[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 117 (Friday, June 18, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32810-32812]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-15531]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[IL183-1a; FRL-6360-1]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Illinois

AGENCY: United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The USEPA is approving a site specific revision to the 
Illinois State Implementation Plan (SIP) for volatile organic materials 
(VOM). This revision is an exemption from the otherwise applicable SIP 
requirements for W.R. Grace, a manufacturer of container sealants, 
lubricant fluids, and concrete additives at 6050 West 51st Street, 
Chicago, Cook County, Illinois. The State's requested revision was 
submitted to USEPA on September 17, 1998. In the proposed rules section 
of this Federal Register, the USEPA is proposing approval of, and 
soliciting comments on, this approval. If adverse written comments are 
received on this action, the USEPA will withdraw this direct final rule 
and address the comments received in response to this action in a final 
rule on the related proposed rule. A second public comment period will 
not be held. Parties interested in commenting on this action should do 
so at this time. This approval makes the State's rule federally 
enforceable.

DATES: This rule is effective on August 17, 1999, unless USEPA receives 
adverse written comments by July 19, 1999. If adverse comment is 
received, USEPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the rule in the 
Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take 
effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, 
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois 60604.
    Copies of the plan and USEPA's analysis are available for 
inspection at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air 
and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 
60604. (Please telephone Fayette Bright at (312) 886-6069 before 
visiting the Region 5 Office.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fayette Bright, Environmental 
Protection Specialist, Regulation Development Section, Air Programs 
Branch (AR-18J), USEPA, Region 5, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-
6069.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What action is USEPA taking?
II. What is a SIP?
III. Why is USEPA taking this action?
IV. What are the Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements?
V. Does this source comply with CAA RACT requirements?
VI. Summary of SIP revision
    a. Regulatory Background
    b. USEPA's Review of this Site Specific SIP Revision Request
VII. What changes will this Federal action make?
VIII. Administrative Requirements
    A. Executive Order 12866
    B. Executive Order 12875
    C. Executive Order 13045
    D. Executive Order 13084
    E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    F. Unfunded Mandates
    G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller
    H. Petitions for Judicial Review

I. What Action Is USEPA Taking?

    USEPA is approving a SIP revision for the W.R. Grace and Company 
facility at 6050 West 51st Street, Chicago, Illinois. This SIP revision 
approves new Section 218.940(h), which has been added to Subpart QQ of 
Part 218. Section 218.940(h) waives the control requirements that would 
otherwise apply to the solvation mixers at W.R. Grace.

II. What Is a SIP?

    Section 110 of the CAA requires states to develop regulations and 
control strategies to address air pollution within their jurisdictions. 
They must submit these to USEPA for approval and incorporation into the 
Federally enforceable SIP. To be approved they must meet Federal 
requirements and not adversely impact attainment of the National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) established by USEPA.

III. Why Is USEPA Taking This Action?

    a. USEPA is approving this action because W.R. Grace Company has 
demonstrated the infeasibility of complying with the control 
regulations of Subpart QQ, which call for an overall VOM reduction of 
at least 81 percent.
    b. As required by Section 182 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 
7511a), sources in ozone nonattainment areas classified as severe must 
have reasonably available control technology (RACT) if they have the 
potential to emit 25 tons of VOM annually (VOM is the same as volatile 
organic compounds).
    c. The information gathered from an explosion investigation, and 
current state of the art technology that detects solvent emission 
peaks, suggests no catalytic oxidizer may be designed for control of 
emissions from W.R. Grace's mixer loading operations that will be free 
from risk of another explosion.
    d. W.R. Grace's consultant, Versar, determined through the control 
device investigations that there is no reasonably available control 
technology for the solvent mixers at Grace's facility. No add-on 
control was found to be technically and economically feasible.

IV. What Are the CAA RACT Requirements?

    a. Section 172 of the CAA contains general requirements for States 
to implement RACT in areas that do not meet the NAAQS.
    b. Section 182(b)(2) of the CAA contains more specific requirements 
for moderate and above ozone nonattainment areas.

[[Page 32811]]

    c. Chicago is classified as a severe nonattainment area for ozone, 
VOM is an ozone precursor.

V. Does This Source Comply With CAA RACT Requirements?

    Yes, due to the possibility of another explosion and other economic 
infeasibility issues, RACT for W.R. Grace's solvent mixers does not 
require additional emission control equipment.

VI. Summary of SIP Revision

    This SIP revision adds the following exemption, in Section 
218.940(h), to Subpart QQ of Part 218 for W.R. Grace's solvation 
mixers.
    Section 218.940(h)--The control requirements of this Subpart shall 
not apply to the solvation mixers at the container sealant 
manufacturing facility located at 6050 West 51st Street in Chicago, 
Illinois.
    Grace's Chicago facility was established in 1940, and currently 
employs approximately 100 people. The facility manufactures container 
sealants, lubricant fluids, and concrete additives. The container 
sealants are a rubbery coating material used by beverage, food, and 
other can coaters to form a seal between the ends of cans to the can 
body within the area where the two pieces are crimped together. Grace's 
Chicago plant produces both solvent-based and water-based container 
sealants.

a. Regulatory Background

    In 1994, the Illinois Pollution Control Board promulgated certain 
amendments to 35 Ill. Adm. Code Part 218 that require RACT, for sources 
in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area, with the potential to emit 25 
tons of VOM annually, as mandated by Section 182 of the Clean Air Act.
    Emissions from W.R. Grace's mixers occur in a complex and variable 
manner due to the batch nature of the process. On June 14, 1996, W.R. 
Grace's incinerator exploded resulting in a fire in the solvent mixing 
area of the facility. The explosion significantly damaged the oxidizer 
and the associated ventilation system. Information gathered in the 
investigation of the explosion suggests that no catalytic oxidizer is 
currently available that will control the emissions from W.R. Grace's 
mixer loading operations and that will be free from the risk of another 
explosion.

b. USEPA's Review of This Site Specific SIP Revision Request

    This exemption was reviewed on the merits of W.R. Grace's RACT 
analysis, primarily based upon the uncertainties involved in the chance 
of another explosion. This site specific SIP revision request is 
technically justified.

VII. What Changes Will This Federal Action Make?

    It exempts W.R. Grace's solvation mixers from the control 
requirements of Subpart QQ of Part 218.
    USEPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because 
USEPA views this as a noncontroversial revision and anticipates no 
adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal 
Register publication, USEPA is proposing to approve the State Plan 
should adverse written comments be filed. This action will be effective 
without further notice unless USEPA receives relevant adverse written 
comment by July 19, 1999. Should USEPA receive such comments, it will 
publish a final rule informing the public that this action will not 
take effect. 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 on August 17, 1999.

VIII. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled 
``Regulatory Planning and Review.''

B. Executive Order 12875

    Under E.O. 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not 
required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local, or 
tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds 
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those 
governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office 
of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior 
consultation with representatives of affected state, local, and tribal 
governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of written 
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the 
need to issue the regulation. In addition, E.O. 12875 requires EPA to 
develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of state, local, and tribal governments ``to provide 
meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals 
containing significant unfunded mandates.'' Today's rule does not 
create a mandate on state, local or tribal governments. The rule does 
not impose any enforceable duties on these entities. Accordingly, the 
requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875 do not apply to this rule.

C. Executive Order 13045

    Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) is 
determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O. 
12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA 
has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. 
If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate 
the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on 
children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other 
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered 
by the Agency.
    This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does not involve 
decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks.

D. Executive Order 13084

    Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not 
required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the 
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded, 
EPA must provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a 
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a 
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with 
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature 
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the 
regulation. In addition, E.O. 13084 requires EPA to develop an 
effective process permitting elected and other representatives of 
Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in 
the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or 
uniquely affect their communities.'' Today's rule does not 
significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal 
governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 
13084 do not apply to this rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment

[[Page 32812]]

rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies 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 small governmental jurisdictions. This final rule will 
not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities 
because 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 create any new requirements, I certify 
that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Moreover, due to the nature of 
the Federal-State relationship under the Clean Air Act, preparation of 
flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic 
reasonableness of state action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base 
its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co., v. 
U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

F. 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 promulgated 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.

G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    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. Section 804, however, exempts from section 801 the 
following types of rules: rules of particular applicability; rules 
relating to agency management or personnel; and rules of agency 
organization, procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect 
the rights or obligations of non-agency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA 
is not required to submit a rule report regarding this rulemaking 
action under section 801 because this is a rule of particular 
applicability.

H. Petitions for Judicial Review

    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 August 17, 1999. 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, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, 
Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: June 7, 1999.
Francis X. Lyons,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    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 et seq.

Subpart O--Illinois

    2. Section 52.720 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(149) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.720  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (149) On September 17, 1998, the Illinois Environmental Protection 
Agency submitted a site specific State Implementation Plan revision 
request for W.R. Grace and Company's facility, which manufactures 
container sealants, lubricant fluids, and concrete additives, and is 
located at 6050 West 51st Street in Chicago, Illinois (Cook County). 
This rule revision is contained in R98-16, the July 8, 1998, Opinion 
and Order of the Illinois Pollution Control Board, and consists of new 
Section 218.940(h), which exempts W.R. Grace's facility from the 
control requirements in 35 Illinois Administrative Code Part 218 
Subpart QQ.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    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 218 Organic Material Emission Standards and Limitations 
for the Chicago Area, Subpart QQ: Miscellaneous Formulation 
Manufacturing Processes, Section 218.940 Applicability, paragraph (h) 
which was amended in R98-16 at 22 Ill. Reg. 14282, effective July 16, 
1998.

[FR Doc. 99-15531 Filed 6-17-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P