Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 139 / Thursday, July 19, 2012 / Notices 42493 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[Petition IV–2010–4; FRL–9701–1] 

Clean Air Act Operating Permit 

Program; Petition for Objection to 

State Operating Permit for Cash Creek 

Generation, LLC—Cash Creek 

Generation Station; Henderson 

County, KY 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of final order on petition 

to object to a state operating permit. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Clean Air Act 

(CAA), the EPA Administrator signed an 

Order, dated June 22, 2012, partially 

granting and partially denying a petition 

to object to a CAA merged prevention of 

significant deterioration and title V 

operating permit issued by the Kentucky 

Division for Air Quality (KDAQ) to Cash 

Creek Generation, LLC for its Cash 

Creek Generation Station (Cash Creek) 

located near Owensboro in Henderson 

County, Kentucky. This Order 

constitutes a final action on the petition 

submitted by Environmental Policy & 

Law Center on behalf of Sierra Club, 

Ursuline Sisters of Saint Joseph, and 

Valley Watch (Petitioners) and received 

by EPA on June 18, 2010. A petition for 

judicial review of those parts of the 

Order that deny issues in the petition 

may be filed in the United States Court 

of Appeals for the appropriate circuit 

within 60 days from the date this notice 

is published in the Federal Register. 

DATES: September 17, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Order, the 

petition, and all pertinent information 

relating thereto are on file at the 

following location: EPA Region 4; Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division; 61 Forsyth Street, SW; Atlanta, 

Georgia 30303–8960. The Order is also 

available electronically at the following 

address: http://www.epa.gov/region07/ 

air/title5/petitiondb/petitions/ 

cashcreek_response2010.pdf. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Art 

Hofmeister, Air Permits Section, EPA 

Region 4, at (404) 562–9115 or 

hofmeister.art@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CAA 

affords EPA a 45-day period to review 

and, as appropriate, the authority to 

object to operating permits proposed by 

state permitting authorities under title V 

of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7661–7661f. 

Section 505(b)(2) of the CAA and 40 

CFR 70.8(d) authorize any person to 

petition the EPA Administrator to object 

to a title V operating permit within 60 

days after the expiration of EPA’s 45- 

day review period if EPA has not 

objected on its own initiative. Petitions 

must be based only on objections to the 

permit that were raised with reasonable 

specificity during the public comment 

period provided by the state, unless the 

petitioner demonstrates that it was 

impracticable to raise these issues 

during the comment period or the 

grounds for the issues arose after this 

period. 

Petitioners submitted a petition 

regarding Cash Creek (received by EPA 

on June 18, 2010), requesting that EPA 

object to the CAA title V operating 

permit (#V–09–006). Petitioners alleged 

that the permit was not consistent with 

the CAA because: (1) KDAQ failed to 

provide an opportunity for meaningful 

public participation; (2) KDAQ’s 

calculation of the proposed facility’s 

potential to emit volatile organic 

compounds (VOC), hydrogen sulfide 

and hazardous air pollutants (HAP) 

failed to account for full emissions from 

active flaring; (3) the permit’s sourcewide VOC emission limit was not 

enforceable as a practical matter; (4) the 

best available control technology 

(BACT) limits applicable to the flare 

during startup and steady-state 

operations were not supported by a 

proper BACT analysis; (5) the BACT 

limits applicable to the flare did not 

cover shutdown and malfunction 

periods; (6) the applicant incorrectly 

estimated fugitive emissions from 

equipment leaks; (7) KDAQ omitted 

numerous control options and relied on 

a faulty cost-effectiveness analysis in 

selecting BACT for equipment leaks; (8) 

KDAQ improperly determined that the 

source was minor for HAPs; (9) Cash 

Creek’s calculation of particulate matter 

emissions from material handling 

assumed an unreasonably high control 

efficiency for wet suppression control 

methods and used an unreasonably low 

silt loading factor; (10) permit terms and 

conditions governing material handling 

were unenforceably vague and did not 

equate to the assumed control 

efficiencies; and (11) Cash Creek failed 

to perform an adequate ozone impacts 

analysis. 

On June 22, 2012, the Administrator 

issued an Order partially granting and 

partially denying the petition. The 

Order explains EPA’s rationale for 

partially granting and partially denying 

the petition. 

Dated: July 6, 2012. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Deputy Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2012–17635 Filed 7–18–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9699–9] 

Proposed Consent Decree Relating to 

the New Source Performance 

Standards for Municipal Solid Waste 

Landfills 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed consent 

decree; request for public comment. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with of the 

Clean Air Act, as amended (‘‘Act’’), 

notice is hereby given of a proposed 

consent decree to settle an action in the 

United States District Court for the 

Southern District of New York 

(Environmental Defense Fund v. 

Jackson, Case No. 11 Civ. 04492 (KBF) 

ECF Case) alleging that EPA failed to 

perform its obligations under the Act as 

they relate to the new source 

performance standards (‘‘NSPS’’) for 

municipal solid waste landfills (‘‘MSW 

Landfills’’). The Act requires EPA to 

review, and if appropriate, revise NSPS 

not later than 8 years after their 

promulgation unless EPA determines 

that such review is not appropriate in 

light of readily available information on 

the efficacy of the standard. Under the 

terms of the proposed consent decree, 

EPA agrees that: (1) By May 1, 2013, 

EPA shall: (i) Perform an appropriate 

review and sign for publication one or 

a combination of the following: (A) a 

proposed rule containing revisions to 

the MSW Landfills NSPS; or (B) a 

proposed determination not to revise 

the MSW Landfills NSPS; or (ii) sign for 

publication a determination that review 

is not appropriate; and, (2) if EPA signs 

a proposed rule or a proposed 

determination, then no later than May 1, 

2014, sign one or a combination of the 

following: (i) A final rule containing 

revisions to the MSW Landfills NSPS, 

based on appropriate review; or, (ii) a 

final determination not to revise the 

MSW Landfills NSPS, based on an 

appropriate review. 

DATES: Written comments on the 

proposed consent decree must be 

received by August 20, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID number EPA– 

HQ–OGC–2012–0490, online at 

www.regulations.gov (EPA’s preferred 

method); by email to 

oei.docket@epa.gov; by mail to EPA 

Docket Center, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; or by 

hand delivery or courier to EPA Docket 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with NOTICES