[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 70 (Friday, April 11, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17766-17771]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-9382]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[Region II Docket No. NJ17-1-166; FRL-5809-3]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Reasonably
Available Control Technology for Volatile Organic Compounds for the
State of New Jersey
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes approval of
a request from New Jersey to revise its State Implementation Plan to
incorporate revisions to Subchapter 16 ``Control and Prohibition of Air
Pollution by Volatile Organic Compounds.'' These revisions relate to
the control of volatile organic compounds from major stationary sources
not subject to control techniques guidelines. The intended effect is to
reduce the emissions of volatile organic compounds and thereby reduce
ozone concentrations in the lower atmosphere. EPA proposes to find that
the State has met the Clean Air Act requirement to adopt reasonably
available control technology for non-CTG major sources.
EPA also proposes approval of revisions to Subchapter 8 ``Permits
and Certificates,'' Subchapter 17 ``Control and Prohibition of Air
Pollution by Toxic Substances,'' Subchapter 23 ``Prevention of Air
Pollution From Architectural Coatings and Consumer Products'' and
Subchapter 25 ``Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution by Vehicular
Fuels,'' and Air Test Method 3--Sampling and Analytical Procedures for
the Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds from Source Operations
(Title 7, Chapter 27B, Subchapter 3).
Revisions to these regulations only involve administrative changes
made to insure consistency with Subchapter 16 revisions. This proposal
would revise the State Implementation Plan so that it contains the most
current versions of the State regulations.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before May 12, 1997.
ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to: Ronald J. Borsellino,
Chief, Air Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Region II
Office, 290 Broadway, New York, New York 10007-1866.
Copies of the State submittal(s) are available at the following
addresses for inspection during normal business hours:
Environmental Protection Agency, Region II Office, Air Programs Branch,
290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Air
Quality Management, Bureau of Air Quality Planning, 401 East State
Street, CN418, Trenton, New Jersey 08625
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul R. Truchan or Raymond K. Forde,
Air Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway,
25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866, (212) 637-4249
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Clean Air Act (Act) as amended in 1990 sets forth a number of
requirements that states with areas designated as nonattainment for
ozone must satisfy and sets forth a timetable for satisfying these Act
requirements (section 182). These requirements are further explained in
the General Preamble to the Act (57 FR 13513), which was published on
April 16, 1992.
Under section 182(b)(2) of the Act, nonattainment areas classified
as moderate or above are required to adopt reasonably available control
technology (RACT) rules for volatile organic compound (VOC) sources.
There are three parts to the section 182(b)(2) RACT requirement: (1)
RACT for sources covered by an existing control techniques guideline
(CTG)--i.e., a CTG issued prior to the enactment of the 1990
Amendments; (2) RACT for sources covered by a post-enactment CTG; and
(3) all major sources not covered by a CTG (non-CTG major sources).
This requirement also applies to all areas within the Ozone Transport
Region. The EPA has defined RACT as the lowest emission limitation that
a particular source is capable of meeting by the application of control
technology that is reasonably available considering technological and
economic feasibility (44 FR 53762; September 17, 1979).
New Jersey is part of the Ozone Transport Region (OTR), therefore,
the section 182(b)(2) RACT requirements are applicable to sources
throughout the State. The schedule for implementing the RACT rules in
an OTR require final installation of the actual VOC controls by May 31,
1995 on those sources for which installation by that date is
practicable.
New Jersey's VOC regulation, Subchapter 16, ``Control and
Prohibition of Air Pollution by Volatile Organic Compounds,'' of
Chapter 27, Title 7 of the New Jersey Administrative Code, was
previously approved by EPA as fulfilling the requirement to address all
source categories covered by a pre-enactment CTG document (59 FR 17933,
April 15, 1994). Since enactment of the Clean Air Act amendments, EPA
has published three CTGs controlling synthetic organic chemical
manufacturing industry (SOCMI) distillation operations, SOCMI reactor
operations, and wood furniture manufacturing operations. New Jersey's
previously approved Subchapter 16 regulates both SOCMI operations under
the process source gases provisions, and wood furniture under the
surface coating provisions. A fourth CTG was
[[Page 17767]]
published on August 27, 1996 for shipbuilding and repair, however
regulations for this CTG are not due until August 27, 1997.
This proposed action addresses the requirement to regulate non-CTG
major sources of VOC. The major source definition depends on the
classification of the nonattainment area and whether the area is in the
OTR (``major'' as defined in section 302, section 182(c), (d), and (e),
and section 184(b)). For areas in an OTR other than those areas
designated severe nonattainment, the definition of major VOC source is
any source that emits or has the potential to emit at least 50 tons per
year. In a severe nonattainment area, the definition of a major VOC
source is any source that emits or has the potential to emit at least
25 tons per year.
II. State Submittals
On November 15, 1993, the Commissioner of the New Jersey Department
of Environmental Protection and Energy submitted a State Implementation
Plan revision, part of which contained adopted revisions to Subchapter
16, ``Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution by Volatile Organic
Compounds,'' of Chapter 27, Title 7 of the New Jersey Administrative
Code, effective December 20, 1993. This was intended to fulfill the
non-CTG major source requirement of the Act. EPA determined that the
November 15, 1993 submittal was complete on December 29, 1993. As of
November 15, 1993 New Jersey only adopted a portion of the proposal
which involved Section 16.1 definitions and Section 16.17 which
requires major sources of VOCs not elsewhere regulated in Subchapter 16
to implement RACT (Generic RACT).
On June 21, 1996, the Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection (NJDEP) submitted a State Implementation Plan
revision which contained two revisions to Subchapter 16 and two
``Administrative Changes and Corrections'' to Subchapter 16. EPA is
proposing action on all changes which have occurred in Subchapter 16
(effective March 2, 1992) since EPA's last approval on April 15, 1994
(59 FR 1994). This includes the following versions of Subchapter 16
with effective dates of December 20, 1993, June 20, 1994, December 5,
1994, May 15, 1995, and July 17, 1995. It should be noted that several
new sections have been added to Subchapter 16 and this has necessitated
recodifying several sections. The new section numbering will be used.
It should also be noted that final approval of this State
Implementation Plan revision will remove the requirement to adopt a
federal implementation plan. The need for a federal implementation plan
resulted from EPA's finding on January 15, 1993 that New Jersey had
failed to submit a complete State Implementation Plan revision as
required by the Act on November 15, 1992.
III. Findings
A. Generic RACT Provisions
Section 16.1 Definitions
New Jersey revised section 16.1 to include appropriate definitions
for terms used in the new provisions. These are generally consistent
with EPA guidance. The following new terms are important in
understanding the generic RACT provisions which have been added to
Subchapter 16: federally enforceable, potential to emit, State
Implementation Plan and major VOC facility.
1. Federally enforceable--Section 16.1's definition for federally
enforceable provides a definition of what limitations and conditions
can be considered enforceable by the EPA. It contains a list of
limitations and conditions, such as EPA's new source performance
standards (40 CFR Part 60), national emission standards for hazardous
air pollutants (40 CFR Part 61), and provisions of the applicable State
Implementation Plan. In addition, the State includes ``any permit or
order issued pursuant to the Air Pollution Control Act, N.J.S.A. 26:2C-
1 et seq., of this chapter.'' This part of the definition is acceptable
only in so far as it refers to permits that are issued pursuant to
programs approved as part of the State Implementation Plan, i.e.
Subchapter 8 which is the only State mechanism for issuing permits to
air pollution sources. EPA is proposing approval of this definition.
2. Potential to emit--Section 16.1's definition for potential to
emit provides direction on how to determine a source's or facility's
potential to emit which is used to determine whether a source is
subject to given requirements. It is based on the maximum capacity of a
source or facility operating 8760 hours a year unless there are any
federally enforceable limitations in place limiting the hours of
operation. This definition is consistent with EPA's guidance and
policy. EPA is proposing approval of this definition.
3. State Implementation Plan--Section 16.1's definition for State
Implementation Plan refers to plans which have been prepared by the
State and approved by EPA pursuant to section 110 of the Act. This
definition is consistent with EPA's guidance and policy. EPA is
proposing approval of this definition.
4. Major VOC facility--Section 16.1 defines a major VOC facility as
any facility with the potential to emit 25 or more tons of VOC per
year. EPA is proposing approval of this definition.
Section 16.17 Facility-Specific VOC Control Requirements
Section 16.17 provides a procedure for establishing VOC control
requirements that represent RACT for a particular process, item of
equipment or source operation that is not specifically regulated by
name elsewhere in Subchapter 16 and is located at a major VOC facility.
This would cover those non-CTG major sources required to be controlled
pursuant to section 182(b)(2). This procedure provides four control
options for meeting RACT:
1. Facility is currently operating controls which collect at least
90 percent of the VOC emissions and prevent from being released at
least 90 percent of the VOCs that were collected; pollution prevention
measures can contribute emission reductions towards meeting these
emission limitations, so long as an equivalent level of emission
reductions is achieved.
2. Facility will be served by controls which collect at least 90
percent of the VOC emissions and prevent from being released at least
90 percent of the VOCs that were collected; pollution prevention
measures can contribute emission reductions towards meeting these
emission limitations, so long as an equivalent level of emission
reductions is achieved.
3. Facility has or will have federally enforceable limits on its
potential to emit restricting it to below 25 tons per year.
4. Facility will develop and have approved an alternative VOC
control plan which represents RACT for that facility.
Sources subject to other provisions in Subchapter 16 may also apply
for an alternative VOC control plan. However, application for an
alternative VOC control plan does not relieve the source from complying
with applicable compliance dates.
In the first two situations listed above, RACT is defined as at
least 90 percent capture of VOC emissions and at least 90 percent
control of the captured VOC emissions. The source must demonstrate that
these limits have been met and provide for adequate recordkeeping which
can demonstrate that the compliance plan has been met. The source must
also have the appropriate permits and certificates. The source
[[Page 17768]]
must be in compliance with these provisions by May 31, 1995. Should a
source use pollution prevention methods to meet this requirement, the
provision requires ``at least the same level of VOC emission
reductions.'' Since the provision is clear that the 90 percent capture
and 90 percent control is the criteria, any compliance plan which does
not meet this criteria will not be consistent with Subchapter 16. EPA
is proposing approval of these provisions.
In the third situation, a facility whose actual emissions of VOCs
in 1990 and each year thereafter has been less than 25 tons per year
including fugitive emissions, may comply by limiting their potential
emissions to less than 25 tons per year. The source must submit and
have approved a compliance plan which demonstrates that these limits
have been met. The source must also have the appropriate permits and
certificates which limit the potential to emit, and provide for
adequate recordkeeping. Without an approved compliance plan the source
would be out of compliance with this section.
The State provided the public with an opportunity to comment on the
acceptability of this method of compliance. The sources must meet the
criteria in section 16.17, which includes recordkeeping sufficient to
determine whether the source is complying, and this would be considered
an acceptable method of complying. New Jersey requires any limits on
potential emissions to be federally enforceable, and contained in a
sources'' operating permit. EPA is proposing approval of this
provision.
In the fourth situation, an alternative VOC control plan must be
approved by NJDEP. It must include a technical analysis of all the
possible control technologies and process alterations. For those
alternatives that are technologically feasible, the plan must evaluate
their economic feasibility. The plan must be supported with adequate
documentation and identify the proposed RACT level. The source must
also have the appropriate permits and certificates and provide for
adequate recordkeeping. The source must be in compliance with these
provisions by May 31, 1995. In this situation, the NJDEP will publish a
Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment and shall submit the
alternative VOC control plan to EPA as a proposed State Implementation
Plan revision. EPA is proposing approval of this provision.
Section 16.17(o) identifies the reasons why the State ``may''
revoke an approval of an alterative VOC control plan. One reason would
be an EPA disapproval of the plan after EPA rulemaking action. The
State Implementation Plan approval process is not complete until EPA
grants approval of a revision, therefore, use of the word ``may''
provides notice of future State revocation should EPA disapprove of a
submittal. Given EPA's authority under the Act to require the State to
correct any EPA identified deficiencies and the State's recognition
that State approval does not guarantee a State Implementation Plan
approval, EPA is proposing an approval of this provision.
For sources who want to comply with the alternative VOC control
plan provisions, Section 16.17 provides a procedure and schedule which
must be followed in order to be in compliance with Subchapter 16.
Should a source not comply with this procedure, it would constitute a
violation of Subchapter 16 and would subject the source owner or
operator to State and federal enforcement action and associated civil
and applicable criminal penalties. EPA has determined this is
sufficient to insure that sources comply. EPA is proposing approval of
this provision.
Subsequent to New Jersey's submission of these State Implementation
Plan revisions, national policy discussions ensued regarding the
approvability of state regulations that contain generic provisions (or
in New Jersey's case, alternative VOC control plan provisions), in
establishing RACT requirements for major sources of VOC emissions.
These discussions resulted in additional Agency guidance.
Generic provisions are those portions of a regulation which require
the application of RACT to an emission point, for which the degree of
control is not specified in the rule but rather is to be determined on
a case-by-case basis taking technological and economic factors into
consideration. Under the Act, these individually determined RACT limits
would then need to be submitted by a state as a State Implementation
Plan revision for EPA approval. On November 7, 1996, EPA issued a
policy memorandum providing additional guidance for approving
regulations which contain these ``generic provisions.'' (Sally Shaver
memorandum to EPA Division Directors, ``Approval Options for Generic
RACT Rules Submitted to Meet the non-CTG VOC RACT Requirement and
Certain NOX RACT Requirements'').
EPA policy allows for the full approval of state generic RACT rules
prior to EPA approval of all of the case-by-case major source RACT
determinations, provided an analysis is completed that concludes that
the remaining source RACT determinations involve a de minimis level of
VOC emissions and such pending determinations must be submitted as
State Implementation Plan revisions. Such an approval does not exempt
the remaining sources from RACT; rather it is a de minimis deferral of
the approval of these case-by-case RACT limits.
EPA has evaluated information provided by New Jersey concerning the
possible use by major sources of the generic RACT provisions in order
to meet the RACT requirement. New Jersey has identified five sources
that are using the generic RACT provisions. One has been submitted as a
State Implementation Plan revision and four are currently being
processed by the State and will be submitted as State Implementation
Plan revisions. Based on the emission reductions claimed in New
Jersey's 15 Percent Plan for Subchapter 16, these sources represent
three percent of the VOC emission reductions resulting from sources
coming into compliance with Subchapter 16. EPA has determined that the
remaining emission reductions are de minimis. Therefore, EPA proposes
to find that New Jersey's VOC RACT regulation conforms with EPA's
policy regarding the approval of generic RACT provisions or rules.
As stated above, full approval of Subchapter 16 will not relieve
sources of the obligation to develop, submit and implement RACT level
controls. Nor will it relieve New Jersey of the obligation to ensure
that all sources within the State comply with the VOC RACT requirements
of the Act by adopting and implementing emission limitations. The
proposed approval of Subchapter 16 requires that all major sources of
VOC must comply with RACT and this requirement would be enforceable by
EPA as well as citizens under Section 304 of the Act. If EPA determines
that the regulated sources and the State are not complying with the
requirement to adopt RACT, EPA could issue a State Implementation Plan
call or a finding of non-implementation of the State Implementation
Plan. EPA is proposing approval of these generic RACT provisions.
B. Source Specific Provisions
1. Combustion sources. Subchapter 16 now regulates the following
types of combustion sources: boilers, stationary gas turbines,
stationary internal combustion engines and asphalt plants. These
sources are also regulated under the nitrogen oxides (NOX)
RACT rules under title 7, chapter 27, Subchapter 19, ``Control and
Prohibition of Air Pollution from Oxides of Nitrogen.''
[[Page 17769]]
Emissions of VOCs and NOX from these sources are related. As
NOX emissions decrease, VOC emissions tend to increase. The
new VOC provisions are intended to minimize the VOC emissions while
insuring that NOX emissions are reduced as required by
Subchapter 19.
a. Utility Boilers
Section 7:27-16.8 specifies emission limitations for utility
boilers and requires the owners and operators of these sources to
install a continuous emission monitoring system for carbon monoxide.
The emission limits specified by New Jersey are the lowest that the
boilers can reasonably achieve while still complying with the emission
limits in the NOX RACT rules. In addition, the sources are
required to annually adjust the combustion process to minimize VOC
emissions. The emission limits are enforceable through appropriate
averaging times, test methods, compliance schedules and reporting and
recordkeeping requirements. EPA is proposing approval of this
provision.
b. Non-Utility Boilers
Section 7:27-16.8 also specifies requirements for non-utility
boilers. The control strategy depends on the maximum gross heat input
rate of non-utility boiler. Smaller boilers are required to annually
adjust the combustion process to minimize VOC emissions, while the
larger size boilers must meet emission limits. Also, any non-utility
boiler with a maximum gross heat input rate of at least 250 million BTU
per hour shall install a continuous emissions monitoring system for
carbon monoxide. The emission limits specified by the State are the
lowest level that the boilers can reasonably achieve while still
complying with the emission limits in the NOX RACT rules.
The emission limits are enforceable through appropriate averaging
times, test methods, compliance schedules and reporting and
recordkeeping requirements. EPA is proposing approval of this
provision.
c. Stationary Gas Turbines
Section 7:27-16.9 specifies emission limitations for stationary gas
turbines. The emission limits specified by New Jersey are the lowest
that the turbines can reasonably achieve while still complying with the
emission limits in the NOX RACT rules. In addition, the
sources are required to annually adjust the combustion process to
minimize VOC emissions. The emission limits are enforceable through
appropriate averaging times, test methods, compliance schedules and
reporting and recordkeeping requirements. EPA is proposing to approve
this provision.
d. Stationary Internal Combustion Engines
Section 7:27-16.10 specifies emission limitations for stationary
internal combustion engines. The emission limits specified by New
Jersey are the lowest that the engines can reasonably achieve while
still complying with the emission limits in the NOX RACT
rules. In addition, the sources are required to annually adjust the
combustion process to minimize VOC emissions. The emission limits are
enforceable through appropriate averaging times, test methods,
compliance schedules and reporting and recordkeeping requirements. EPA
is proposing to approve this provision.
e. Asphalt Plants
Section 7:27-16.11 specifies emission limitations for batch mixed
and drum asphalt plants. The emission limits specified by New Jersey
are the lowest that the asphalt plants can reasonably achieve while
still complying with the emission limits in the NOX RACT
rules. In addition, the sources are required to annually adjust the
combustion process to minimize VOC emissions. The emission limits are
enforceable through appropriate averaging times, test methods,
compliance schedules and reporting and recordkeeping requirements. EPA
is proposing approval of this provision.
f. Flares
Section 7:27-16.13 requires that any flare in use after May 31,
1995 at a major VOC facility must have been designed to reduce VOC
emissions by at least 95 percent. The rule prohibits the use of
noncomplying flares after that date. The flare must also be installed
and operated in accordance with the manufacturers' specifications.
Based upon present technology available, flares have been attaining
control efficiency levels at 95 percent and greater. Regulatory
compliance is maintained via inspections, certification, recordkeeping
and recording requirements, and operation and maintenance procedures to
ensure that the control technology is installed and operating
sufficiently. EPA is proposing approval of this provision.
2. VOC Transfer Operations
Section 16.4 specifies emission limitations and operating practices
for operations that involve the transfer of VOCs other than gasoline.
This section applies to receiving vessels or tanks, delivery vessels,
transfer operations and contains requirements similar to those required
in Section 16.3 for gasoline transfer and storage. Receiving vessels
(including storage tanks, delivery vessels, manufacturing process
vessels) of 2,000 gallons or greater are required to have submerged
filling. Storage tanks of 2,000 gallons or greater capacity with
emissions of 1,000 pounds VOC per year must have a vapor control
device. Delivery vessels must be inspected and certified as passing
pressure tests and must be loaded and unloaded within specified
pressure and vacuum standards. Transfer operations with emissions of
2,000 pounds VOC per year are required to have a vapor balance system
or vapor control device that is 90 percent effective.
Section 16.5 specifies emission limitations and operating practices
for marine vessel loading of VOCs and ballasting operations. Emissions
from the transfer of VOCs must be reduced by 95 percent and transfers
must meet leak tightness standards. EPA is proposing approval of this
provision.
3. Surface Coating Operations.
Sections 16.7 has been revised to add three new surface coating
categories: concrete pipe coating, sheet-fed gravure printing and
screen printing operations to the original categories previously
approved by EPA. These new categories are subject to the same general
requirements for recordkeeping, reporting, options for coming into
compliance and testing. Concrete pipe coating operations are subject to
the same emission limitations as metal pipe coating operations. Inks
used in screen printing operations are limited to 3.3 pounds of VOC per
gallon, with the exception that inks used on fabrics are limited to 2.9
pounds of VOC per gallon. There are also two specialty ink limitations:
conductive inks are limited to 8.5 pounds of VOC per gallon and special
purpose screen printing inks which must withstand adverse environmental
conditions are limited to 6.7 pounds of VOC per gallon. As an
alternative to complying with the coating limitations, a source could
choose to comply by using add-on control equipment which captures at
least 70 percent of the VOC emissions and controls 90 percent of these
captured emissions using carbon adsorption equipment or 95 percent if
using a thermal oxidizer.
New Jersey has also revised the control requirements for the other
regulated printing operations which choose to comply by using add-on
controls to reflect advances in equipment capabilities. Sources
installing new thermal oxidizers will
[[Page 17770]]
have to meet the 95 percent destruction requirement. Carbon adsorption
equipment will continue to meet the 90 percent control requirement.
New limitations have been added for fountain solutions used to
dampen printing plates in order to prevent ink transfer to areas which
will not contain a printed image. The VOC content of fountain solutions
is limited to 5 percent if the solution is kept at a temperature of 55
degrees Fahrenheit or less and 3 percent if the solution is at a
temperature greater than 55 degrees Fahrenheit. EPA is proposing
approval of these provisions.
4. Leak Detection and Repair at Chemical Plants.
The leak detection and repair requirements previously contained in
section 16.6 have been moved to a new section 16.18. Section 16.18
specifies the leak detection and repair requirements for various types
of facilities, including those for which a CTG was published. These
were previously approved by EPA. Section 16.18 now requires chemical
plants which are major, that is, which process 550 tons/year of VOC, to
conduct leak detection and repair identified leaking components. These
requirements were based on the previously issued CTGs and leak
detection and repair requirements contained in ``National Emission
Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants.'' EPA is proposing
approval of this provision.
5. Natural Gas Pipelines--Blowdown.
Section 16.21 requires natural gas pipeline owners or operators to
control the emissions of VOC during non-emergency release of natural
gas from the pipeline when performing inspections, maintenance or
repairs. This is referred to as blowdown and covers releases of VOC of
2,000 pounds or greater. Blowdown events which would have an emission
rate above 3.5 pounds of VOC per hour would be regulated by section
16.16 which would require 95 percent control. Since the smaller
blowdown events are infrequent and can occur at pump stations,
compressor stations and at valves along the pipeline (instead of at a
fixed location), it is difficult to require a specific level of control
or operating procedures. Instead these events are required to be
included in ``Control Measure Plans,'' which requires reporting of such
events and the reduction of VOCs through use of control technology or
operating procedures which limit VOC emissions.
Unlike RACT demonstrations required by section 16.17, minor
blowdown sources are not automatically required to submit Control
Measure Plans unless requested to do so. However, annual reporting of
blowdown events is required and New Jersey may require amendments if
the State or EPA identifies deficiencies and denies approval of a
proposed Control Measure Plan.
While EPA does not require RACT for this minor source category, New
Jersey has taken credit for emission reductions resulting from
controlling this source category in its 15 Percent Rate of Progress
Plan. Therefore, EPA recognizes the need for review and revision of
such plans in the event that the Control Measure Plans do not meet the
requirements of section 16.21(f). While the submission of such plans is
not automatic, EPA has determined that because the reductions from such
sources are minimal (potentially no more than one percent of the VOC
reductions resulting from the revisions to Subchapter 16) and because
New Jersey has identified a surplus of reductions which is greater than
the reductions it credits for this source category, EPA proposes
approval of Section 16.21. Regulatory compliance is maintained via
implementation of the Control Measure Plans and annual reports required
by this provision.
C. Other Changes
In addition to expanding Subchapter 16 with the new sections
discussed above, New Jersey has made a number of less extensive changes
to Subchapter 16. Minor changes have been made to the previously
approved sections and some have also been renumbered. The definition of
VOC has been changed to make it consistent with EPA's. New Jersey has
made administrative changes to Subchapter 16 in order to correct errors
it had identified. These were generally of a typographical nature
involving references, punctuation and omissions and did not
substantively change the requirements previously adopted. Along with
the recodification, several sections were also reorganized to improve
their clarity. These are consistent with the original adoptions. The
State also removed interim milestones which have past, while retaining
the final compliance date. EPA is proposing approval of these changes.
D. Related Changes to Other Subchapters
Subchapters 8, 17, 23, 25, and Air Test Method 3. New Jersey also
submitted as part of this State Implementation Plan revision, revisions
to Subchapter 8 ``Permits and Certificates,'' which provides the
mechanism which New Jersey uses for issuing permits and certificates;
Subchapter 17 ``Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution by Toxic
Substances,'' which restricts the emission of toxic substances;
Subchapter 23 ``Prevention of Air Pollution From Architectural Coatings
and Consumer Products'' which limits the amount of VOC in architectural
coatings and paints; Subchapter 25 ``Control and Prohibition of Air
Pollution by Vehicular Fuels'' which regulates gasoline; and Air Test
Method 3--Sampling and Analytical Procedures for the Determination of
Volatile Organic Compounds from Source Operations (Title 7, Chapter
27B, Subchapter 3). The revisions made to these Subchapters primarily
involve changing the definition of VOC to make it consistent with EPA's
and minor administrative changes similar to those described in III.C.
above. EPA is proposing approval of the revisions to Subchapters 8, 23,
25, and Air Test Method 3.
IV. Summary
EPA has evaluated the submitted revisions for consistency with its
provisions, EPA regulations and EPA policy. EPA is proposing approval
of Subchapter 16. EPA is also proposing to approve the revisions of
Subchapters 8, 17, 23, 25, and Air Test Method 3.
Neither the ozone attainment demonstration nor other aspects of the
ozone State Implementation Plan are being revised by this action. EPA,
therefore, is only addressing the adequacy of Subchapter 16 in meeting
section 182(b)(2) with regard to non-CTG major sources and the ability
of this revision to fulfill EPA requirements. EPA is not making a
finding concerning other aspects of its State Implementation Plan at
this time. EPA is only proposing approval of the addition of the new
control requirements.
Nothing in this proposed rule should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for
revision to any State Implementation Plan. Each request for revision to
the State Implementation Plan shall be considered separately in light
of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
Administrative Requirements
Executive Order 12866
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal
[[Page 17771]]
Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a July
10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air
and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted
this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., 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, 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.
State Implementation Plan 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 State Implementation Plan approval does
not impose any new requirements, EPA certifies 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 flexibility analysis would constitute federal inquiry into the
economic reasonableness of state action. The Act forbids EPA to base
its actions concerning State Implementation Plans on such grounds.
Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C.
7410(a)(2).
Unfunded Mandates
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a federal mandate that may result in estimated
annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate;
or to private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
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 EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the approval action proposed does not
include a federal mandate that may result in estimated annual 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
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
The Administrator's decision to approve or disapprove the State
Implementation Plan revision will be based on whether it meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)-(K) and part D of the Act, as
amended, and EPA regulations in 40 CFR Part 51.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Dated: April 2, 1997.
William J. Muszynski,
Deputy Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-9382 Filed 4-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P