Approval of Section 112(l) Authority for Hazardous Air Pollutants; Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for Dry Cleaning Facilities; State of Vermont, 9215-9219 [2018-04277]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 43 / Monday, March 5, 2018 / Rules and Regulations Dated: February 7, 2018. Alexis Strauss, Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows: PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart F—California 2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(497)(i)(C) to read as follows: ■ § 52.220 Identification of plan-in part. * * * * * (c) * * * (497) * * * (i) * * * (C) Northern Sierra Air Quality Management District. (1) City of Portola. (i) Ordinance No. 344, Portola Municipal Code, Chapter 15.10, ‘‘Wood Stove and Fireplace Ordinance,’’ adopted June 22, 2016, except paragraphs 15.10.060(B) and sections 15.10.090 and 15.10.100. * * * * * [FR Doc. 2018–04316 Filed 3–2–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 63 [EPA–R01–OAR–2017–0343; A–1–FRL– 9972–97–Region 1] Approval of Section 112(l) Authority for Hazardous Air Pollutants; Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for Dry Cleaning Facilities; State of Vermont Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct final action to grant the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (VT DEC) the authority to implement and enforce, with respect to area sources only, the Vermont Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Rule in place of the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities (Dry Cleaning NESHAP). sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 Mar 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 Pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA), the VT DEC submitted a request for approval to implement and enforce the Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Rule of the Vermont Air Pollution Control Regulations as a partial substitution for the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities (Dry Cleaning NESHAP), as it applies to area sources. EPA has reviewed this request and has determined that the Vermont Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Rule satisfies the requirements necessary for partial rule substitution. Thus, EPA is hereby granting VT DEC’s request. This action does not affect the authority of any party to implement and enforce the Dry Cleaning NESHAP with respect to major source dry cleaners. This approval makes the Vermont Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Rule federally enforceable in Vermont. DATES: This direct final rule will be effective June 4, 2018, unless EPA receives adverse comments by April 4, 2018. If EPA receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of June 4, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01– OAR–2017–0343 at https:// www.regulations.gov, or via email to lancey.susan@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 9215 submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Lancey, Air Permits, Toxics, and Indoor Programs Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109–3912, telephone number 617–918–1656, lancey.susan@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean EPA. Table of Contents I. General Information A. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule? B. Does this direct final rule apply to me? C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA? II. Background III. What requirements must a State rule meet to substitute for a Section 112 rule? IV. What if any material differences exist between the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule and the Dry Cleaning NESHAP and what is EPA’s evaluation? A. What are the differences in applicability? B. How does the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule address the control requirements? C. How do the monitoring requirements differ? D. What are the differences in reporting and recordkeeping? E. Is the State’s submittal separable? F. What is EPA’s action regarding the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule? V. Final Action VI. Incorporation by Reference VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews VIII. Judicial Reviews I. General Information A. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule? The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the state rule should adverse comments be filed. If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a notice withdrawing the direct final rule and informing the public that the rule will not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on the proposed rule. All parties interested in commenting on the proposed rule E:\FR\FM\05MRR1.SGM 05MRR1 9216 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 43 / Monday, March 5, 2018 / Rules and Regulations sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this rule will be effective on June 4, 2018 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule. For further information about commenting on this rule, see the ADDRESSES section of this document. Office Square (mail code OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109–3912. II. Background 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 B. Does this direct final rule apply to requirements. The Federal regulations me? governing EPA’s approval of state and local rules or programs under section Categories and entities potentially 112(l) are located at 40 CFR part 63, regulated by this direct final rule subpart E. See 58 FR 62262 (November include: 26, 1993), as amended by 65 FR 55810 (September 14, 2000). Under these 1 NAICS Category regulations, a state air pollution control code agency has the option to request EPA’s Coin Operated Laundries and Dry approval to substitute a state rule for the Cleaners .................................... 812310 applicable Federal rule (e.g., the Dry Cleaning and Laundry ServNational Emission Standards for ices (except coin operated) ...... 812320 Hazardous Air Pollutants). Upon Industrial Laundries ...................... 812332 approval by EPA, the state agency is 1 North American Industry Classification authorized to implement and enforce its System. rule in place of the Federal rule, and the state rule becomes federally enforceable This Table is not intended to be in that state. exhaustive, but rather provides a guide EPA originally promulgated the Dry for readers regarding entities likely to be Cleaning NESHAP on September 22, regulated by this direct final rule. To 1993. See 58 FR 49354. The Dry determine whether your facility is Cleaning NESHAP has been amended affected you should examine the several times and is codified at 40 CFR applicability criteria in the Vermont Air part 63, subpart M, ‘‘National Pollution Control Regulations, Chapter Perchloroethylene Air Emission 5, Air Pollution Control, section 5– Standards for Dry Cleaning Facilities.’’ 253.11 Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning. On May 26, 2017, EPA received VT If you have questions regarding the DEC’s request to implement and enforce applicability of any aspect of this action Vermont Air Pollution Control to a particular entity, please contact the Regulations (VT APCR) section 5– person identified in the ‘‘For Further 253.11 Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Information Contact’’ section. (Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule) in lieu of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP as applied to C. What should I consider as I prepare area sources. my comments for the EPA? Do not submit information containing III. What requirements must a State rule meet to substitute for a Section 112 CBI to EPA through https:// rule? www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information A state must demonstrate that it has that you claim to be CBI. For CBI satisfied the general delegation/approval information on a disk or CD–ROM that criteria contained in 40 CFR 63.91(d). you mail to the EPA, mark the outside The process of providing ‘‘up-front of the disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then approval’’ assures that a state has met identify electronically within the disk or the delegation criteria in Section CD–ROM the specific information that 112(l)(5) of the CAA as implemented by is claimed as CBI. In addition to one EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR 63.91(d). complete version of the comments that These criteria require, among other includes information claimed as CBI, a things, that the state has demonstrated copy of the comments that does not that its NESHAP program contains contain the information claimed as CBI adequate authorities to assure must be submitted for inclusion in the compliance with each applicable public docket. Information so marked Federal requirement, adequate resources will not be disclosed except in for implementation, and an expeditious accordance with procedures set forth in compliance schedule. Under 40 CFR 40 CFR part 2. Send or deliver 63.91(d)(3), interim or final Title V information identified as CBI only to the program approval under 40 CFR part 70 following address: ‘‘EPA–R01–OAR– satisfies the criteria set forth in 40 CFR 2017–0343’’, Susan Lancey, U.S. 63.91(d) for ‘‘up-front approval.’’ On Environmental Protection Agency, EPA November 29, 2001, EPA promulgated New England Regional Office, 5 Post full approval of VT DEC’s operating VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 Mar 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 permits program with an effective date of November 30, 2001. See 66 FR 59535. Accordingly, VT DEC has satisfied the up-front approval criteria of 40 CFR 63.91(d). Additionally, the regulations governing approval of state requirements that substitute for a section 112 rule require EPA to evaluate the state’s submittal to ensure that it meets the stringency and other requirements of 40 CFR 63.93. A rule will be approved if the state requirements contain or demonstrate: (1) Applicability criteria that are no less stringent than the corresponding Federal rule; (2) levels of control and compliance and enforcement measures that result in emission reductions from each affected source that are no less stringent than would result from the otherwise applicable Federal rule; (3) a compliance schedule that requires each affected source to be in compliance within a time frame consistent with the deadlines established in the otherwise applicable Federal rule; and (4) the additional compliance and enforcement measures as specified in 40 CFR 63.93(b)(4). See 40 CFR 63.93(b). A state may also seek, and EPA may approve, a partial delegation of the EPA’s authorities. See CAA 112(l)(1). To obtain a partial rule substitution, the state’s submittal must meet the otherwise applicable requirements in 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93, and be separable from the portions of the program that the state is not seeking rule substitution for. See 64 FR 1889. Before we can approve alternative requirements in place of a part 63 emissions standard, the state must submit to us detailed information that demonstrates how the alternative requirements compare with the otherwise applicable Federal standard. A detailed discussion of how EPA will determine equivalency for state alternative NESHAP requirements is provided in the preamble to EPA’s proposed Subpart E amendments on January 12, 1999. See 64 FR 1908. After reviewing VT DEC’s partial rule substitution request and equivalency demonstration for the Dry Cleaning NESHAP as it applies to area sources, EPA has determined this request meets all the requirements necessary for approval under CAA section 112(l) and 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93. IV. What if any material differences exist between the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule and the Dry Cleaning NESHAP and what is EPA’s evaluation? The following discussion explains the major differences between the area source requirements in the Vermont Dry E:\FR\FM\05MRR1.SGM 05MRR1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 43 / Monday, March 5, 2018 / Rules and Regulations Cleaning Rule and the area source requirements in the Dry Cleaning NESHAP and how EPA evaluated the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule. A detailed side-by-side comparison of these requirements, as well as an equivalency narrative, are included in the public docket. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES A. What are the differences in applicability? The Dry Cleaning NESHAP applies to each dry cleaning facility that uses perchloroethylene (PCE), except for coin-operated dry cleaning machines. The Dry Cleaning NESHAP exempts existing dry cleaning machines from certain requirements if the total PCE consumption of the dry cleaning facility is less than 140 gallons per year. See 40 CFR 63.320(d). The Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule applies to all dry cleaning facilities that use PCE at area sources of HAP. The Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule has no exemption for coin-operated machines and no exemption based on PCE consumption. Under Vermont’s rule, major sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP) must continue to comply with the Federal Dry Cleaning NESHAP. See VT APCR section 5– 253.11(a). Consequently, EPA finds that the applicability of the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule is no less stringent than that of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP. B. How does the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule address the control requirements? The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires the owner or operator of each dry cleaning system at area sources to equip each dry cleaning machine with a refrigerated condenser, except that certain existing dry cleaning systems installed between December 9, 1991, and September 22, 1993, may alternatively comply by routing the airperchloroethylene gas-vapor stream of each dry cleaning machine through a carbon adsorber. See 40 CFR 63.322(a). The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires new area source dry cleaning systems installed after December 21, 2005, to equip each dry cleaning machine with a refrigerated condenser and a nonvented carbon adsorber and to desorb the carbon adsorber in accordance with the manufacturer’s instruction. See 40 CFR 63.322(o)(2). The Vermont Dry Cleaning rule requires all dry cleaning machines to be equipped with a refrigerated condenser without exception, and requires dry cleaning systems installed after December 21, 2005 to equip each dry cleaning machine with a refrigerated condenser and a non-vented carbon adsorber. The carbon adsorber must be desorbed in accordance with the manufacturer’s VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 Mar 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 instruction. The Vermont Dry Cleaning rule does not allow a primary carbon adsorber as a method of control. See VT APCR section 5–253.11(c)(2) and (4). Both the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule and the Dry Cleaning NESHAP effectively prohibit transfer machines, prohibit dry cleaning systems installed after December 21, 2005 in a building with a residence, and prohibit any dry cleaning system in a building with a residence after December 21, 2020. See VT APCR section 5–253.11(c)(3), (5)–(6) and 40 CFR 63.322(o)(3)–(5). The Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule only allows equivalent control devices approved by the Vermont Air Pollution Control Officer and the EPA pursuant to 40 CFR 63.325. See VT APCR section 5– 253.11(c)(2)(ii) and (3). Consequently, EPA finds that the Vermont Dry Cleaning control requirements are no less stringent than those of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP. C. How do the monitoring requirements differ? The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires dry cleaning systems at area sources to be inspected weekly for perceptible leaks and requires a monthly inspection using a halogenated hydrocarbon detector or PCE gas analyzer. See 40 CFR 63.322(k) and (o)(1)(i). Instead, the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule requires a weekly inspection for perceptible leaks and a weekly inspection using a halogenated hydrocarbon detector or PCE gas analyzer. See VT APCR section 5–253.11(e)(1). The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires weekly temperature monitoring to determine if the temperature is equal to or less than 45 degrees Fahrenheit, or alternatively monitoring of refrigeration system high pressure and low pressure during the drying phase. See 40 CFR 63.323(a)(1). The Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule requires weekly temperature monitoring of the refrigerated condenser and requires the temperature to be maintained at less than or equal to 40 degrees Fahrenheit. The Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule does not allow refrigeration system high and low pressure monitoring as an alternative to temperature monitoring of the refrigerated condenser. See VT APCR section 5–253.11(c)(2)(i)(B) and (e)(2). Therefore, EPA finds that the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule monitoring requirements are no less stringent than those of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP. D. What are the differences in reporting and recordkeeping? The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires the owner or operator of any new dry cleaning facility to submit a notification PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 9217 of compliance status within 30 days after startup. See 40 CFR 63.324(b). The Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule also requires the owner or operator of any new dry cleaning facility to submit a notification of compliance status within 30 days of commencing operations. See VT APCR section 5–253.11(g)(2). Thus, the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule reporting requirements are no less stringent than those of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP. E. Is the State’s submittal separable? A state may also seek, and EPA may approve, a partial delegation of the EPA’s authorities. See CAA 112(l)(1). To obtain a partial rule substitution, the state’s submittal must meet the otherwise applicable requirements in 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93, and be separable from the portions of the program that the state is not seeking rule substitution for. See 64 FR 1889. A separable portion of a state rule or program is a section(s) of a rule or a portion(s) of a program which can be acted upon independently without affecting the overall integrity of the rule or program as a whole. Here, the state’s rule applies to area source dry cleaners, while the NESHAP continues to apply to major source dry cleaners. EPA finds that there exists a logical and compelling distinction between area and major dry cleaning sources. That is, the state rule may independently regulate area source dry cleaners separate from major source dry cleaners, without affecting the overall integrity of the rule or program as a whole. EPA further finds that granting partial delegation would not create an overly cumbersome or unworkable scheme. For these reasons, EPA concludes that the portion of the NESHAP delegated under this partial rule substitution is separable from the remainder of the NESHAP. Therefore, partial delegation is appropriate. F. What is EPA’s action regarding the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule? After reviewing VT DEC’s request for approval of the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule, EPA has determined that the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule meets all of the requirements necessary for partial rule substitution under section 112(l) of the CAA and 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93. Therefore, EPA hereby approves VT DEC’s request to implement and enforce VT APCR section 5–253.11 (as effective under state law on December 15, 2016), in place of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP for area sources in Vermont. As of the effective date of this action, the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule is enforceable by EPA and by citizens under the CAA. Although VT DEC has primary E:\FR\FM\05MRR1.SGM 05MRR1 9218 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 43 / Monday, March 5, 2018 / Rules and Regulations responsibility to implement and enforce the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule, EPA retains the authority to enforce any requirement of the rule upon its approval under CAA 112. See CAA section 112(l)(7). V. Final Action EPA is approving the Vermont Air Pollution Control Regulations, Chapter 5, Air Pollution Control, section 5– 253.11, Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning (as effective under state law on December 15, 2016) as a partial rule substitution for the Dry Cleaning NESHAP for area sources in Vermont. The Federal Dry Cleaning NESHAP continues to apply to major source dry cleaners in Vermont. The applicability of the Federal NESHAP to major source dry cleaners is in no way affected by this action. This rule will be effective June 4, 2018 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant adverse comments by April 4, 2018. VI. Incorporation by Reference In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of Vermont Air Pollution Control Regulations, Chapter 5, Air Pollution Control, section 5–253.11, Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning, effective December 15, 2016. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available electronically through https:// www.regulations.gov. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the CAA, the Administrator has the authority to approve section 112(l) submissions that comply with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. In reviewing section 112(l) submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria and objectives of the CAA and of EPA’s implementing regulations. Accordingly, this action merely approves the State’s request as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action: • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); • does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 Mar 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 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 rule does not have Tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the submitted rule 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. 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). This rule will be effective June 4, 2018. PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 VIII. 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 May 4, 2018. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action 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, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and record keeping requirements. Dated: February 26, 2018. Alexandra Dapolito Dunn, Regional Administrator, EPA New England. 40 CFR part 63 is amended as follows: PART 63—NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES 1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart A—General Provisions 2. Section 63.14 is amended by adding paragraph (l)(13) to read as follows: ■ § 63.14 Incorporations by reference. * * * * * (l) * * * (13) Vermont Air Pollution Control Regulations, Chapter 5, Air Pollution Control, section 5–253.11, Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning, effective as of December 15, 2016. Incorporation by reference approved for § 63.99(a). * * * * * Subpart E—Approval of State Programs and Delegation of Federal Authorities 3. Section 63.99 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(46) to read as follows: ■ § 63.99 Delegated Federal authorities. (a) * * * (46) Vermont. (i) Affected area sources within Vermont must comply with Vermont Regulations applicable to Hazardous Air Pollutants (incorporated E:\FR\FM\05MRR1.SGM 05MRR1 9219 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 43 / Monday, March 5, 2018 / Rules and Regulations by reference as specified in § 63.14) as described in paragraph (a)(46)(i)(A) of this section: (A) The material incorporated into the Vermont Air Pollution Regulations at Chapter 5, Air Pollution Control, section 5–253.11, Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning (effective as of December 15, 2016) pertaining to area source dry cleaning facilities in the State of Vermont jurisdiction, and approved under the procedures in § 63.93 to be implemented and enforced in place of the requirements for area source dry cleaning facilities in the Federal NESHAP for Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities (subpart M of this part), effective as of July 11, 2008. For purposes of this paragraph (a)(46) the term ‘‘area source dry cleaning facilities’’ means any source that qualifies as an area source under § 63.320(h). (1) Authorities not delegated. (i) Vermont is not delegated the Administrator’s authority to implement and enforce Vermont Air Pollution Control Regulations, Chapter 5, Air Pollution Control, section 5–253.11, in lieu of those provisions of subpart M of this part which apply to major sources, as defined in § 63.320(g). (ii) [Reserved] (2) [Reserved] (B) [Reserved] (ii) [Reserved] * * * * * [FR Doc. 2018–04277 Filed 3–2–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P Federal Railroad Administration Washington, DC 20590 (telephone 202– 493–0665). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 49 CFR Part 225 Background [FRA–2008–0136, Notice No. 10] A ‘‘rail equipment accident/incident’’ is a collision, derailment, fire, explosion, act of God, or other event involving the operation of railroad ontrack equipment (standing or moving) that results in damages to railroad ontrack equipment, signals, tracks, track structures, or roadbed, including labor costs and the costs for acquiring new equipment and material, greater than the reporting threshold for the year in which the event occurs. See 49 CFR 225.19(c). A railroad must report each rail equipment accident/incident to FRA using the Rail Equipment Accident/ Incident Report (Form FRA F 6180.54). See 49 CFR 225.19(b), (c), 225.21(a). Paragraphs (c) and (e) of 49 CFR 225.19 further provide that FRA will adjust the dollar figure constituting the reporting threshold, if necessary, every year under the procedures in 49 CFR part 225 Appendix B to reflect any cost increases or decreases. Approximately one year has passed since FRA reviewed the reporting threshold. See 81 FR 94271, Dec. 23, 2016. Consequently, FRA has recalculated the reporting threshold under 49 CFR 225.19(c), using updated costs for labor and equipment. FRA has determined the current reporting threshold of $10,700, which applies to rail equipment accidents/incidents that occur during CY 2017, should remain the same for rail equipment accidents/ incidents that occur during CY 2018. The specific inputs to the equation set forth in Appendix B (Tnew = Tprior * [1 + 0.4(Wnew ¥ Wprior)/Wprior + 0.6(Enew ¥ Eprior)/100]) are: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIN 2130–ZA16 Monetary Threshold for Reporting Rail Equipment Accidents/Incidents for Calendar Year 2018 Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: FRA’s accident/incident reporting regulations require railroads to report to the agency all rail equipment accidents/incidents above the monetary reporting threshold (reporting threshold) for that calendar year (CY). There is no change to the CY 2017 reporting threshold ($10,700) for CY 2018 as the overall increase in wages and equipment costs were not great enough to cause the threshold to change when rounded to the nearest $100. DATES: This final rule is effective March 5, 2018. This final rule is applicable January 1, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kebo Chen, Staff Director, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Office of Safety Analysis, RRS–22, Mail Stop 25, West Building 3rd Floor, Room W33– 314, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone 202– 493–6079); or Senya Waas, Trial Attorney, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, Office of Chief Counsel, RCC–10, West Building 3rd Floor, Room W31–223, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, SUMMARY: Wnew Wprior Enew Eprior $10,700 sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES Tprior $29.77918 $29.99942 203.83333 203.33333 Where: Tnew = New threshold; Tprior = Prior threshold (with reference to the threshold, ‘‘prior’’ refers to the previous threshold rounded to the nearest $100, as reported in the Federal Register); Wnew = New average hourly wage rate, in dollars; Wprior = Prior average hourly wage rate, in dollars; Enew = New equipment average Producer Price Index (PPI) value; Eprior = Prior equipment average PPI value. See 49 CFR part 225 Appendix B. Using the above figures, the calculated new threshold, represented as Tnew, is VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:56 Mar 02, 2018 Jkt 244001 $10,700.64, which is rounded to the nearest $100 for a final reporting threshold of $10,700 for CY 2018.1 1 Wage statistics are available from the Surface Transportation Board (STB), ‘‘Quarterly Wage Form A&B,’’ at https://www.stb.gov/stb/industry/econ_ reports.html (visited December 5, 2017). The average hourly wage rate is determined by dividing the compensation for time worked at straight time rates by the service hours worked at straight time rates (yielding dollars per hour). FRA averages the second-quarter data reported for the Group No. 300 Maintenance of Way and Structures employees, and the Group No. 400 Maintenance of Equipment and Stores employees. The equipment PPI is available at the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), U.S. Department of Labor, ‘‘PPI Databases: Commodity Data,’ at https:// PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 FRA intends to publish a rulemaking (RIN 2130–AC49) to reexamine its method for calculating the reporting threshold in 2018 because more accurate methodologies for calculating the threshold are available. FRA believes updating its methodology will ensure the reporting threshold reflects changes in equipment and labor costs as accurately as possible. www.bls.gov/ppi/ (visited December 5, 2017). Select Group 14 Transportation Equipment, then Item 144 Railroad Equipment, followed by checking Not Seasonally Adjusted. The complete Series ID is WPU144, base date 1982. E:\FR\FM\05MRR1.SGM 05MRR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 43 (Monday, March 5, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9215-9219]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04277]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-R01-OAR-2017-0343; A-1-FRL-9972-97-Region 1]


Approval of Section 112(l) Authority for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants; Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for Dry Cleaning 
Facilities; State of Vermont

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct 
final action to grant the Vermont Department of Environmental 
Conservation (VT DEC) the authority to implement and enforce, with 
respect to area sources only, the Vermont Perchloroethylene Dry 
Cleaning Rule in place of the National Emissions Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities 
(Dry Cleaning NESHAP). Pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA), the VT DEC 
submitted a request for approval to implement and enforce the 
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Rule of the Vermont Air Pollution 
Control Regulations as a partial substitution for the National 
Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Perchloroethylene 
Dry Cleaning Facilities (Dry Cleaning NESHAP), as it applies to area 
sources. EPA has reviewed this request and has determined that the 
Vermont Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Rule satisfies the requirements 
necessary for partial rule substitution. Thus, EPA is hereby granting 
VT DEC's request. This action does not affect the authority of any 
party to implement and enforce the Dry Cleaning NESHAP with respect to 
major source dry cleaners. This approval makes the Vermont 
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Rule federally enforceable in Vermont.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective June 4, 2018, unless 
EPA receives adverse comments by April 4, 2018. If EPA receives adverse 
comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule 
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not 
take effect. The incorporation by reference of certain publications 
listed in the rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register 
as of June 4, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2017-0343 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to 
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow 
the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, 
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either 
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its 
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you 
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia 
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written 
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and 
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person 
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full 
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia 
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please 
visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan Lancey, Air Permits, Toxics, and 
Indoor Programs Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New 
England Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code 
OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912, telephone number 617-918-1656, 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?
    B. Does this direct final rule apply to me?
    C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?
II. Background
III. What requirements must a State rule meet to substitute for a 
Section 112 rule?
IV. What if any material differences exist between the Vermont Dry 
Cleaning Rule and the Dry Cleaning NESHAP and what is EPA's 
evaluation?
    A. What are the differences in applicability?
    B. How does the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule address the control 
requirements?
    C. How do the monitoring requirements differ?
    D. What are the differences in reporting and recordkeeping?
    E. Is the State's submittal separable?
    F. What is EPA's action regarding the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule?
V. Final Action
VI. Incorporation by Reference
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
VIII. Judicial Reviews

I. General Information

A. Why is the EPA using a direct final rule?

    The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because 
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates 
no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this 
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document 
that will serve as the proposal to approve the state rule should 
adverse comments be filed.
    If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a notice 
withdrawing the direct final rule and informing the public that the 
rule will not take effect. All public comments received will then be 
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The 
EPA will not institute a second comment period on the proposed rule. 
All parties interested in commenting on the proposed rule

[[Page 9216]]

should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public 
is advised that this rule will be effective on June 4, 2018 and no 
further action will be taken on the proposed rule. For further 
information about commenting on this rule, see the ADDRESSES section of 
this document.

B. Does this direct final rule apply to me?

    Categories and entities potentially regulated by this direct final 
rule include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               NAICS \1\
                           Category                               code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coin Operated Laundries and Dry Cleaners.....................     812310
Dry Cleaning and Laundry Services (except coin operated).....     812320
Industrial Laundries.........................................     812332
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.

    This Table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this 
direct final rule. To determine whether your facility is affected you 
should examine the applicability criteria in the Vermont Air Pollution 
Control Regulations, Chapter 5, Air Pollution Control, section 5-253.11 
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning. If you have questions regarding the 
applicability of any aspect of this action to a particular entity, 
please contact the person identified in the ``For Further Information 
Contact'' section.

C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?

    Do not submit information containing CBI to EPA through https://www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the 
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on a disk or 
CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM 
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the 
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one 
complete version of the comments that includes information claimed as 
CBI, a copy of the comments that does not contain the information 
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. 
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with 
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. Send or deliver information 
identified as CBI only to the following address: ``EPA-R01-OAR-2017-
0343'', Susan Lancey, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New 
England Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square (mail code OEP05-2), 
Boston, MA 02109-3912.

II. Background

    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), as amended by 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 National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants). Upon approval by EPA, the 
state agency is authorized to implement and enforce its rule in place 
of the Federal rule, and the state rule becomes federally enforceable 
in that state.
    EPA originally promulgated the Dry Cleaning NESHAP on September 22, 
1993. See 58 FR 49354. The Dry Cleaning NESHAP has been amended several 
times and is codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart M, ``National 
Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for Dry Cleaning Facilities.'' 
On May 26, 2017, EPA received VT DEC's request to implement and enforce 
Vermont Air Pollution Control Regulations (VT APCR) section 5-253.11 
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning (Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule) in lieu of 
the Dry Cleaning NESHAP as applied to area sources.

III. What requirements must a State rule meet to substitute for a 
Section 112 rule?

    A state must demonstrate that it has satisfied the general 
delegation/approval criteria contained in 40 CFR 63.91(d). The process 
of providing ``up-front approval'' assures that a state has met the 
delegation criteria in Section 112(l)(5) of the CAA as implemented by 
EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 63.91(d). These criteria require, among 
other things, that the state has demonstrated that its NESHAP program 
contains adequate authorities to assure compliance with each applicable 
Federal requirement, adequate resources for implementation, and an 
expeditious compliance schedule. Under 40 CFR 63.91(d)(3), interim or 
final Title V program approval under 40 CFR part 70 satisfies the 
criteria set forth in 40 CFR 63.91(d) for ``up-front approval.'' On 
November 29, 2001, EPA promulgated full approval of VT DEC's operating 
permits program with an effective date of November 30, 2001. See 66 FR 
59535. Accordingly, VT DEC has satisfied the up-front approval criteria 
of 40 CFR 63.91(d).
    Additionally, the regulations governing approval of state 
requirements that substitute for a section 112 rule require EPA to 
evaluate the state's submittal to ensure that it meets the stringency 
and other requirements of 40 CFR 63.93. A rule will be approved if the 
state requirements contain or demonstrate: (1) Applicability criteria 
that are no less stringent than the corresponding Federal rule; (2) 
levels of control and compliance and enforcement measures that result 
in emission reductions from each affected source that are no less 
stringent than would result from the otherwise applicable Federal rule; 
(3) a compliance schedule that requires each affected source to be in 
compliance within a time frame consistent with the deadlines 
established in the otherwise applicable Federal rule; and (4) the 
additional compliance and enforcement measures as specified in 40 CFR 
63.93(b)(4). See 40 CFR 63.93(b).
    A state may also seek, and EPA may approve, a partial delegation of 
the EPA's authorities. See CAA 112(l)(1). To obtain a partial rule 
substitution, the state's submittal must meet the otherwise applicable 
requirements in 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93, and be separable from the 
portions of the program that the state is not seeking rule substitution 
for. See 64 FR 1889.
    Before we can approve alternative requirements in place of a part 
63 emissions standard, the state must submit to us detailed information 
that demonstrates how the alternative requirements compare with the 
otherwise applicable Federal standard. A detailed discussion of how EPA 
will determine equivalency for state alternative NESHAP requirements is 
provided in the preamble to EPA's proposed Subpart E amendments on 
January 12, 1999. See 64 FR 1908.
    After reviewing VT DEC's partial rule substitution request and 
equivalency demonstration for the Dry Cleaning NESHAP as it applies to 
area sources, EPA has determined this request meets all the 
requirements necessary for approval under CAA section 112(l) and 40 CFR 
63.91 and 63.93.

IV. What if any material differences exist between the Vermont Dry 
Cleaning Rule and the Dry Cleaning NESHAP and what is EPA's evaluation?

    The following discussion explains the major differences between the 
area source requirements in the Vermont Dry

[[Page 9217]]

Cleaning Rule and the area source requirements in the Dry Cleaning 
NESHAP and how EPA evaluated the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule. A detailed 
side-by-side comparison of these requirements, as well as an 
equivalency narrative, are included in the public docket.

A. What are the differences in applicability?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP applies to each dry cleaning facility that 
uses perchloroethylene (PCE), except for coin-operated dry cleaning 
machines. The Dry Cleaning NESHAP exempts existing dry cleaning 
machines from certain requirements if the total PCE consumption of the 
dry cleaning facility is less than 140 gallons per year. See 40 CFR 
63.320(d). The Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule applies to all dry cleaning 
facilities that use PCE at area sources of HAP. The Vermont Dry 
Cleaning Rule has no exemption for coin-operated machines and no 
exemption based on PCE consumption. Under Vermont's rule, major sources 
of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP) must continue to comply with the 
Federal Dry Cleaning NESHAP. See VT APCR section 5-253.11(a). 
Consequently, EPA finds that the applicability of the Vermont Dry 
Cleaning Rule is no less stringent than that of the Dry Cleaning 
NESHAP.

B. How does the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule address the control 
requirements?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires the owner or operator of each dry 
cleaning system at area sources to equip each dry cleaning machine with 
a refrigerated condenser, except that certain existing dry cleaning 
systems installed between December 9, 1991, and September 22, 1993, may 
alternatively comply by routing the air-perchloroethylene gas-vapor 
stream of each dry cleaning machine through a carbon adsorber. See 40 
CFR 63.322(a). The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires new area source dry 
cleaning systems installed after December 21, 2005, to equip each dry 
cleaning machine with a refrigerated condenser and a non-vented carbon 
adsorber and to desorb the carbon adsorber in accordance with the 
manufacturer's instruction. See 40 CFR 63.322(o)(2). The Vermont Dry 
Cleaning rule requires all dry cleaning machines to be equipped with a 
refrigerated condenser without exception, and requires dry cleaning 
systems installed after December 21, 2005 to equip each dry cleaning 
machine with a refrigerated condenser and a non-vented carbon adsorber. 
The carbon adsorber must be desorbed in accordance with the 
manufacturer's instruction. The Vermont Dry Cleaning rule does not 
allow a primary carbon adsorber as a method of control. See VT APCR 
section 5-253.11(c)(2) and (4). Both the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule and 
the Dry Cleaning NESHAP effectively prohibit transfer machines, 
prohibit dry cleaning systems installed after December 21, 2005 in a 
building with a residence, and prohibit any dry cleaning system in a 
building with a residence after December 21, 2020. See VT APCR section 
5-253.11(c)(3), (5)-(6) and 40 CFR 63.322(o)(3)-(5). The Vermont Dry 
Cleaning Rule only allows equivalent control devices approved by the 
Vermont Air Pollution Control Officer and the EPA pursuant to 40 CFR 
63.325. See VT APCR section 5-253.11(c)(2)(ii) and (3). Consequently, 
EPA finds that the Vermont Dry Cleaning control requirements are no 
less stringent than those of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP.

C. How do the monitoring requirements differ?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires dry cleaning systems at area 
sources to be inspected weekly for perceptible leaks and requires a 
monthly inspection using a halogenated hydrocarbon detector or PCE gas 
analyzer. See 40 CFR 63.322(k) and (o)(1)(i). Instead, the Vermont Dry 
Cleaning Rule requires a weekly inspection for perceptible leaks and a 
weekly inspection using a halogenated hydrocarbon detector or PCE gas 
analyzer. See VT APCR section 5-253.11(e)(1). The Dry Cleaning NESHAP 
requires weekly temperature monitoring to determine if the temperature 
is equal to or less than 45 degrees Fahrenheit, or alternatively 
monitoring of refrigeration system high pressure and low pressure 
during the drying phase. See 40 CFR 63.323(a)(1). The Vermont Dry 
Cleaning Rule requires weekly temperature monitoring of the 
refrigerated condenser and requires the temperature to be maintained at 
less than or equal to 40 degrees Fahrenheit. The Vermont Dry Cleaning 
Rule does not allow refrigeration system high and low pressure 
monitoring as an alternative to temperature monitoring of the 
refrigerated condenser. See VT APCR section 5-253.11(c)(2)(i)(B) and 
(e)(2). Therefore, EPA finds that the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule 
monitoring requirements are no less stringent than those of the Dry 
Cleaning NESHAP.

D. What are the differences in reporting and recordkeeping?

    The Dry Cleaning NESHAP requires the owner or operator of any new 
dry cleaning facility to submit a notification of compliance status 
within 30 days after startup. See 40 CFR 63.324(b). The Vermont Dry 
Cleaning Rule also requires the owner or operator of any new dry 
cleaning facility to submit a notification of compliance status within 
30 days of commencing operations. See VT APCR section 5-253.11(g)(2). 
Thus, the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule reporting requirements are no less 
stringent than those of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP.

E. Is the State's submittal separable?

    A state may also seek, and EPA may approve, a partial delegation of 
the EPA's authorities. See CAA 112(l)(1). To obtain a partial rule 
substitution, the state's submittal must meet the otherwise applicable 
requirements in 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93, and be separable from the 
portions of the program that the state is not seeking rule substitution 
for. See 64 FR 1889. A separable portion of a state rule or program is 
a section(s) of a rule or a portion(s) of a program which can be acted 
upon independently without affecting the overall integrity of the rule 
or program as a whole.
    Here, the state's rule applies to area source dry cleaners, while 
the NESHAP continues to apply to major source dry cleaners. EPA finds 
that there exists a logical and compelling distinction between area and 
major dry cleaning sources. That is, the state rule may independently 
regulate area source dry cleaners separate from major source dry 
cleaners, without affecting the overall integrity of the rule or 
program as a whole. EPA further finds that granting partial delegation 
would not create an overly cumbersome or unworkable scheme. For these 
reasons, EPA concludes that the portion of the NESHAP delegated under 
this partial rule substitution is separable from the remainder of the 
NESHAP. Therefore, partial delegation is appropriate.

F. What is EPA's action regarding the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule?

    After reviewing VT DEC's request for approval of the Vermont Dry 
Cleaning Rule, EPA has determined that the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule 
meets all of the requirements necessary for partial rule substitution 
under section 112(l) of the CAA and 40 CFR 63.91 and 63.93. Therefore, 
EPA hereby approves VT DEC's request to implement and enforce VT APCR 
section 5-253.11 (as effective under state law on December 15, 2016), 
in place of the Dry Cleaning NESHAP for area sources in Vermont. As of 
the effective date of this action, the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule is 
enforceable by EPA and by citizens under the CAA. Although VT DEC has 
primary

[[Page 9218]]

responsibility to implement and enforce the Vermont Dry Cleaning Rule, 
EPA retains the authority to enforce any requirement of the rule upon 
its approval under CAA 112. See CAA section 112(l)(7).

V. Final Action

    EPA is approving the Vermont Air Pollution Control Regulations, 
Chapter 5, Air Pollution Control, section 5-253.11, Perchloroethylene 
Dry Cleaning (as effective under state law on December 15, 2016) as a 
partial rule substitution for the Dry Cleaning NESHAP for area sources 
in Vermont. The Federal Dry Cleaning NESHAP continues to apply to major 
source dry cleaners in Vermont. The applicability of the Federal NESHAP 
to major source dry cleaners is in no way affected by this action.
    This rule will be effective June 4, 2018 without further notice 
unless the Agency receives relevant adverse comments by April 4, 2018.

VI. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, the EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes 
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 
51.5, the EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of Vermont 
Air Pollution Control Regulations, Chapter 5, Air Pollution Control, 
section 5-253.11, Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning, effective December 
15, 2016. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents 
generally available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator has the authority to approve 
section 112(l) submissions that comply with the provisions of the Act 
and applicable Federal regulations. In reviewing section 112(l) 
submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they 
meet the criteria and objectives of the CAA and of EPA's implementing 
regulations. Accordingly, this action merely approves the State's 
request as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional 
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this 
action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     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 rule does not have Tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the submitted rule 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.
    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). This rule will be effective June 4, 2018.

VIII. 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 May 4, 2018. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this action 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, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and record keeping 
requirements.

    Dated: February 26, 2018.
Alexandra Dapolito Dunn,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
    40 CFR part 63 is amended as follows:

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS 
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart A--General Provisions

0
2. Section 63.14 is amended by adding paragraph (l)(13) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.14   Incorporations by reference.

* * * * *
    (l) * * *
    (13) Vermont Air Pollution Control Regulations, Chapter 5, Air 
Pollution Control, section 5-253.11, Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning, 
effective as of December 15, 2016. Incorporation by reference approved 
for Sec.  63.99(a).
* * * * *

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

0
3. Section 63.99 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(46) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.99   Delegated Federal authorities.

    (a) * * *
    (46) Vermont. (i) Affected area sources within Vermont must comply 
with Vermont Regulations applicable to Hazardous Air Pollutants 
(incorporated

[[Page 9219]]

by reference as specified in Sec.  63.14) as described in paragraph 
(a)(46)(i)(A) of this section:
    (A) The material incorporated into the Vermont Air Pollution 
Regulations at Chapter 5, Air Pollution Control, section 5-253.11, 
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning (effective as of December 15, 2016) 
pertaining to area source dry cleaning facilities in the State of 
Vermont jurisdiction, and approved under the procedures in Sec.  63.93 
to be implemented and enforced in place of the requirements for area 
source dry cleaning facilities in the Federal NESHAP for 
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities (subpart M of this part), 
effective as of July 11, 2008. For purposes of this paragraph (a)(46) 
the term ``area source dry cleaning facilities'' means any source that 
qualifies as an area source under Sec.  63.320(h).
    (1) Authorities not delegated. (i) Vermont is not delegated the 
Administrator's authority to implement and enforce Vermont Air 
Pollution Control Regulations, Chapter 5, Air Pollution Control, 
section 5-253.11, in lieu of those provisions of subpart M of this part 
which apply to major sources, as defined in Sec.  63.320(g).
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (2) [Reserved]
    (B) [Reserved]
    (ii) [Reserved]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2018-04277 Filed 3-2-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.