[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 179 (Monday, September 16, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58339-58342]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-23257]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[FRL-7271-1]


Approval of the Clean Air Act, Section 112(l), Authority for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for 
Dry Cleaning Facilities: Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of 
Environmental Protection

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 112(l) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the 
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection submitted a 
request for approval to implement and enforce 310 CMR 70.01-04 
Environmental Results Program (ERP) Certification and 310 CMR 7.26(10)-
(16) Perchloroethylene Air Emissions Standards for Dry Cleaning 
Facilities in place of National Emissions Standard for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants (NESHAP) for Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities as it 
applies to area sources. EPA has reviewed this request and found that 
it satisfies the requirements necessary to qualify for approval. Thus, 
EPA is hereby granting the Massachusetts Department of Environmental 
Protection the authority to implement and enforce its perchloroethylene 
air emissions regulation in place of the Federal dry cleaning NESHAP 
for area sources. This approval makes the Massachusetts Department of 
Environmental Protection rule federally enforceable and reduces the 
burden on area sources within the state of Massachusetts as that they 
will only have one rule with which they must comply. Major sources 
remain subject to the Federal dry cleaning NESHAP.

DATES: This action will be effective November 15, 2002, unless EPA 
receives relevant adverse comments by October 16, 2002. If EPA receives 
such comments, then it will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal 
Register informing the public that this direct final rule will not take 
effect. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed 
in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register 
as of November 15, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be mailed concurrently to the 
addresses below: Steven Rapp, Chief, Air Permits, Toxics and Indoor 
Programs Unit (CAP), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region I, 
One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02114. Steven DeGabriele, 
Director, Business Compliance Division, Massachusetts Department of 
Environmental Protection, One Winter Street, Boston, MA 02108. Copies 
of the requests for approval are available for public inspection at 
EPA's Region I Office, Air Permits, Toxics, and Indoor Programs Unit, 
during normal business hours.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MaryBeth Smuts, Air Permits, Toxics, 
and Indoor Programs Unit, U.S. EPA Region I, One Congress St., Suite 
1100 (CAP), Boston, MA 02114, (617) 918-1512.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This Supplementary Information is organized 
as follows:

I. Background and Purpose
II. EPA Evaluation of Differences Between the State and the Federal 
Regulations
    A. What Major Differences Between the Massachusetts Department 
of Environmental Protection's Dry Cleaning Rule and the Dry Cleaning 
NESHAP Were Selected for Explanations?
    1. How Does the Applicability of Sources Differ?
    2. Are There Differences in the Compliance Dates?
    3. What Are the Differences in Temperature Requirements for 
Refrigerated Condensers?
    4. How Do the Work Practice Standards Differ?
    5. What Are the Requirement Differences in Compliance 
Certifications?
    6. Do the Record Retention Requirements Differ?
    B. What Is EPA's Action Regarding the MA DEP Rule?
    C. When Did the Massachusetts Department of Environmental 
Protection's Authorities To Implement and Enforce Section 112 
Standards Become Effective?
III. Opportunity for Public Comments
IV. Summary of EPA's Action
V. Administrative Requirements

I. Background and Purpose

    Under CAA section 112(l), EPA may approve state or local rules or 
programs to be implemented and enforced in place of certain otherwise 
applicable Federal rules, emissions standards, or requirements. The 
Federal regulations governing EPA's approval of state and local rules 
or programs under section 112(l) are located at 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
E (see 58 FR 62262, November 26, 1993) and the subsequently amended 
regulations (see 65 FR 55810, September 14, 2000). Under these 
regulations, a state air pollution control agency has the option to 
request EPA's approval to substitute a state rule for the applicable 
Federal rule (e.g. the Federal National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP)). Upon approval, the state agency is 
given the authority to implement and enforce its rule in place of the 
NESHAP.
    This ``rule substitution'' option requires EPA to ``make a detailed 
and thorough evaluation of the State's submittal to ensure that it 
meets the stringency and other requirements'' of 40 CFR 63.93 (see 58 
FR 62274). A rule will be approved if EPA finds: (1) The State, local 
and territorial agencies and Indian tribes (S/L/T) are ``no less 
stringent'' than the corresponding Federal regulation, (2) adequate 
authorities exist, (3) the schedule for implementation and compliance 
is ``no less stringent'', and (4) the S/L/T program is otherwise in 
compliance with Federal guidance.
    On September 22, 1993, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
promulgated the NESHAP for perchloroethylene dry cleaning facilities 
(see 58 FR 49354), which has been codified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
M, ``National Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for Dry Cleaning 
Facilities'' (dry cleaning NESHAP). On October 24, 2001, EPA received 
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection's (MA DEP) request 
to implement and enforce its 310 CMR 7.26(10)-(16) Perchloroethylene 
Air Emissions Standards for Dry Cleaning Facilities and 310 CMR 70.01-
04 Environmental Results Program (ERP) Certification known as the ``ERP 
for dry cleaning facilities in lieu of the dry cleaning NESHAP rule. MA 
DEP's request for approval was submitted pursuant to the provisions of 
40 CFR part 63, subpart E and was found to be complete on January 8, 
2002.
    The ERP is a multimedia compliance program which requires self 
certification regarding air, water and hazardous waste requirements 
while providing extensive compliance assistance to dry cleaners through 
training programs and workbooks. Inspections and enforcement are part 
of the air program. Only the air portion of the ERP for dry cleaning 
facilities is evaluated by this EPA action.

[[Page 58340]]

II. EPA's Evaluation of Differences Between the State and Federal 
Regulations

A. What Major Differences Between the MA DEP Perchloroethylene Air 
Emissions Standards for Dry Cleaning Facilities and Certification 
Program Regulations and the Dry Cleaning NESHAP Were Selected for 
Explanations?

    The MA DEP's dry cleaning and certification program rules differ in 
several ways from the Federal dry cleaning NESHAP. Most of these 
differences make the MA DEP dry cleaning regulations more stringent 
than the Federal NESHAP. However, some of the provisions of the State's 
dry cleaning regulations require further clarification to explain how 
they are no less stringent than the Federal dry cleaning NESHAP.
    In a letter and supplemental material dated October 22, 2001, the 
MA DEP submitted its application for substitution of its dry cleaning 
rules with an equivalency demonstration table, narrative, and a summary 
of its enforcement and compliance measures under its Environmental 
Results Program. Extracts of the equivalency table and narrative are 
presented here to provide explanation that provisions in the 
Massachusetts rules are no less stringent than the Federal dry cleaning 
NESHAPS. The places where the Massachusetts rules are identical are not 
cited in this section. The state provided a summary of the status of 
its enforcement and compliance program for dry cleaners as well as its 
training and outreach program for dry cleaners. This additional 
information is available upon request or for public inspection at EPA's 
Region I Office at the address listed above.
1. How Does the Applicability of Sources Differ?
    In 40 CFR 63.320(g), the Federal NESHAP classifies dry cleaning 
sources as major sources based on either annual perchloroethylene 
(perc) emissions or annual perc consumption. Major sources are those 
sources with either 10 tons per year perc emissions or perc consumption 
greater than 8000 liters (2100 gallons) for dry-to-dry machines or 
greater than 6800 liters (1800 gallons) for transfer or transfer and 
dry-to-dry machines. These major sources will remain subject to the 
Federal dry cleaning NESHAPS.
    Under 40 CFR 63.320(d) and (e), the Federal NESHAP provides partial 
exemptions for certain area sources based on perc consumption. 
Depending on the types of dry cleaning equipment at the area sources, 
exemption thresholds are 140 or 200 gallons of perc per year. 
Additionally, both the Federal NESHAP and the ERP exempt coin-operated 
machines. The MA DEP applicability provisions for dry cleaners as 
established in 310 CMR, 7.26 (10)-(16) and the certification 
requirements of 310 CMR 70.00 do not provide partial exemptions for 
area sources based on consumption of perc. Therefore, the full ERP 
applies to more area sources than the area source provisions of the 
Federal NESHAP.
2. Are There Differences in the Compliance Dates?
    The Federal regulations required compliance by September 22, 1993 
or immediately upon startup. The MA DEP regulations provide that the 
compliance date begins at promulgation of the rules or at start up of 
new dry cleaners in 310CMR 7.26 (10)(b). The state compliance dates 
have been passed because the state regulations have been in place since 
1997. Hence for this rulemaking, the compliance dates are identical to 
Federal requirements.
3. What Are the Differences in Temperature Requirements for 
Refrigerated Condensers?
    In 40 CFR 63.322(a) and 63.323(a)(1), there are Federal 
requirements for operating and maintaining refrigerated condensers on a 
dry-to-dry machine, dryer, or reclaimer. Similar requirements for 
washers are in 40 CFR 63.322(f) and 63.323(a)(2). Federal rules require 
a sensor to monitor its gas stream to determine if it is equal to or 
less than 45 [deg]F. The ERP has an identical monitoring provision. In 
addition, the ERP includes in the operation and maintenance 
requirements a temperature limit that makes the standard clearer. See 
310 CMR 7.26(13)(c) and (d).
4. How Do the Work Practice Standards Differ?
    In 40 CFR 63.322(k), there is a Federal work practice requirement 
for leak detection of large area sources and biweekly leak detection 
for small area sources. In the MA DEP regulations, there is no 
distinction between large or small area sources. Leak detection is 
required weekly for all sources and the use of a leak detection device 
is required in contrast to the Federal requirement that relied on 
perceptible detection of leaks. The MA DEP requirements are more 
stringent in requiring a measuring device rather than just the senses. 
Further, if perceptible leaks are detected, the Federal regulation 40 
CFR 63.322, requires that all leaks be repaired. The MA DEP 
requirements regulates that both perceptible leaks and leaks detected 
by monitoring devices be repaired.
5. What Are the Requirement Differences in Compliance Certifications?
    The Federal NESHAP requires the owner or operator of a dry cleaning 
facility constructed or reconstructed after September 22, 1993, to file 
a compliance certification notification within 30 days of startup. See 
40 CFR 63.320(b) and 63.324(b). This certification is a one time only 
requirement for the Federal standard. The MA DEP requirements require 
not only an initial compliance certification within 60 days of start up 
but also an additional annual certification of compliance for area 
source dry cleaners. This annual self certification requirement of the 
ERP is more stringent than the Federal requirements. While the initial 
compliance certification for a new source may be filed up to 30 days 
later than under the Federal NESHAP, on balance the compliance 
certification requirements of the ERP are at least as stringent as the 
Federal NESHAP. EPA notes that new sources must be in compliance with 
the control requirements upon start-up under both rules.
6. Does the Record Retention Requirement Differ?
    In 40 CFR 63.324(d), the Federal requirement for retaining records 
of perchloroethylene purchases is five years on-site. The MA DEP 
provisions require record retention for a three year period. Although 
there is a difference in the record retention time, EPA does not 
consider the ERP to be, on balance, less stringent given the ERP annual 
certification requirements. The MA DEP provisions impose an annual 
certification requirement on all dry cleaners, which does not exist 
under the Federal requirements. Under the MA DEP provisions, a 
responsible official must sign the certification form, certifying under 
penalties of perjury that the facility is in compliance with all 
requirements. By requiring annual certification, the MA DEP can 
maintain a dry cleaner database containing historical and current 
information, and measure environmental performance, which meets the 
needs of the recordkeeping requirements.

B. What Is EPA's Action Regarding the MA ERP for Dry Cleaning 
Facilities?

    After reviewing the request for approval of the Massachusetts 
Department of Environmental Protection

[[Page 58341]]

Environmental Results Program Certification and Perchloroethylene Air 
Emissions Standards for Dry Cleaning Facilities, EPA has determined 
that this request meets all of the requirements necessary to qualify 
for approval under CAA section 112(l) and 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93. EPA 
has determined that the MA DEP's dry cleaning rule is equivalent to or 
not less stringent than the Federal dry cleaning NESHAP. Therefore, EPA 
hereby approves MA DEP dry cleaning rules to be implemented and 
enforced in place of the Federal dry cleaning NESHAP, as it applies to 
only area sources in Massachusetts. As of the effective date of this 
action, MA DEP's dry cleaning rule is enforceable by the EPA and 
citizens under the CAA. Although the MA DEP has primary implementation 
and enforcement responsibility, EPA retains the right, pursuant to CAA 
section 112(l)(7), to enforce any applicable emission standard or 
requirement under CAA, section 112.

C. When Did the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection's 
Authorities To Implement and Enforce Section 112 Standards Become 
Effective?

    Under 40 CFR 63.91(d), the MA DEP must demonstrate that it meets 
all 112(l) approval criteria and under 63.91(d)(3), final Title V 
program approval satisfies this approval criteria. On September 28, 
2001 EPA granted MA DEP final Title V operating permit approval which 
became effective November 27, 2001.

III. Opportunities for Public Comments

    EPA views the approval of the MA DEP request to use its ERP for dry 
cleaning facilities as a substitute for the Federal dry cleaning NESHAP 
as a noncontroversial action, since the state program has been in 
operation for several years and is more stringent then the NESHAP. EPA 
anticipates no adverse comments. Therefore, EPA is publishing this 
direct final rule without prior proposal. However, in the proposed 
rules section of this Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a 
separate document that will serve as the proposal for this action 
should relevant adverse comments be filed. This action will be 
effective on November 15, 2002, without further notice, unless EPA 
receives relevant adverse comments by October 16, 2002.
    If EPA receives such comments, then it will publish a timely 
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that this 
direct final rule will not take effect. All public comments received 
will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed 
rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this rule. Any 
parties interested in commenting should do so at this time. If no such 
comments are received, the public is advised that this rule will be 
effective on November 15, 2002, and no further action will be taken on 
the proposed rule.

IV. Summary of EPA's Action

    Pursuant to section 112(l) of the CAA and 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93, 
EPA is approving the Massachusetts Department of Environmental 
Protection request to implement and enforce its Regulations 310 CMR, 
Sections 7.26 (10)-(16) Perchloroethylene Air Emissions Standards for 
Dry Cleaning Facilities and Sections 70.01-04 Environmental Results 
Program Certification pertaining to dry cleaning facilities in place of 
40 CFR part 63, subpart M, National Perchloroethylene Air Emissions 
Standards for Dry Cleaning Facilities, as it applies to area sources. 
This approval makes the Massachusetts Department of Environmental 
Protection rules federally enforceable and reduces the burden on area 
sources within Massachusetts' jurisdiction such that they only have one 
rule with which they must comply. Major sources remain subject to 40 
CFR part 63, subpart M.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13045

    The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this regulatory 
action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and 
Review.'' This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045, entitled, 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks,'' because it is not an ``economically significant'' action under 
Executive Order 12866.

B. Executive Order 13211

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)) because it is not a 
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

C. Executive Order 13175

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, 
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the 
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
    This final rule does not have tribal implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, 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 in Executive Order 13175. 
This Federal action allows the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to 
implement an equivalent regulation to replace pre-existing requirements 
under Federal law and does not have tribal implications. Thus, 
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

D. Executive Order 13132

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that 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.''
    This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will 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. This action simply allows 
Massachusetts to implement equivalent alternative requirements to 
replace a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the 
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air 
Act. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 
601 et seq. generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment 
rulemaking requirements under the

[[Page 58342]]

Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute 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 
entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 50,000. This 
final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number 
of small entities because approvals under 40 CFR 63.93 do not create 
any new requirements, but simply allows the state to implement and 
enforce equivalent requirements in place of the Federal requirements 
that EPA is already imposing. Therefore, because this 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.

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 allows Massachusetts to implement equivalent 
alternative requirements to replace pre-existing requirements under 
Federal 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. 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. This rule is not a 
``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 
272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or 
adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA 
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides 
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. This 
action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA did not 
consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.

I. 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 November 15, 2002. 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 63

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Administrative 
practice and procedure, Hazardous substances, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and record keeping 
requirements.

    Authority: This action is issued under the authority of section 
112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 7412.

    Dated: August 13, 2002.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA-New England.

    40 CFR part 63 is amended as follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

    2. Section 63.14 is amended by adding paragraph (d)(4) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.14  Incorporations by reference.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (4) Massachusetts Regulations Applicable to Hazardous Air 
Pollutants (July 2002). Incorporation By Reference approved for Sec.  
63.99(a)(21)(ii) of subpart E of this part.
* * * * *

Subpart E--Approval of State Programs and Delegation of Federal 
Authorities

    3. Section 63.99 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(21) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.99  Delegated Federal authorities.

    (a) * * *
    (21) Massachusetts.
    (i) [Reserved]
    (ii) Affected area sources within Massachusetts must comply with 
the Massachusetts Regulations Applicable to Hazardous Air Pollutants 
(incorporated by reference as specified in Sec.  63.14) as described in 
paragraph (a)(21)(ii)(A) of this section:
    (A) The material incorporated in the Massachusetts Department of 
Environmental Protection 310 CMR 72.6 and 310 CMR 70.01 pertaining to 
dry cleaning facilities in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts 
jurisdiction, and has been approved under the procedures in Sec.  63.93 
to be implemented and enforced in place of the Federal NESHAPs for 
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities (subpart M of this part) for 
area sources only, as defined in Sec.  63.320(h).
    (B) [Reserved]

[FR Doc. 02-23257 Filed 9-13-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P