planning Section (6T-AP), Air Programs Branch, EPA Region 6, 
1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone (214) 665-7214.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On July 26, 1993, the Governor of Texas submitted a request to 
revise the Texas SIP to include an alternative emission reduction plan 
for the Shell Oil Manufacturing Complex located in Deer Park, Texas.
    Due to VOC Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) fix-up 
changes required by the 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA), the Texas Air Control 
Board (TACB), which is now known as the Texas Natural Resource 
Conservation Commission, adopted revisions to its Regulation V on May 
10, 1991, eliminating the exemption of sources with emissions of less 
than 100 pounds per day from RACT requirements. As a result of this 
action, Shell was required to install a 90 percent control technology 
on three vacuum vents. These vents emit a total of 36 pounds of VOC per 
year (0.018 tons per year (TPY)). The vast majority of the vent stream 
emissions are composed of steam and air. Instead of controlling 
emissions from these three vents, Shell proposed to use an emission 
reduction from an analyzer vent located at its Alkylation Plant. The 
analyzer vent reduction is not required by any State or Federal rule, 
regulation, permit condition, board order, or court order. 1.05 TPY of 
VOC emission reduction was achieved from the analyzer vent by 
physically limiting the maximum flow rate through the vent from 4.2 TPY 
of VOC to 3.15 TPY. The reduced flow was made permanent by replacing 
the metering valves and adding flow restrictors.
II. Applicable EPA Policies

    On December 4, 1986 (51 FR 43814), the EPA issued the final ETPS, 
containing the criteria by which emissions trades will be evaluated. As 
indicated in the ETPS, it is the policy of the EPA to encourage 
emissions trades to achieve more flexible, rapid, and efficient 
attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. It describes 
emissions trading, sets out general principles that the EPA uses to 
evaluate emissions trades under the CAA, and expands opportunities for 
States and industry to use these less costly control approaches. A 
source may secure ERCs by meeting each of the applicable requirements 
of the final ETPS. Generally, only reductions which are surplus, 
enforceable, permanent, and quantifiable can qualify as ERCs. In 
addition, the ETPS lays out more stringent baseline and additional 20 
percent emission reduction requirements if the trade occurs in a 
nonattainment area needing but lacking an approved attainment 
demonstration.
    On April 7, 1994 (59 FR 16710), the EPA issued the final Economic 
Incentive Program (EIP) rule which sets forth general principles for a 
broad range of EIPs which States may pursue. Through the EIP rule, the 
Agency encourages the development of EIPs that will assist States in 
meeting air quality management goals through flexible approaches which 
allow for less costly control strategies, and which provide stronger 
incentives for the development and implementation of innovative 
emission reduction technology. In the preamble to the EIP rule (59 FR 
16690), the EPA addresses the relationship between the EIP and the 
ETPS. The preamble clarifies that the provisions of the ETPS which 
apply to trading between existing sources represent one particular 
model for how States could design an EIP. Therefore, an application for 
an emissions trade or bubble that meets the requirements of the ETPS, 
[[Page 31916]] will be deemed to meet the requirements of the EIP.
    Shell Oil Company's Deer Park Manufacturing bubble application was 
developed to meet the requirements of the ETPS. Therefore, the EPA has 
evaluated the emissions trade against the ETPS requirements.

III. Analysis

    The following items are the basis for approval of the Texas SIP 
revision. Please refer to the EPA's Technical Support Document and the 
Texas SIP submittal for more detailed information.

A. Valid Emission Reduction Credits

    As required by the ETPS, to be valid for trading purposes, an 
emission reduction must be surplus, enforceable, permanent, and 
quantifiable. The EPA believes the emission reduction from the analyzer 
vent meets these criteria.
    First, the emission reduction from the analyzer vent is surplus. 
The analyzer vent is not subject to any State or Federal regulation. 
The emissions rate of 4.2 TPY is low enough to be exempt from the 
State's vent gas rule.
    Second, the emission reduction was made enforceable through State 
Board Order number 93-11 which specifies the terms of the emissions 
trade.
    Third, the emission reduction is permanent since the flow through 
the analyzer vent was physically reduced by changing the metering 
valves and adding flow restrictors.
    Finally, the emission reduction is quantifiable. The annual 
emissions for the analyzer vent were from the 1991 Air Emissions 
Inventory Reportable Quantities based on information from historical 
flow settings. The annual emissions from the three vacuum vents were 
based on engineering estimates and measurements.
    Because the emission reduction from the analyzer vent is surplus, 
enforceable, permanent, and quantifiable, the EPA believes that the 
emission reduction associated with this bubble is valid for use as an 
ERC.

B. More Stringent Baseline and 20 Percent Reduction Requirements

    As discussed above, the ETPS also requires more stringent baselines 
and an additional 20 percent emission reduction if the trade occurs in 
a nonattainment area needing but lacking an approved attainment 
demonstration. This trade occurs in the Houston-Galveston severe ozone 
nonattainment area, which does not currently have an approved 
attainment demonstration which is required under section 182(c)(2)(A) 
of the CAA. This trade complies with the more stringent baseline and 
the 20 percent additional emission reduction requirements. As described 
more fully in the Technical Support Document, the 1.05 TPY emission 
reduction from the analyzer vent more than compensates for the 0.016 
TPY emission reduction that was required from the three uncontrolled 
vacuum vents.

C. Procedural Background

    The CAA requires States to observe certain procedural requirements 
in developing implementation plans and plan revisions for submission to 
the EPA. Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA provides that each implementation 
plan submitted by a State must be adopted after reasonable notice and 
public hearing.1 Section 110(l) of the CAA similarly provides that 
each revision to an implementation plan submitted by a State under the 
CAA must be adopted by such State after reasonable notice and public 
hearing. Public notice on the proposed Shell bubble was published in 
the Houston ozone nonattainment area in accordance with the State of 
Texas' public notice requirements. The State held a public hearing on 
the proposed regulations on March 9, 1993. The Shell bubble was adopted 
by the State on June 18, 1993, and was submitted through the Governor 
to the EPA on July 26, 1993, as a proposed revision to the SIP.

    \1\ Also Section 172(c)(7) of the CAA requires that plan 
provisions for nonattainment areas meet the applicable provisions of 
Section 110(a)(2).
IV. Final Action

    In this action, the EPA is approving the alternative emission 
reduction (bubble) plan for the Shell Oil Company's Deer Park 
Manufacturing Complex, which was adopted by the TACB on June 18, 1993, 
in Board Order 93-11, and submitted to the EPA by the Governor of Texas 
in a letter dated July 26, 1993.
    The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because 
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates 
no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal 
Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision 
should adverse or critical comments be filed. Thus, this action will be 
effective August 18, 1995 unless, by July 19, 1995, adverse or critical 
comments are received.
    If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn 
before the effective date by publishing a subsequent notice that will 
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be 
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a 
proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on 
this action. Any 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 action will be effective August 18, 1995.
    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.
    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., the EPA 
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, the 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 
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 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 CAA, 
preparation of a regulatory 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, 256-66 (1976); 42 
U.S.C. 7410(a)(2)).
    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 August 18, 1995. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration of this final rule by the Administrator does not affect 
the finality of this rule for purposes of judicial review; nor does it 
extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be 
filed, or postpone the effectiveness of this action. This action may 
not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements (see 
section 307(b)(2)).
    The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from 
review under Executive Order 12866. [[Page 31917]] 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, 
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic 
compounds.

    Note: Incorporation by reference of the SIP for the State of 
Texas was approved by the Director of the Federal Register on July 
1, 1982.

    Dated: February 9, 1995.

William B. Hathaway,

Acting Regional Administrator.

    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. 7401-7671q.

Subpart SS--Texas

    2. Section 52.2270 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(95) to read 
as follows:

Sec. 52.2270  Identification of plan.

* * * * *

    (c) * * *

    (95) Alternative emission reduction (bubble) plan for the Shell Oil 
Company's Deer Park manufacturing complex submitted to the EPA by the 
Governor of Texas in a letter dated July 26, 1993.

    (i) Incorporation by reference.

    (A) TACB Order 93-11, as adopted by the TACB on June 18, 1993.

    (B) SIP narrative entitled, ``Site-Specific State Implementation 
Plan,'' section IV.H.1.b., attachment (4), entitled, ``Alternate 
Emission Reduction (``Bubble'') Plan Provisions for Uncontrolled 
Vacuum-Producing Vents, Shell Oil Company, Deer Park Manufacturing 
Complex, HG-0659-W,'' adopted by the TACB on June 18, 1993.

    (ii) Additional material.

    (A) SIP narrative entitled, ``Site-Specific State Implementation 
Plan,'' section IV.H.1.b., adopted by the TACB on June 18, 1993.

    (B) TACB certification letter dated July 5, 1993, and signed by 
William R. Campbell, Executive Director, TACB.

[FR Doc. 95-14852 Filed 6-16-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P