[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 14, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13019-13021]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-2428]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[Region 2 Docket No. EPA-R02-OAR-2004-NJ-0001, FRL-8040-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Reasonably
Available Control Technology for Oxides of Nitrogen for a Specific
Source in the State of New Jersey
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is approving a revision to
the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone submitted by the State of
New Jersey. This SIP revision consists of a source-specific reasonably
available control technology (RACT) determination for controlling
oxides of nitrogen from the cogeneration facility operated by Schering
Corporation. This action approves of the source-specific RACT
determination that was made by New Jersey in accordance with provisions
of its regulation to help meet the national ambient air quality
standard for ozone. The intended effect of this action is to approve
source-specific emission limitations required by the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be effective April 13, 2006.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Regional
Material in EDocket (RME) Docket ID Number EPA-R02-OAR-2004-NJ-0001.
All documents in the docket are listed in the Regional Material in
EDocket (RME) index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, once in the
system, select ``quick search,'' then key in the appropriate RME Docket
identification number. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in Regional Material in EDocket or in
hard copy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region II Office, Air
Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 10007-
1866. Copies of the documents relevant to this action are also
available for public inspection during normal business hours, by
appointment at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Room B-108, 1301 Constitution Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC; and the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection, Office of Air Quality Management, Bureau of Air Pollution
Control, 401 East State Street, CN027, Trenton, New Jersey 08625.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Ruvo, Air Programs Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York,
New York 10007-1866, (212) 637-4014 ([email protected]).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
EPA is approving a revision to the New Jersey State Department of
Environmental Protection's (New Jersey's) ozone State Implementation
Plan (SIP) submitted on March 31, 2005. This SIP revision relates to
New Jersey's source-specific reasonably available
[[Page 13020]]
control technology (RACT) determination for controlling oxides of
nitrogen (NOX) from the Schering Corporation's (Schering)
heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) with duct burner for the
cogeneration facility located in Union, New Jersey. The reader is
referred to the proposed rulemaking on this action (July 1, 2005, 70 FR
38068) for additional details.
II. What Comments Were Received and What Is EPA's Response?
EPA's July 1, 2005 proposed rule provided a 30-day public comment
period. During this period, EPA received two comment letters on the
proposal to approve New Jersey's NOX RACT determination.
EPA's response immediately follows a summary of each public comment.
Comments: Schering submitted a comment letter which provided a
chronology of events regarding the operation and regulatory status of
the HRSG. Schering's letter requested approval to operate the HRSG in
the same manner that EPA and New Jersey approved Schering to operate a
similar HRSG at the same cogeneration facility in 1998.
Response: By submitting the source-specific RACT determination to
New Jersey and EPA for review and approval, Schering in essence has
already formally made the request to operate the HRSG in a way similar
to another unit at the facility. Therefore, EPA is satisfying
Schering's request by proceeding with this action on the source-
specific SIP revision.
Comments: A concerned citizen commented EPA is doing nothing to
make New Jersey's air cleaner. The comments were not directed at
Schering as a specific source or at any specific NOX
emission limitation at Schering. In addition, the comments did not
include any supporting information or justification on how EPA can make
the air cleaner.
Response: EPA acknowledges the citizen's support for clean air.
However, no specific information or supporting justification relevant
to the NOX RACT determination for Schering was provided for
EPA to reconsider the proposed approval. For the reasons in this
section, and in the July 1, 2005 proposal, EPA is approving the
NOX emission limitation for Schering, consistent with the
RACT requirements of the Clean Air Act. With respect to the citizen's
comment that EPA is doing nothing to clean the air in New Jersey, EPA
is championing a host of programs including the Clean Air Interstate
Rule, the Clean Air Mercury Rule, and diesel retrofit programs for
trucks and buses. These and other programs, in cooperation with the
State of New Jersey, will help to clean the air and to meet the
national ambient air quality standards in New Jersey and across the
country.
III. What Are EPA's Conclusions?
EPA has determined New Jersey's SIP revision for New Jersey's
NOX RACT determination for Schering's HRSG with duct burner
is consistent with New Jersey's NOX RACT regulation and
EPA's guidance. EPA has determined that the NOX emission
limits identified in New Jersey's Conditions of Approval document
represents RACT for Schering's HRSG with duct burner. More
specifically, EPA approves the current Conditions of Approval document
which includes an alternative emission limit for the HRSG/duct burner
when operating in the fresh air fired mode and when firing natural gas.
The limit will be the lower of 0.17 lbs/MMBtu, or 115% of the average
of three one-hour stack tests, each performed over a consecutive 60-
minute period. Accordingly, EPA is approving the New Jersey SIP
revision for an alternative RACT emission limit determination for
Schering's HRSG with duct burner.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 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),
because it 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.) 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.
A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in
the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by
5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under
[[Page 13021]]
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 May 15, 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 may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxides, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: February 22, 2006.
Alan J. Steinberg,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
0
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
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 FF--New Jersey
0
2. Section 52.1570 is amended by adding new paragraph (c)(80) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1570 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(80) Revision to the New Jersey State Implementation Plan (SIP) for
ozone concerning the control of nitrogen oxides from the Schering
Corporation's CoGEN II cogeneration facility located in Union County
submitted by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
(NJDEP), dated March 31, 2005.
(i) Incorporation by reference:
(A) Conditions of Approval, Alternative Maximum Emission Rate For
NOX, Schering Corporation, Union, Union County, New Jersey
facility identification number 40084 approved March 9, 2005.
[FR Doc. 06-2428 Filed 3-13-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P