rox ni.ve rr'Spe rCc , LL C 2? 5 Psr k 5:ree : P C Bo x 5c'. 5 Hcusatoni c M

A 0 1 236-01:6 5 • L'\2 L;L, 3345 P 27A 16c' 

## Fo x RIVER PAPE

R C °

Februar y 19 , 200 4

Ms . Kare n L . Rega s DEP/BWP/Busines s Complianc e Divisio n On e Winter Street, 8t h Floor Boston , M A 0210 8 MATTER : Comment

s to Propose

d Regulation s 31 0 CM R 7.0 0 - Th e Contro l o f

Ai r Pollutio n Dea r Ms . Regas : Fo x Rive r Pape r Compan y - Risin g Divisio n i s please d t o submi t th e followin g comment

s to th e Departmen

t o f Environmenta

l Protection' s (DEP's ) Propose d Amendments to 31 0 CM R 7.0 0 - th e Contro l o f

Ai r Pollution . Fo

x Rive r Pape r Compan y i s aspecialt

y pape r mil l locate d i n Housatonic , Massachusetts . Fox River ha s bee n active wit h th

e Associated Industrie s o f Massachusett

s (AIM ) i n th

e developmen

t o f these regulations , especiall y th e propose d opacit y regulatio n a

t 31 0 CM R 7.0

6 (l)(c) . Fox Rive r wa s par t o f th e original AI M workgrou p tha t convene d ove r 7 year s ag o t o addres s alega

l technicalit

y involvin g 31 0 CM R 7.06 . Specifically , Fo x Rive r wa s on e o f severa l sources tha

t coul d not certif y unde r 31 0 CM R 7.0

0 Appendi x C tha

t i t wa s i n complianc e wit h th

e then existin g opacit

y standar d du e to routine event

s - startup/shutdown an

d sootblowing . Afte r

much discussion , th

e workgrou

p an d DE P cam e to a n agreemen

t to chang

e th e regulatio n t

o addres s thi s technicality . Th e regulatio n wen

t throug h th

e appropriat

e publi c hearin

g proces s an

d wa s adopted . Tw o year

s late r th e Environmenta

l Protectio n Agenc y (EPA ) decided tha t th e ne w regulatio n 31 0 CM R 7.06(c ) di d not mee t th e EP A standar d o f enforceabilit

y an d ha d declare d i t voi d an d force d arewrite an

d re-issuance o f

th e regulatio n and , coincidentally , thre w th e Titl e V permit s fo r

thes e source s into turmoil . Th e curren t propose d regulation s addres s EP

A concerns wit h 31 0 CM R 7.06 (l)(c) . AIM' s workgrou

p wa s reconvene

d t o revie w th

e Department' s propose d revise d regulation . Fo x River ha s continue d t

o b e par t o f tha t workgrou

p an d support s th e positio n tha

t AI M ha s take n relativ e t

o th e entir e 31 0 CM R 7.0

0 propose d modifications . Whil e recognizin g th

e nee d t o allo w DE

P enforcemen

t fo r thos e source s tha

t operat e erratically , Fo

x Rive r offer s th e followin g specifi c comment s to th e propose d changes . Th e proposed regulatio n contain s aprovisio n fo r a n approved "Pla

n o f Goo d Operating Practice" . Originally , th

e "Pla n o f Good Operating Practice " wa s no t arequiremen

t fo r th e alternativ e opacit

y limits . I n fact , DE

P emphatically state

d the y di d not wan t t o b e i n th e busines s o f

approvin g complicate d goo d operating plan s - th

e facilit y woul d nee

d t o prepar e on e an d hav e i t on-sit e fo r inspection . However , ove r time , thi s "requirement " ha s morphe d into par

t o f th e regulations , suc

h tha t th e pla n ha s becom e prescriptiv e an

d detailed , wit h DE

P now being i n apositio n to approv e or disapprove ver

y detailed operating plans . Th

e problem s wit h DE

P reviewin g an

d approvin g suc

h plan s include th

e following :

Representin g Fo

x Rive ran d Gilber t Brand sMs . Kare n L . Rega s DEP/BWP/Busines s Complianc e Divisio n Februar y 19 , 200 4 Pag e 2

1 . Th

e Operating Plans ar

e th e facilitie s responsibilit

y an d no t DEP's . DEP' s approva

l o r revie w o f suc h Plan s wil l likel y hav

e n o effec t o n whethe r o r no t asourc e meet s th e opacit y limits . 2 . Th

e Plan s contai n procedure s tha t chang e a s facilitie s chang

e an d i t i s overly burdensom

e fo r facilitie s to submi

t suc h changes t

o DE P fo r approval . 3 . DE

P i s no t equippe d t o revie w an

d approv e Operating Plans i n atimel y o r consisten t fashion . 4 . I t i s no t practica l t o consistentl

y enforc e suc

h Operating Plans an

d t o certif y compliance . Ho w wil l afacilit y certif

y tha t i t i s i n complianc e wit h th

e Operating Plan , i f

fo r example , i t deviated fro mth

e Plan , but

di dno t creat e avisibl e emission ? 5 . I t i s enoug h tha t afacilit y i s committe d to complyin g wit h the numeri c limit s o f thi s regulation . Those limits , onc e imbedded i n th

e facility' s operating permit , wil l full y satisf y EP A wit h aproces s tha

t i s analogou s t

o virtuall y al l othe

r ai r limit s an d standards . Followin g ademonstration o f nee d fo r th e exemption , th

e facilit y shoul d b

e allowe d whateve r mean s the y nee d to compl y wit h th

e regulation , withou t

abureaucratic approva

l proces s tha

t pointlessl y expend

s bot h publi c an

d privat e secto r resources . 6 . Fo

x Rive r point s t o th e US EP A requirements fo r

QA/Q C Plans unde

r NSPS . Thes

e plan s ar e prepared b y th

e facilit y fo r

th e facilit y us

e an d must incorporat

e an y standard

s i n th e applicabl e regulations . The y must mee t th e standar d o f Goo d Engineering Practice , bu

t th e specifi c provision s ar

e no t "approved " b y th

e Agenc y o

r th e Department . A fa r bette r approac h woul d b

e to us e th e standar d contained i n th

e proposed regulatio n i n conjunctio n wit h aflexibl e standar

d tha t woul d allo w DE

P discretio n to wor

k wit h eac

h compan

y t o establish appropriat e an d cos t effectiv e guideline s an

d limit s fo r

thos e who canno

t absolutel y mee t th e propose d 31 0 CM R7.06(c ) regulatio n durin g al l operating scenarios . A facilit y could , workin g wit h th e DE P an d outsid e experts , com

e t o a n agreemen

t on individua l opacit

y limits , whic h woul d b e writte n into th

e source' s operating permit . Sincerely , FO X RIVE R PAPE

R CO. , LLC . 0 Stephe n A . Graha

m Mil l Manage

r SAG:m h Federa l Exp . 843 5 046 8 566 1