[Federal Register: December 18, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 243)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 77430-77432]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr18de02-14]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[KY 139-200307(a); FRL-7423-3]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans for Kentucky:
Source-Specific Revision for Lawson Mardon Packaging
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a source-specific revision to the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. This
revision allows Lawson Mardon Packaging, USA, Corporation to have an
alternative compliance averaging period of 30 days instead of the 24-
hour averaging period specified by Kentucky air quality regulations
59:210 and 59:212.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective February 18, 2003 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by January 17,
2003. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform
the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to: Michele Notarianni, Air
Planning Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. (404/562-9031 (phone)
or notarianni.michele@epa.gov (e-mail).)
Copies of the Commonwealth's submittal are available at the
following addresses for inspection during normal business hours:
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Air Planning Branch, 61
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. (Michele Notarianni,
404/562-9031, notarianni.michele@epa.gov)
Commonwealth of Kentucky, Division for Air Quality, 803 Schenkel
Lane, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601-1403. (502/573-3382)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michele Notarianni at address listed
above or 404/562-9031 (phone) or notarianni.michele@epa.gov (e-mail).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Today's Action
II. EPA's Evaluation
III. Final Action
I. Today's Action
The EPA is approving a source-specific revision into the Kentucky
SIP for the Lawson Mardon Packaging, USA, Corporation (LMP) located in
Shelby County, Kentucky. The revision was submitted to EPA by Kentucky
on March 4, 2002. This revision allows LMP to use a 30-day averaging
period instead of the required 24-hour averaging period as specified in
Kentucky air quality regulations 59:210, ``New fabric, vinyl and paper
surface coating operations,'' and 59:212, ``New graphic arts facilities
using rotogravure and flexography.'' The effect of today's approval
action is that once LMP's synthetic minor operating permit is
finalized, LMP shall determine compliance with volatile organic
compound (VOC) emission rates allowed by its permit every 30 days
instead of every 24 hours.
II. EPA's Evaluation
The LMP plant in Shelbyville, Kentucky manufactures flexible
packaging for the food and pharmaceutical industries. LMP currently
operates a total of 15 printing and/or laminating machines. The plant's
proposed, facility-wide synthetic minor operating permit covers all 15
machines,
[[Page 77431]]
and is conditioned on EPA's approval of the permit as a source-specific
SIP revision.
The Agency's policy regarding emissions time averaging for existing
sources of VOCs is established and clarified in a January 20, 1984, EPA
Memorandum from John O'Connor, Acting Director of the Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, to Air Directors in Regions I-X. The
policy requires that SIP revisions relating to VOC control must
maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone.
To allow VOC compliance averaging periods greater than 24 hours, the
policy establishes four conditions which are summarized below along
with EPA's analysis of the LMP submittal.
Condition 1: Real reductions in actual emissions must be achieved,
consistent with Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) levels
in SIPs or Agency control technique guidelines. EPA Analysis:
Incinerators are used as add-on controls on those production lines
required to have them. These controls meet or exceed RACT control
levels.
Condition 2: Averaging periods must be as short as practicable, and
in no case longer than 30 days. EPA Analysis: LMP has requested a 30-
day compliance averaging period, which meets this condition. LMP
supported its request with a statistical analysis demonstrating that
daily, maximum potential VOC emissions are significantly less than
daily, maximum allowable VOC emissions. The level of confidence for the
statistical analysis is 99.73 percent.
Condition 3: A demonstration must be made that the use of averaging
periods greater than 24 hours will not jeopardize the ozone NAAQS or
the Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) plan for the area. EPA Analysis:
LMP submitted a statistical analysis to compare 24-hour and 30-day
compliance averaging results against maximum allowable permit VOC
emission rates. The analysis accounts for potential daily emission
fluctuations and shows that actual VOC emissions for eight of LMP's
older machines are consistently and far below the allowable VOC
emission rates. The analysis does not include data from seven, newer
machines, which were installed after submittal of LMP's permit
application, because data were not available at that time. However,
because the seven, newer machines have better overall control
efficiencies and less variation than the older machines, the
statistical analysis for the existing machines may also be applied to
the new machines as representative. A further consideration is that LMP
uses continuous emission monitoring systems to ensure its control
equipment is operating properly and within limits.
Condition 4: Sources in areas with measured violations cannot be
considered for longer term averaging until the SIP has been revised to
demonstrate attainment of the ozone NAAQS and maintenance of RFP. EPA
Analysis: Shelby County, Kentucky is currently classified as
unclassified/attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and is currently
attaining the standard. The closest, downwind monitor has not shown an
exceedance of the 1-hour NAAQS within the last five years. Conditions
addressing RFP plans are not applicable to 1-hour ozone attainment
areas.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving this source-specific revision to the Kentucky SIP
allowing LMP to use a 30-day compliance averaging period because it is
consistent with the requirements of the Clean Air Act and EPA policy.
Use of an alternative averaging period is not expected to jeopardize
maintenance of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in Shelby County for reasons
discussed in section II.
The EPA is publishing this rule 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 SIP revision should
adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective February 18,
2003 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments
by January 17, 2003.
If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the 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. Parties interested in commenting
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public
is advised that this rule will be effective on February 18, 2003 and no
further action will be taken on the proposed rule.
V. Administrative Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically
significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the
[[Page 77432]]
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection
burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. Section 804 exempts from section 801 the following types
of rules: (1) Rules of particular applicability; (2) rules relating to
agency management or personnel; and (3) rules of agency organization,
procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect the rights or
obligations of non-agency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA is not required
to submit a rule report regarding this action under section 801 because
this is a rule of particular applicability.
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 February 18, 2003. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: December 5, 2002.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
Part 52 of chapter I, title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, is
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42.U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart S--Kentucky
2. Section 52.920(d) is amended by adding a new entry at the end of
the table to read as follows:
Sec. 52.920 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
EPA--Approved Kentucky Source-Specific Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State effective Federal Register
Name of source Permit number date EPA approval date Notice
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Lawson Mardon USA Packaging N/A............... February 18, 2003. December 18, 2002. [Insert FR page
Corporation. citation]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 02-31666 Filed 12-17-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P