[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 145 (Friday, July 28, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38722-38725]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-18523]



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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52

[WI49-01-6738a; FRL-5254-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Wisconsin

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 
approves revisions to Wisconsin's State Implementation Plan (SIP) for 
ozone which were submitted to the USEPA on April 17, 1990, and June 30, 
1994, and supplemented on July 15, 1994. Included in these revisions is 
a volatile organic compound (VOC) regulation which establishes 
reasonably available control technology (RACT) for screen printing 
facilities. Additionally, the State has submitted current negative 
declarations for pre-1990 Control Technology Guideline (CTG) categories 
for which Wisconsin does not have rules as well as a list of major 
sources affected by the 13 CTG categories that USEPA is required to 
issue pursuant to sections 183(a), 183(b)(3) and 183(b)(4) of the Clean 
Air Act (Act). These revisions were submitted to address, in part, the 
requirement of section 182(b)(2)(B) of the Act that States adopt RACT 
regulations for sources covered by pre-1990 CTG documents, and the 
requirement of section 182(b)(2)(C) of the Act that States revise their 
SIPs to establish RACT regulations for major sources of VOCs for which 
the USEPA has not issued a CTG document. In the proposed rules section 
of this Federal Register, the USEPA is proposing approval of and 
soliciting public comment on this requested SIP revision. If adverse 
comments are received on this action, the USEPA will withdraw this 
final rule and address the comments received in response to this action 
in a final rule on the related proposed rule, which is being published 
in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register. A second public 
comment period will not be held. Parties interested in commenting on 
this action should do so at this time.

DATES: This action will be effective September 26, 1995 unless an 
adverse comment is received by August 28, 1995. If the effective date 
of this action is delayed due to adverse comments, timely notice will 
be published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: Carlton T. Nash, Chief, 
Regulation Development Section, Air Toxics and Radiation Branch (AT-
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

[[Page 38723]]
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    Copies of the State submittal are available for public review 
during normal business hours at the above address. (It is recommended 
that you telephone Kathleen D'Agostino at (312) 886-1767 before 
visiting the Region 5 office.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen D'Agostino, Regulation 
Development Section, Air Toxics and Radiation Branch (AT-18J), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois 60604. Telephone: (312) 886-6036.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 182(b)(2) of the Act requires States 
to adopt VOC RACT rules for all areas designated nonattainment for 
ozone and classified as moderate or above. Section 182(b)(2)(B) 
requires that States adopt RACT regulations for sources covered by pre-
1990 CTG documents. Section 182(b)(2)(C) requires that States submit 
revisions to the SIP for major sources of VOCs for which the USEPA has 
not issued a CTG document. The counties of Kewaunee, Manitowoc, and 
Sheboygan and the Milwaukee area (including Kenosha, Milwaukee, 
Ozaukee, Racine, Washington, and Waukesha) are the only areas in 
Wisconsin designated nonattainment and classified as moderate or above. 
Therefore, these are the areas in Wisconsin subject to the RACT catch-
up requirements of section 182(b)(2).

Negative Declarations

    Wisconsin has not promulgated RACT regulations for several pre-1990 
CTG categories because there are no sources located in the ozone 
nonattainment areas that would be affected. Therefore, to satisfy the 
requirement of section 182(b)(2)(B), the State is required to 
officially certify that there are currently no sources in the 
nonattainment areas that would be covered by these categories. The 
State submitted current negative declarations for the following 
categories on April 17, 1990, and June 30, 1994: (1) leaks from 
petroleum refinery equipment; (2) manufacture of synthesized 
pharmaceutical products; (3) manufacture of pneumatic rubber tires; (4) 
automobile and light duty truck manufacturing; (5) fire truck and 
emergency response vehicle manufacturing; (6) manufacture of high-
density polyethylene, polypropylene, and polystyrene resins, a.k.a. 
polymer manufacturing; (7) leaks from synthetic organic chemical and 
polymer manufacturing equipment; (8) air oxidation processes at 
synthetic organic chemical manufacturing industries; and (9) equipment 
leaks from natural gas/gasoline processing plants.

List of Major Sources Subject to Post-1990 CTG Source Categories

    Pursuant to sections 183(a), 183(b)(3) and 183(b)(4) of the Act, 
USEPA was required to develop CTG documents for 13 source categories by 
November 15, 1993. A list of these source categories, contained in 
Appendix E to the General Preamble, was published in the Federal 
Register on April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070). The State was required to 
submit a list of major sources that would be subject to these post-1990 
CTG documents. On June 30, 1994, Wisconsin submitted this list which 
included facilities in four source categories: (1) cleanup solvents; 
(2) offset lithography; (3) plastic parts coating; and (4) wood 
furniture coating.

Screen Printing

    Because the USEPA has not issued a CTG for screen printing, the 
State of Wisconsin developed a non-CTG regulation for this category. 
This regulation was submitted to the USEPA on June 30, 1994, and 
supplemented on July 15, 1994. The Wisconsin rule applies to screen 
printing facilities which: 1) are located in the counties of Kenosha, 
Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Washington or Waukesha and have maximum 
theoretical emissions of VOCs from all screen printing units greater 
than 25 tons per year, or 2) are located in the counties of Kewaunee, 
Manitowoc, or Sheboygan and have maximum theoretical emissions of VOCs 
from all screen printing units greater than 100 tons per year. Sources 
are required to achieve final compliance with this regulation no later 
than May 31, 1995.
    In its rule, Wisconsin establishes a general emission limit of 3.3 
pounds of VOC per gallon of ink or coating, excluding water, as 
applied. This limit is applicable to all printing operations at screen 
printing facilities, except for those using special purpose inks and 
coatings or those involved in roll coating operations.
    Wisconsin's rule defines special purpose inks and coatings as those 
inks and coatings which are conductive; used to print ink transfers 
(decals); or designed to resist or withstand any of the following: more 
than 2 years of outdoor exposure; exposure to chemicals, solvents, 
acids, detergent, oil products, or cosmetics; temperatures in excess of 
170 F; vacuum forming; embossing; or molding. The emissions limit 
established in the Wisconsin rule for special purpose inks and coatings 
is 6.7 pounds per gallon, excluding water, as delivered to an 
applicator. Wisconsin's rule establishes a limit of 6.7 pounds per 
gallon for roll coating operations occurring at screen printing 
facilities.
    Additionally, for screen reclamation processes, the Wisconsin rule 
establishes a limit of 0.24 kilograms per square meter (0.050 pounds of 
VOC per square foot) of screen reclaimed, calculated on a daily average 
basis for each day of operation.
    With respect to recordkeeping requirements, the regulation requires 
sources to collect and record the following information: a unique name 
or identification number for each coating, as applied; the VOC content 
of each coating, as applied, in units of pounds of VOC per gallon, 
excluding water; the daily average VOC emission rate from screen 
reclamation in kilograms per square meter (pounds per square foot) of 
screen reclaimed; the amount of VOCs emitted during the day from screen 
reclamation in kilograms (pounds); and the total surface area of screen 
reclaimed during the day in square meters (square feet).
    To determine the approvability of a VOC rule, USEPA must evaluate 
the rule for consistency with the requirements of section 110 and part 
D of the Act. In addition, USEPA has reviewed the Wisconsin rule in 
accordance with USEPA policy guidance documents and regulations, 
including ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies, 
and Deviations, Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987 
Federal Register Notice;'' South Coast Air Quality Management District 
rule 1130, as approved in the Federal Register on September 29, 1993 
(58 FR 50884); and Bay Area Management District rule 8-20 as approved 
in the Federal Register on March 22, 1995 (60 FR 15062). The USEPA has 
found that the rule meets the requirements applicable to ozone and is, 
therefore, approvable for incorporation into the State's ozone SIP. A 
more complete discussion of the USEPA's review of the State's 
regulation is contained in a technical support document dated April 7, 
1995. The USEPA is approving this revision as meeting, in part, the 
RACT catch-up requirements of section 182(b)(2) of the Act.
    The USEPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because 
USEPA views this as a noncontroversial revision and anticipates no 
adverse comments. However, USEPA is publishing a separate document in 
this Federal Register publication, which constitutes a ``proposed 
approval'' of the 

[[Page 38724]]
requested SIP revision and clarifies that the rulemaking will not be 
deemed final if timely adverse or critical comments are filed. The 
``direct final'' approval shall be effective on September 26, 1995, 
unless USEPA receives adverse or critical comments by August 28, 1995.
    If the USEPA receives comments adverse to or critical of the 
approval discussed above, USEPA will withdraw this approval before its 
effective date, and publish a subsequent Federal Register notice which 
withdraws this final action. All public comments received will then be 
addressed in a subsequent final rulemaking notice. Any parties 
interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. If 
no such comments are received, USEPA hereby advises the public that 
this action will be effective on September 26, 1995.
    This action has been classified as a Table 2 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, Acting Assistant Administrator for 
Air and Radiation. 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 or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to any 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. section 600 et seq., 
the USEPA must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the 
impact of any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 
sections 603 and 604. Alternatively, the USEPA may certify 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 government entities with 
jurisdiction over populations of less than 50,000.
    The SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D, of 
the 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 small entities. 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 State action. The 
Act forbids the USEPA 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).
    Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, the 
USEPA 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 USEPA 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 USEPA 
to establish a plan for informing and advising any small governments 
that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    The USEPA has determined that the approval action promulgated today 
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 pre-existing requirements under State 
or local law, and imposes no new Federal requirements. Accordingly, no 
additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or the private 
sector, result from this action.
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by September 26, 1995. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this rule for the purpose 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: June 20, 1995.
David A. Ullrich,
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 YY--Wisconsin

    2. Section 52.2570 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(82) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.2570  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (82) Revisions to the ozone State Implementation Plan (SIP) were 
submitted by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources on April 17, 
1990, and June 30, 1994, and supplemented on July 15, 1994. Included in 
these revisions is a volatile organic compound (VOC) regulation which 
establishes reasonably available control technology (RACT) for screen 
printing facilities. Additionally, the State submitted current negative 
declarations for pre-1990 Control Technology Guideline (CTG) categories 
for which Wisconsin does not have rules as well as a list of major 
sources affected by the 13 CTG categories that USEPA is required to 
issue pursuant to sections 183(a), 183(b)(3) and 183(b)(4) of the Clean 
Air Act (Act).
    (i) Incorporation by reference. The following sections of the 
Wisconsin Administrative Code are incorporated by reference.
    (A) NR 422.02(11m), (21s), (41p), (41s), (41v) and (42m) as created 
and published in the (Wisconsin) Register, June, 1994, No. 462, 
effective July 1, 1994. NR 422.02(32) as amended and published in the 
(Wisconsin) Register, June, 1994, No. 462, effective July 1, 1994.
    (B) NR 422.03(4m) as created and published in the (Wisconsin) 
Register, June, 1994, No. 462, effective July 1, 1994.
    (C) NR 422.145 as created and published in the (Wisconsin) 
Register, June, 1994, No. 462, effective July 1, 1994.
    (D) NR 439.04(4)(intro.) and (5)(a) as amended and published in the 
(Wisconsin) Register, June, 1994, No. 462, effective July 1, 1994.
    (ii) Additional material.
    (A) On April 17, 1990, and June 30, 1994, Wisconsin submitted 
negative declarations for the following source categories: Leaks from 
petroleum 

[[Page 38725]]
refinery equipment; Manufacture of synthesized pharmaceutical products; 
Mmanufacture of pneumatic rubber tires; Automobile and light duty truck 
manufacturing; Fire truck and emergency response vehicle manufacturing; 
Manufacture of high-density polyethylene, polypropylene, and 
polystyrene resins, a.k.a. polymer manufacturing; Leaks from synthetic 
organic chemical and polymer manufacturing equipment; Air oxidation 
processes at synthetic organic chemical manufacturing industries; and 
Equipment leaks from natural gas/gasoline processing plants. These 
negative declarations are approved into the Wisconsin ozone SIP.
    (B) On June 30, 1994, Wisconsin submitted a list of facilities 
subject to the post-enactment source categories listed in Appendix E to 
the General Preamble. 57 FR 18070, 18077 (April 28, 1992). The list 
included facilities covered by the source categories cleanup solvents, 
offset lithography, plastic parts coating, and wood furniture coating. 
This list is approved into the Wisconsin ozone SIP.

[FR Doc. 95-18523 Filed 7-27-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P