Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Stafford County Reasonably Available Control Technology Under the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 45925-45928 [E8-18191]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 153 / Thursday, August 7, 2008 / Proposed Rules
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: videtich.callie@epa.gov and
komp.mark@epa.gov.
• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section if you are
faxing comments).
• Mail: Callie Videtich, Director, Air
Program, Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P–
A, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202–1129.
• Hand Delivery: Callie Videtich,
Director, Air Program, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8,
Mailcode 8P–A, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202–1129. Such
deliveries are only accepted Monday
through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays. Special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Please see the direct final rule which
is located in the Rules Section of this
Federal Register for detailed
instructions on how to submit
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mark Komp, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 8, Mailcode 8P–A, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
80202–1129, (303) 312–6436,
komp.mark@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the
information provided in the Direct Final
action of the same title which is located
in the Rules and Regulations section of
this Federal Register.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 12, 2008.
Carol Rushin,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. E8–16269 Filed 8–6–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
rmajette on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
[EPA–R03–OAR–2008–0472; FRL–8701–9]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Stafford County Reasonably Available
Control Technology Under the 8-Hour
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:16 Aug 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
revision submitted by the
Commonwealth of Virginia. This SIP
revision pertains to the requirements in
meeting the reasonably available control
technology (RACT) under the 8-hour
ozone national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS). These requirements
are based on: Certification that
previously adopted RACT controls in
Virginia’s SIP that were approved by
EPA under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
are based on the currently available
technically and economically feasible
controls, and that they continue to
represent RACT for the 8-hour
implementation purposes; a negative
declaration demonstrating that no
facilities exist in Stafford County for the
applicable control technology guideline
(CTG) categories; and new RACT
determinations. This action is being
taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before September 8,
2008.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2008–0472 by one of the
following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. E-mail:
fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2008–0472,
Cristina Fernandez, Chief, Air Quality
Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2008–
0472. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change, and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an e-mail
comment directly to EPA without going
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
45925
through www.regulations.gov, your
e-mail address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public
docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., 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 in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy 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
available at the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, 629 East Main
Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gregory Becoat, (215) 814–2036, or by
e-mail at becoat.gregory@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April
21, 2008, the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality (VADEQ)
submitted a revision to its SIP that
addresses Stafford County’s
requirements of RACT under the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS set forth by the CAA.
I. Background
Ozone is formed in the atmosphere by
photochemical reactions between
volatile organic compounds (VOC),
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and carbon
monoxide (CO) in the presence of
sunlight. In order to reduce ozone
concentrations in the ambient air, the
CAA requires all nonattainment areas to
apply control on VOC/NOX emission
sources to achieve emission reductions.
Among effective control measures,
RACT controls are a major group for
reducing VOC and NOX emissions from
stationary sources.
Since the 1970s, EPA has consistently
interpreted RACT to mean the lowest
E:\FR\FM\07AUP1.SGM
07AUP1
rmajette on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
45926
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 153 / Thursday, August 7, 2008 / Proposed Rules
emission limit that a particular source is
capable of meeting by the application of
the control technology that is reasonably
available considering technological and
economic feasibility. See, e.g., 72 FR
20586 at 20610 (April 25, 2007). Section
182 of the CAA sets forth two separate
RACT requirements for ozone
nonattainment areas. The first
requirement, contained in section
182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA, and referred to
as RACT fix-up requires the correction
of RACT rules for which EPA identified
deficiencies before the CAA was
amended in 1990. On March 31, 1994,
EPA published a final rulemaking notice
approving the Commonwealth of
Virginia’s SIP revision in order to
correct the Commonwealth’s VOC RACT
regulations and establish and require
the implementation for revised SIP
regulations to control VOCs (59 FR
15117, March 31, 1994). The second
requirement, set forth in section
182(b)(2) of the CAA, applies to
moderate (or worse) ozone
nonattainment areas as well as to
marginal and attainment areas in ozone
transport region (OTR) established
pursuant to section 184 of the CAA, and
requires these areas to implement RACT
controls on all major VOC and NOX
emission sources and on all sources and
source categories covered by a control
technique guideline (CTG) issued by
EPA. On March 12, 1997, EPA
published a final rulemaking notice
approving the Commonwealth of
Virginia’s SIP revision as meeting the
CTG RACT provisions of the CAA (62
FR 11332, March 12, 1997). Further
details of Virginia’s RACT requirements
can be found in a Technical Support
Document (TSD) prepared for this
rulemaking.
The counties of Fairfax, Loudoun,
Prince William, and Arlington, as well
as the cities of Fairfax, Alexandria,
Manassas, Manassas Park, and Falls
Church (Northern Virginia Area), along
with Stafford County, Virginia,
Washington, D.C., and portions of
southern Maryland, are part of the OTR.
Under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, these
jurisdictions, including Stafford County,
Virginia, Washington, D.C., and portions
of southern Maryland were originally
classified as part of the Metropolitan
Washington serious 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area located in OTR (56
FR 56694 at 56844, November 6, 1991).
As part of the planning process, section
182(b)(2) of the CAA required the
Commonwealth of Virginia to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:16 Aug 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
implement RACT on all sources and
source categories covered by a CTG
issued by EPA. Point sources with the
potential to emit 50 tons per year or
more of VOCs or 100 tons per year or
more of NOX that were not covered by
a CTG were also required to implement
RACT. As a result of failure to meet the
attainment date of November 15, 1999,
the Metropolitan Washington area was
reclassified as a severe nonattainment
area for the 1-hour standard (68 FR 3410
at 3425, January 24, 2003). As a result
of the reclassification, the
Commonwealth of Virginia was required
to perform RACT evaluations on point
sources with the potential to emit 25
tons per year for either VOC (62 FR
11334, March 12, 1997) or NOX (69 FR
48150, August 9, 2004).
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated
the new 8-hour NAAQS for ozone (62
FR 38856, July 18, 1997). Under the 8hour ozone NAAQS, the Metropolitan
Washington Area, with the exception of
Stafford County, was designated
nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone
standard and classified as a moderate
nonattainment area. Stafford County
was included as part of the
Fredericksburg area, and was designated
as a moderate nonattainment area for
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS (69 FR 23858,
April 30, 2004). On May 2, 2005 and
May 4, 2005, the Commonwealth of
Virginia submitted a redesignation
request and maintenance plan for the
Fredericksburg area, respectively. EPA
issued a final rule approving Virginia’s
redesignation request and maintenance
plan for the Fredericksburg area on
December 23, 2005 (70 FR 76165).
Although Stafford County is part of
the Fredericksburg maintenance area,
the requirements of section 184 of the
CAA must still be satisfied because
Stafford County is also part of the OTR.
Section 184(b)(1)(B) of the CAA requires
the implementation of RACT with
respect to all sources of VOC covered by
a CTG. Additionally, section 184(b)(2) of
the CAA requires the implementation of
major stationary source requirements as
if the area were a moderate
nonattainment area on any stationary
source with a potential to emit of at
least 50 tons per year of VOC or 100
tons per year of NOX. Virginia is
therefore required to submit to EPA a
SIP revision that demonstrates how
Stafford County meets the RACT
requirements under the 8-hour ozone
standard.
EPA requires under the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS that states meet the CAA RACT
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
requirements, either through a
certification that previously adopted
RACT controls in their SIP revisions
approved by EPA under the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS represent adequate
RACT control levels for 8-hour
attainment purposes, or through the
adoption of new or more stringent
regulations that represent RACT control
levels. A certification must be
accompanied by appropriate supporting
information such as consideration of
information received during the public
comment period and consideration of
new data. This information may
supplement existing RACT guidance
documents that were developed for the
1-hour standard, such that the State’s
SIP accurately reflects RACTs for the 8hour ozone standard based on the
current availability of technically and
economically feasible controls.
Adoption of new RACT regulations will
occur when states have new stationary
sources not covered by existing RACT
regulations, or when new data or
technical information indicates that a
previously adopted RACT measure does
not represent a newly available RACT
control level. Another 8-hour ozone
NAAQS requirement for RACT is to
submit a negative declaration that there
are no CTG major sources of VOC and
NOX emissions within Virginia.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
Virginia’s SIP revision for Stafford
County contains the requirements of
RACT set forth by the CAA under the 8hour ozone NAAQS. Virginia’s SIP
revision satisfies the 8-hour RACT
requirements through (1) certification
that previously adopted RACT controls
in Virginia’s SIP that were approved by
EPA under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
are based on the currently available
technically and economically feasible
controls, and that they continue to
represent RACT for the 8-hour
implementation purposes; (2) a negative
declaration demonstrating that no
facilities exist in Stafford County for the
applicable CTG categories; and (3) new
RACT determinations.
VOC RACT Controls
Virginia’s Regulations and Statutes,
under 9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, contain the
Commonwealth’s VOC RACT controls
that were implemented and approved in
the Virginia SIP under the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS.
Table 1 lists Virginia’s VOC RACT
controls.
E:\FR\FM\07AUP1.SGM
07AUP1
45927
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 153 / Thursday, August 7, 2008 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—VIRGINIA’S VOC RACT CONTROLS
Existing stationary sources
Regulation 9
VAC 5–40–
460 ....................
610 ....................
1400 ..................
3290 ..................
3590 ..................
3740 ..................
3890 ..................
4040
4190
4340
4490
4640
4790
State effective date
Title of regulation
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
..................
4940 ..................
5080 ..................
5230 ..................
5230 ..................
5230 ..................
5230 ..................
5230 ..................
5230 ..................
5510 ..................
6840 ..................
Emission Standards for Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products Manufacturing
Operations.
Emission Standards for Rubber Tire Manufacturing Operations ......................
Emission Standards for Petroleum Refinery Operations ...................................
Emission Standards for Solvent Metal Cleaning Operations Using Non-Halogenated Solvents.
Emission Standards for Large Appliance Coating Application Systems ...........
Emission Standards for Magnet Wire Coating Application Systems ................
Emission Standards for Automobile and Light Duty Truck Coating Application
Systems.
Emission Standards for Can Coating Application Systems ..............................
Emission Standards for Metal Coil Coating Application Systems .....................
Emission Standards for Paper and Fabric Coating Application Systems .........
Emission Standards for Vinyl Coating Application Systems .............................
Emission Standards for Metal Furniture Coating Application Systems .............
Emission Standards for Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products Coating Application Systems.
Emission Standards for Flatwood Paneling Coating Application Systems .......
Flexographic, Packaging Rotogravure, and Publication Rotogravure Printing
Lines.
Emission Standards for Petroleum Liquid Storage and Transfer Operations—
Stage I Vapor Control Systems—Gasoline Service Stations.
Emission Standards for Petroleum Liquid Storage and Transfer Operations—
Tank Truck Gasoline Loading Terminals.
Emission Standards for Petroleum Liquid Storage and Transfer Operations—
Bulk Gasoline Plants.
Emission Standards for Petroleum Liquid Storage and Transfer Operations—
Petroleum Liquids in Fixed Roof Tanks.
Emission Standards for Petroleum Liquid Storage and Transfer Operations—
Petroleum Liquid Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks.
Emission Standards for Petroleum Liquid Storage and Transfer Operations—
Gasoline Tank Trucks and Vapor Collection Systems.
Emission Standards for Asphalt Paving Operations .........................................
Emission Standards for Solvent Metal Cleaning Operations in the Northern
Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control Area.
Virginia also submitted a negative
declaration certifying that the following
VOC CTG or non-CTG major sources do
not exist in Stafford County.
Federal
Register
date
Citation
02/01/02
03/03/06
71 FR 10838.
04/17/95
04/17/95
04/01/97
04/21/00
04/21/00
11/03/99
65 FR 21315.
65 FR 21315.
64 FR 59635.
04/17/95
04/17/95
04/17/95
04/21/00
04/21/00
04/21/00
65 FR 21315.
65 FR 21315.
65 FR 21315.
04/17/95
04/17/95
04/17/95
04/17/95
04/17/95
04/17/95
04/21/00
04/21/00
04/21/00
04/21/00
04/21/00
04/21/00
65
65
65
65
65
65
04/17/95
04/01/96
04/21/00
03/12/97
65 FR 21315.
62 FR 11334.
02/01/02
03/03/06
71 FR 10838.
02/01/02
03/03/06
71 FR 10838.
02/01/02
03/03/06
71 FR 10838.
02/01/02
03/03/06
71 FR 10838.
02/01/02
03/03/06
71 FR 10838.
02/01/02
03/03/06
71 FR 10838.
03/24/04
03/24/04
04/27/05
06/09/04
70 FR 21625.
69 FR 32277.
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
21315.
21315.
21315.
21315.
21315.
21315.
Table 2 lists Virginia’s negative
declaration for VOC CTG major sources.
TABLE 2—DOCUMENTS FOR WHICH NO APPLICABLE FACILITIES EXIST IN STAFFORD COUNTY
Document title
Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Petroleum Refinery Equipment
Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions form Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners
Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Manufacture of High Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and Polystyrene Resins
Control of Volatile Organic Compound Equipment Leaks form Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing Plants
Control of Volatile Organic Compound fugitive Emission from Synthetic Organic Chemical Polymer and Resin Manufacturing Equipment
Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Air Oxidation Processes in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry
SOCMI Distillation and Reactor Processes CTG
Wood Furniture
Shipbuilding/repair
Aerospace
rmajette on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
NOX RACT Controls
The only facility in Stafford County
considered to be a major stationary
source for either VOC or NOX is
Cellofoam. Because actual VOC
emissions from Cellofoam are
significantly below the facility’s
federally enforceable limit, the
Cellofoam source specific new RACT
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:16 Aug 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
determination is appropriate, and
therefore, the existing RACT controls
can be recertified. Further details can be
found in a TSD prepared for this
rulemaking.
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the
Virginia SIP revision for Stafford County
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
that addresses the requirements of
RACT under the 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
which was submitted on April 21, 2008.
This SIP revision is based on a
combination of (1) certification that
previously adopted RACT controls in
Virginia’s SIP that were approved by
EPA under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
are based on the currently available
E:\FR\FM\07AUP1.SGM
07AUP1
45928
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 153 / Thursday, August 7, 2008 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on PRODPC74 with PROPOSALS
technically and economically feasible
controls, and that they continue to
represent RACT for the 8-hour
implementation purposes; (2) a negative
declaration demonstrating that no
facilities exist in Stafford County for the
applicable CTG categories; and (3) new
RACT determinations. EPA is soliciting
public comments on the issues
discussed in this document. These
comments will be considered before
taking final action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this
action merely proposes to approve state
law as meeting Federal requirements
and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. For that reason, this proposed
action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• 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);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:16 Aug 06, 2008
Jkt 214001
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule,
pertaining to the Stafford County, VA
RACT under the 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because
the SIP is not approved to apply in
Indian country located in the state, and
EPA notes that it will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 25, 2008.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E8–18191 Filed 8–6–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[DA 08–1713; MB Docket No. 08–85; RM–
11427]
Radio Broadcasting Services;
Ehrenberg and First Mesa, AZ;
Needles, CA
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document requests
comments on a petition for rulemaking
filed by Michael Cusinato, proposing to
allot Channel 287B1 at Needles,
California, as a fourth local service. To
accommodate the proposed Needles
allotment, Petitioner also requests the
substitution of Channel 228C2 for
vacant Channel 286C2 at Ehrenberg,
Arizona, and the substitution of
Channel 286C2 for Channel 287C2 at
Wickenburg, Arizona, and modification
of the Station KHOV–FM license
accordingly at its license site. An Order
to Show Cause is directed to Univision
Radio License Corporation, licensee of
Station KHOV–FM to show cause why
its license should not be modified to
specify operation on Channel 286C2. To
accommodate the Wickenburg
substitution, Petition proposes to
substitute Channel 246C2 for Channel
286C2 at Kachina Village, Arizona, and
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
modify the license for Station
KFLX(FM) accordingly, at its license
site. An Order to Show Cause is directed
to Grenax Broadcasting II LLC, licensee
of Station KFLX(FM) to show cause why
its license should not be modified to
Channel 246C2. Finally, to
accommodate the substitution at
Kachina Village, Petitioner proposes the
substitution of Channel 281C for vacant
Channel 281C at First Mesa, Arizona.
DATES: Comments must be filed on or
before September 15, 2008, and reply
comments on or before September 30,
2008.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554. In addition to
filing comments with the FCC,
interested parties should serve the
petitioner as follows: Michael Cusinato,
705 Peridot Ct., Castle Rock, Colorado
80108.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Victoria McCauley, Media Bureau, (202)
418–2180.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
synopsis of the Commission’s Notice of
Proposed Rule Making, MB Docket No.
08–85, adopted July 23, 2008, and
released July 25, 2008. The full text of
this Commission decision is available
for inspection and copying during
normal business hours in the FCC’s
Reference Information Center at Portals
II, CY–A257, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554. This document
may also be purchased from the
Commission’s copy contractor, Best
Copy and Printing, Inc., Portals II, 445
12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402,
Washington, DC 20554, telephone
1–800–378–3160 or https://
www.BCPIWEB.com.
This document does not contain
proposed information collection
requirements subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–
13. In addition, therefore, it does not
contain any proposed information
collection burden ‘‘for small business
concerns with fewer than 25
employees,’’ pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4). Provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply to
this proceeding.
Members of the public should note
that from the time a Notice of Proposed
Rule Making is issued until the matter
is no longer subject to Commission
consideration or court review, all ex
parte contacts are prohibited in
Commission proceedings, such as this
one, which involve channel allotments.
See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules
governing permissible ex parte contacts.
E:\FR\FM\07AUP1.SGM
07AUP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 153 (Thursday, August 7, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45925-45928]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18191]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2008-0472; FRL-8701-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Stafford County Reasonably Available Control Technology Under
the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia. This SIP revision
pertains to the requirements in meeting the reasonably available
control technology (RACT) under the 8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS). These requirements are based on:
Certification that previously adopted RACT controls in Virginia's SIP
that were approved by EPA under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS are based on the
currently available technically and economically feasible controls, and
that they continue to represent RACT for the 8-hour implementation
purposes; a negative declaration demonstrating that no facilities exist
in Stafford County for the applicable control technology guideline
(CTG) categories; and new RACT determinations. This action is being
taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before September 8,
2008.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2008-0472 by one of the following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. E-mail: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2008-0472, Cristina Fernandez, Chief, Air
Quality Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2008-0472. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., 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 in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy 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 available at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 629
East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Becoat, (215) 814-2036, or by
e-mail at becoat.gregory@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 21, 2008, the Virginia Department
of Environmental Quality (VADEQ) submitted a revision to its SIP that
addresses Stafford County's requirements of RACT under the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS set forth by the CAA.
I. Background
Ozone is formed in the atmosphere by photochemical reactions
between volatile organic compounds (VOC), oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) and carbon monoxide (CO) in the presence of sunlight.
In order to reduce ozone concentrations in the ambient air, the CAA
requires all nonattainment areas to apply control on VOC/NOX
emission sources to achieve emission reductions. Among effective
control measures, RACT controls are a major group for reducing VOC and
NOX emissions from stationary sources.
Since the 1970s, EPA has consistently interpreted RACT to mean the
lowest
[[Page 45926]]
emission limit that a particular source is capable of meeting by the
application of the control technology that is reasonably available
considering technological and economic feasibility. See, e.g., 72 FR
20586 at 20610 (April 25, 2007). Section 182 of the CAA sets forth two
separate RACT requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. The first
requirement, contained in section 182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA, and referred
to as RACT fix-up requires the correction of RACT rules for which EPA
identified deficiencies before the CAA was amended in 1990. On March
31, 1994, EPA published a final rulemaking notice approving the
Commonwealth of Virginia's SIP revision in order to correct the
Commonwealth's VOC RACT regulations and establish and require the
implementation for revised SIP regulations to control VOCs (59 FR
15117, March 31, 1994). The second requirement, set forth in section
182(b)(2) of the CAA, applies to moderate (or worse) ozone
nonattainment areas as well as to marginal and attainment areas in
ozone transport region (OTR) established pursuant to section 184 of the
CAA, and requires these areas to implement RACT controls on all major
VOC and NOX emission sources and on all sources and source
categories covered by a control technique guideline (CTG) issued by
EPA. On March 12, 1997, EPA published a final rulemaking notice
approving the Commonwealth of Virginia's SIP revision as meeting the
CTG RACT provisions of the CAA (62 FR 11332, March 12, 1997). Further
details of Virginia's RACT requirements can be found in a Technical
Support Document (TSD) prepared for this rulemaking.
The counties of Fairfax, Loudoun, Prince William, and Arlington, as
well as the cities of Fairfax, Alexandria, Manassas, Manassas Park, and
Falls Church (Northern Virginia Area), along with Stafford County,
Virginia, Washington, D.C., and portions of southern Maryland, are part
of the OTR. Under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, these jurisdictions,
including Stafford County, Virginia, Washington, D.C., and portions of
southern Maryland were originally classified as part of the
Metropolitan Washington serious 1-hour ozone nonattainment area located
in OTR (56 FR 56694 at 56844, November 6, 1991). As part of the
planning process, section 182(b)(2) of the CAA required the
Commonwealth of Virginia to implement RACT on all sources and source
categories covered by a CTG issued by EPA. Point sources with the
potential to emit 50 tons per year or more of VOCs or 100 tons per year
or more of NOX that were not covered by a CTG were also
required to implement RACT. As a result of failure to meet the
attainment date of November 15, 1999, the Metropolitan Washington area
was reclassified as a severe nonattainment area for the 1-hour standard
(68 FR 3410 at 3425, January 24, 2003). As a result of the
reclassification, the Commonwealth of Virginia was required to perform
RACT evaluations on point sources with the potential to emit 25 tons
per year for either VOC (62 FR 11334, March 12, 1997) or NOX
(69 FR 48150, August 9, 2004).
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated the new 8-hour NAAQS for ozone
(62 FR 38856, July 18, 1997). Under the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the
Metropolitan Washington Area, with the exception of Stafford County,
was designated nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone standard and
classified as a moderate nonattainment area. Stafford County was
included as part of the Fredericksburg area, and was designated as a
moderate nonattainment area for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS (69 FR 23858,
April 30, 2004). On May 2, 2005 and May 4, 2005, the Commonwealth of
Virginia submitted a redesignation request and maintenance plan for the
Fredericksburg area, respectively. EPA issued a final rule approving
Virginia's redesignation request and maintenance plan for the
Fredericksburg area on December 23, 2005 (70 FR 76165).
Although Stafford County is part of the Fredericksburg maintenance
area, the requirements of section 184 of the CAA must still be
satisfied because Stafford County is also part of the OTR. Section
184(b)(1)(B) of the CAA requires the implementation of RACT with
respect to all sources of VOC covered by a CTG. Additionally, section
184(b)(2) of the CAA requires the implementation of major stationary
source requirements as if the area were a moderate nonattainment area
on any stationary source with a potential to emit of at least 50 tons
per year of VOC or 100 tons per year of NOX. Virginia is
therefore required to submit to EPA a SIP revision that demonstrates
how Stafford County meets the RACT requirements under the 8-hour ozone
standard.
EPA requires under the 8-hour ozone NAAQS that states meet the CAA
RACT requirements, either through a certification that previously
adopted RACT controls in their SIP revisions approved by EPA under the
1-hour ozone NAAQS represent adequate RACT control levels for 8-hour
attainment purposes, or through the adoption of new or more stringent
regulations that represent RACT control levels. A certification must be
accompanied by appropriate supporting information such as consideration
of information received during the public comment period and
consideration of new data. This information may supplement existing
RACT guidance documents that were developed for the 1-hour standard,
such that the State's SIP accurately reflects RACTs for the 8-hour
ozone standard based on the current availability of technically and
economically feasible controls. Adoption of new RACT regulations will
occur when states have new stationary sources not covered by existing
RACT regulations, or when new data or technical information indicates
that a previously adopted RACT measure does not represent a newly
available RACT control level. Another 8-hour ozone NAAQS requirement
for RACT is to submit a negative declaration that there are no CTG
major sources of VOC and NOX emissions within Virginia.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
Virginia's SIP revision for Stafford County contains the
requirements of RACT set forth by the CAA under the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Virginia's SIP revision satisfies the 8-hour RACT requirements through
(1) certification that previously adopted RACT controls in Virginia's
SIP that were approved by EPA under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS are based on
the currently available technically and economically feasible controls,
and that they continue to represent RACT for the 8-hour implementation
purposes; (2) a negative declaration demonstrating that no facilities
exist in Stafford County for the applicable CTG categories; and (3) new
RACT determinations.
VOC RACT Controls
Virginia's Regulations and Statutes, under 9 VAC 5 Chapter 40,
contain the Commonwealth's VOC RACT controls that were implemented and
approved in the Virginia SIP under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
Table 1 lists Virginia's VOC RACT controls.
[[Page 45927]]
Table 1--Virginia's VOC RACT Controls
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing stationary sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation 9 VAC 5-40- State Federal
Title of regulation effective Register Citation
date date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
460.......................... Emission Standards for 02/01/02 03/03/06 71 FR 10838.
Synthesized
Pharmaceutical Products
Manufacturing
Operations.
610.......................... Emission Standards for 04/17/95 04/21/00 65 FR 21315.
Rubber Tire
Manufacturing
Operations.
1400......................... Emission Standards for 04/17/95 04/21/00 65 FR 21315.
Petroleum Refinery
Operations.
3290......................... Emission Standards for 04/01/97 11/03/99 64 FR 59635.
Solvent Metal Cleaning
Operations Using Non-
Halogenated Solvents.
3590......................... Emission Standards for 04/17/95 04/21/00 65 FR 21315.
Large Appliance Coating
Application Systems.
3740......................... Emission Standards for 04/17/95 04/21/00 65 FR 21315.
Magnet Wire Coating
Application Systems.
3890......................... Emission Standards for 04/17/95 04/21/00 65 FR 21315.
Automobile and Light
Duty Truck Coating
Application Systems.
4040......................... Emission Standards for 04/17/95 04/21/00 65 FR 21315.
Can Coating Application
Systems.
4190......................... Emission Standards for 04/17/95 04/21/00 65 FR 21315.
Metal Coil Coating
Application Systems.
4340......................... Emission Standards for 04/17/95 04/21/00 65 FR 21315.
Paper and Fabric
Coating Application
Systems.
4490......................... Emission Standards for 04/17/95 04/21/00 65 FR 21315.
Vinyl Coating
Application Systems.
4640......................... Emission Standards for 04/17/95 04/21/00 65 FR 21315.
Metal Furniture Coating
Application Systems.
4790......................... Emission Standards for 04/17/95 04/21/00 65 FR 21315.
Miscellaneous Metal
Parts and Products
Coating Application
Systems.
4940......................... Emission Standards for 04/17/95 04/21/00 65 FR 21315.
Flatwood Paneling
Coating Application
Systems.
5080......................... Flexographic, Packaging 04/01/96 03/12/97 62 FR 11334.
Rotogravure, and
Publication Rotogravure
Printing Lines.
5230......................... Emission Standards for 02/01/02 03/03/06 71 FR 10838.
Petroleum Liquid
Storage and Transfer
Operations--Stage I
Vapor Control Systems--
Gasoline Service
Stations.
5230......................... Emission Standards for 02/01/02 03/03/06 71 FR 10838.
Petroleum Liquid
Storage and Transfer
Operations--Tank Truck
Gasoline Loading
Terminals.
5230......................... Emission Standards for 02/01/02 03/03/06 71 FR 10838.
Petroleum Liquid
Storage and Transfer
Operations--Bulk
Gasoline Plants.
5230......................... Emission Standards for 02/01/02 03/03/06 71 FR 10838.
Petroleum Liquid
Storage and Transfer
Operations--Petroleum
Liquids in Fixed Roof
Tanks.
5230......................... Emission Standards for 02/01/02 03/03/06 71 FR 10838.
Petroleum Liquid
Storage and Transfer
Operations--Petroleum
Liquid Storage in
External Floating Roof
Tanks.
5230......................... Emission Standards for 02/01/02 03/03/06 71 FR 10838.
Petroleum Liquid
Storage and Transfer
Operations--Gasoline
Tank Trucks and Vapor
Collection Systems.
5510......................... Emission Standards for 03/24/04 04/27/05 70 FR 21625.
Asphalt Paving
Operations.
6840......................... Emission Standards for 03/24/04 06/09/04 69 FR 32277.
Solvent Metal Cleaning
Operations in the
Northern Virginia
Volatile Organic
Compound Emissions
Control Area.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virginia also submitted a negative declaration certifying that the
following VOC CTG or non-CTG major sources do not exist in Stafford
County.
Table 2 lists Virginia's negative declaration for VOC CTG major
sources.
Table 2--Documents for Which No Applicable Facilities Exist in Stafford
County
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Document title
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Control of Volatile Organic Compound Leaks from Petroleum Refinery
Equipment
Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions form Large Petroleum Dry
Cleaners
Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Manufacture of High
Density Polyethylene, Polypropylene, and Polystyrene Resins
Control of Volatile Organic Compound Equipment Leaks form Natural Gas/
Gasoline Processing Plants
Control of Volatile Organic Compound fugitive Emission from Synthetic
Organic Chemical Polymer and Resin Manufacturing Equipment
Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Air Oxidation
Processes in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry
SOCMI Distillation and Reactor Processes CTG
Wood Furniture
Shipbuilding/repair
Aerospace
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX RACT Controls
The only facility in Stafford County considered to be a major
stationary source for either VOC or NOX is Cellofoam.
Because actual VOC emissions from Cellofoam are significantly below the
facility's federally enforceable limit, the Cellofoam source specific
new RACT determination is appropriate, and therefore, the existing RACT
controls can be recertified. Further details can be found in a TSD
prepared for this rulemaking.
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the Virginia SIP revision for Stafford
County that addresses the requirements of RACT under the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, which was submitted on April 21, 2008. This SIP revision is
based on a combination of (1) certification that previously adopted
RACT controls in Virginia's SIP that were approved by EPA under the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS are based on the currently available
[[Page 45928]]
technically and economically feasible controls, and that they continue
to represent RACT for the 8-hour implementation purposes; (2) a
negative declaration demonstrating that no facilities exist in Stafford
County for the applicable CTG categories; and (3) new RACT
determinations. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues
discussed in this document. These comments will be considered before
taking final action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly,
this action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
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);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule, pertaining to the Stafford County,
VA RACT under the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, does not have tribal implications
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 25, 2008.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E8-18191 Filed 8-6-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
