[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 134 (Thursday, July 13, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39572-39574]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-6189]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[R03-OAR-2005-PA-0007; FRL-8192-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; NOX RACT Determination for Koppers Industry,
Inc.
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The revision was
submitted by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
(PADEP) to establish and require reasonably available control
technology (RACT) for Koppers Industry, Inc. located in Lycoming
County. EPA is approving this revision to establish RACT requirements
in the SIP in accordance with the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This rule is effective on August 14, 2006.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Regional
Material in EDocket (RME) ID Number R03-OAR-2005-PA-0007. All documents
in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although listed in the electronic docket, some information is not
publicly available, i.e., confidential business information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for public
inspection during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are
[[Page 39573]]
available at the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection,
Bureau of Air Quality, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market Street, Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania 17105.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LaKeshia N. Robertson, (215) 814-2113,
or by e-mail at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On August 30, 2004, the PADEP submitted formal SIP revisions to
establish RACT for 15 sources located in Pennsylvania. On March 31,
2005 (70 FR 16423), EPA published a direct final rule (DFR) approving
revisions to PADEP issued operating permits (OP) and plan approvals
(PA) for these 15 sources. A description of these revisions and EPA's
rationale for approving them were provided in the March 31, 2005
rulemaking and will not be restated herein. In accordance with direct
final rulemaking procedures, on March 31, 2005 (70 FR 16471), EPA also
published a companion notice of proposed rulemaking for these SIP
revisions, inviting interested parties to comment on the DFR. On April
29, 2005, EPA received an adverse comment on its approval of the
nitrogen oxides (NOX) RACT determination for Koppers
Industry, Inc (OP-41-0008). Due to the receipt of the adverse comment
on the Koppers Industry, Inc. RACT determination, EPA published a
partial withdrawal of the direct final rule on May 26, 2005 (70 FR
30377). This withdrawal applied to the Koppers facility only.
EPA received no adverse comments on its approval of RACT
determination for the remaining 14 sources, and, therefore, EPA's March
31, 2005 DFR approving PADEP's RACT determination for the other 14
sources became effective on May 31, 2005.
II. Final Action
On May 18, 2006, Koppers, Inc. sent an e-mail requesting the
withdrawal of the adverse comment submitted on April 29, 2005. EPA is
now approving PADEP's RACT determination for Koppers Inc., located in
Lycoming County.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This rule also does not
have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct
effect on one or more Indian tribes, 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 by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does
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 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
This action merely approves a state rule implementing a Federal
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April
23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
B. 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 exempts from section 801 the following types
of rules: (1) Rules of particular applicability; (2) rules relating to
agency management or personnel; and (3) 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 today's action under section 801
because this is a rule of particular applicability establishing source-
specific requirements for one named source.
C. 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 September 11, 2006. 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, pertaining to RACT for Koppers Industry, Lycoming
County may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirement. (See section 307 (b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: June 26, 2006.
William T. Wisniewski,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
[[Page 39574]]
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart NN--Pennsylvania
0
2. In Sec. 52.2020, the table in paragraph (d)(1) is amended by adding
the entry for Koppers Industries, Inc. at the end of the table to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.2020 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Additional explanation/Sec.
Name of source Permit No. County effective date EPA approval date 52.2063 citation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Koppers Industry, Inc.............. OP-41-0008............ Lycoming............. 3/30/99 7/13/06............... 52.2020(d)(1)(s).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 06-6189 Filed 7-12-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P