Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Final rule.
EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The revision was submitted by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) to establish and require reasonably available control technology (RACT) for Koppers Industry, Inc. located in Lycoming County. EPA is approving this revision to establish RACT requirements in the SIP in accordance with the Clean Air Act (CAA).
This rule is effective on August 14, 2006.
EPA has established a docket for this action under Regional Material in EDocket (RME) ID Number R03–OAR–2005–PA–0007. All documents in the docket are listed in the
LaKeshia N. Robertson, (215) 814–2113, or by e-mail at
On August 30, 2004, the PADEP submitted formal SIP revisions to establish RACT for 15 sources located in Pennsylvania. On March 31, 2005 (70 FR 16423), EPA published a direct final rule (DFR) approving revisions to PADEP issued operating permits (OP) and plan approvals (PA) for these 15 sources. A description of these revisions and EPA's rationale for approving them were provided in the March 31, 2005 rulemaking and will not be restated herein. In accordance with direct final rulemaking procedures, on March 31, 2005 (70 FR 16471), EPA also published a companion notice of proposed rulemaking for these SIP revisions, inviting interested parties to comment on the DFR. On April 29, 2005, EPA received an adverse comment on its approval of the nitrogen oxides (NO
EPA received no adverse comments on its approval of RACT determination for the remaining 14 sources, and, therefore, EPA's March 31, 2005 DFR approving PADEP's RACT determination for the other 14 sources became effective on May 31, 2005.
On May 18, 2006, Koppers, Inc. sent an e-mail requesting the withdrawal of the adverse comment submitted on April 29, 2005. EPA is now approving PADEP's RACT determination for Koppers Inc., located in Lycoming County.
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 11, 2006. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action, pertaining to RACT for Koppers Industry, Lycoming County may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirement. (See section 307 (b)(2).)
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
42 U.S.C. 7401
(d) * * *
(1) * * *