# ^Polaroi d

Joh n P . LeFebvre . P E Corporat e Environmenta l Manage r Februar y 17 , 200 4 Polaroi d Corporatio n 126 5 Mai n Street , W2-M Z Waltham . M A 02451--171 4

Kare n L . Rega s DEP/BWP/Busines s Complianc e Divisio n On e Winter Street, 8 t hFloor Boston , M A 0210 8 Attention : 31

0 CM R7.0

0 Comment

s Dea r Karen : Th e Polaroi d Corporation , havin g alread y submitte d writte n an

d ora l comment

s a t th e Februar y 12 , 2004 , hearing , i s please d t o offe r these additiona

l comment

s wit h regar

d t o propose d actio n b y th

e Massachusett

s Departmen

t o f Environmenta

l Protectio n ("DEP " o

r "th e Department" ) t

o revis e 31 0 CM R 7.00 . 31 0 CM R7.02(2)(a

) an d 7.02(2)(f

) Polaroi d note s som

e tension betwee

n these tw o provisions . Paragrap h "(a) " specificall y preclude s th

e provision s o f

paragrap h "(f) " a s i t states tha t al l o f "(g), " includin g "(g)7' \ar e not availabl e i f

a n existin g approva

l woul d b

e contravened . W

e sugges t tha t som e languag e be adde d t o clarif y th e relationshi

p betwee n these provision s suc

h as : "31 0 CM R 7.02(2)(f ) Exemption s fo r

Action s tha

t Contraven

e a n Issue d Pla n Approval . Notwithstandin g 31 0 CM R 7.02(2)(a) , an

d excep t a s provide d i n 31 0 CM R7.02(4)(a) 3 an d 4 ... " Presumptiv

e LPA' s Polaroi d discussion wit h DE P personne

l followin g th

e publi c hearin g mad

e i t clea r tha t th e sourc e o f ou r concer n aroun d presumptive LPA' s neede d furthe r explanation . Propose d 31 0 CM R 7.02(4)(b ) woul d eliminat e th e sentenc e "The calculatio n ca

n conside r propose d limitation s o

r restriction s o

n operating rat

e o r shor t an d lon g ter memissions , provide d tha t thes e condition s becom

e federall y enforceable upo n pla n approval. " Thi s i s acritica l concep t i n th e us e o f LPA' s an

d provide s fo r

their utilit y wit h wha

t migh t otherwis e b

e a n installatio n subjec

t t o federa l non-attainmen

t NSR . A reade

r i s full y awar

e (currently ) tha

t thes e restriction s ar

e availabl e through th

e LP A process . Wit h th

e proposed language , th

e definitio n o f potentia l emission s governs . Tha t definitio n provide s fo r

self-impose d limitation s t o th e exten t tha t the y ar e contained i n th

e "source' s pla

n approval. " Wha

t i s no t clea r t o Polaroid , i s whethe

r apresumptive approva

l woul d carr

y th e sam e federa l enforceability , an

d therefor e safeguards , a

s a n 'actively ' issue

d Departmen

t approval . Perhap s thi s concer n coul d b

e addresse

d wit hComment

s o n Propose d Change s to 31 0 CM R7 , et . Seq . Februar y 17 , 200 4 Pag e

som e additiona

l language a

t th e en d o f propose d 31 0 CM R 7.02(3)(b)2 . "Thi s 'presumptiv e approval ' shall b

e apla n approva

l a s tha t ter mi s use d i n 31 0 CM R7.02(3)(a) , an d th e applican

t ma y ac t i n accordanc

e wit h al l the condition s specifie d i n th e application . Th

e applican

t shal l als o b e restricte d to al l limitation s state d i n th e applicatio n designe

d t o restric t operating parameter

s and/o r emission s fo r

the purpos e o f

federa l enforceability. " 31 0 CM R7.02(3)(g ) Polaroi d bot

h support s an d opposes change

s t o thi s provision . Th

e delete d languag

e i s unnecessary , bu

t s o i s th e proposed additiona

l language . Moreover , th e propose d languag e use s th e ter m"air contaminant, " whic h i s no t par t o f th e MEPA protoco l an

d ma y lea d to confusion . W e sugges t tha t th e propose d language no t

b e added . 310 CM R7.02(4)(c

) Polaroi d wishe s to reiterat e it s oppositio n to th

e eliminatio n o f

thi s provision . Appendi x C source s ar e alread y subjec t t o requirement s tha

t wil l ensur

e th e Departmen

t ha s a n opportunit

y t o revie w modification s to th e facilit y befor

e the y occur . Thi s propose

d eliminatio n appear

s to b e i n direc t conflic t wit h th e concep t bein g pursue

d b y th e Departmen

t wit h th e proposa

l o f presumptive LPA's . 310 CM R7.02(8Ki)5 . Whil e thi s provisio n i s proposed fo r elimination , reference s to i t ar e stil l presen

t i n 7.02(8)(i)l.b . an

d 7.03(10) , an

d atitl e ha

s bee n propose d fo r it . 310 CM R7.03(8

) Polaroi d support

s thi s proposed chang

e a s i t focuse s th

e effec t o f th e provisio n on actua

l emissions . 31 0 CM R7.03(23

) Polaroi d opposes th

e additio n o f

declarator

y languag e to thi s section on th

e belie f tha t i t i s bot h ba d practic e and , i n thi s case , wrong . Whil e i t i s helpfu l t

o reader s o f th e regulation s to point ou t instance s wher

e othe r regulations , particularl y federall y regulations , ma y b e relevant , i t i s not appropriat

e fo r th e Departmen

t t o mak e pronouncement

s regarding th

e applicabilit

y o f regulation s promulgate d b y thir d parties . I n thi s particula r case, th e Department' s statemen

t i s demonstrabl

y fals e a s th e EP A ha s provide d correspondenc e to th e contrar y unde r certai n circumstances . I f

th e Departmen

t i s incline d to ad

d languag e to th e temporar

y boiler provisions , the y should chang

e ".. . i s subjec t

t o Ne w Sourc

e ... " to ".. . ma

y b e subject to Ne w Sourc

e ... " 310 CM R7.06(l)(c ) Polaroi d encourages th

e Departmen

t to rethin k it s propose

d actio n fo r

opacity . I t

i s far to o bureaucrati

c aproces s fo r

suc h a n insignifican t

issue , wit h absolutel

y n o benefi t t o th e environment .Comment s on Propose

d Changes t o 31 0 CM R7 , et . Seq . Februar y 17,2004 Pag e 3

31 0 CM R7.12(2)(a

) Polaroi d wa

s trul y shocke

d t o se e th e propose d dat e change . Th

e Departmen

t should b e al l to o awar e o f th e difficultie s o f

meetin g aMarc h 1 deadlin

e fo r thi s reporting . Th

e propose d date , o f course , wa

s roughl y th

e annua l deadlin e prio r t o Augus t 2001 . A t

tha t time , th e Departmen

t itsel f extende d th e reportin g dat

e t o areasonabl

e tim e frame . Prior

to tha t chang e i t wa s standar d operating procedur

e to immediately issu

e areques t fo r extensio n to th e Departmen

t upon receipt o f th e reportin g package . Rollin g u p th e volum e o f dat arequired fo r

amanufacturin g operation t o mak e aSEIS S repor

t i s n o small task . Simultaneously , ther e ar e othe r reportin g obligation s tha t facilitie s hav

e fo r th e Marc h 1 date , an

d th e sit e personne

l must coordinat

e severa l certification s wit h th

e responsibl

e official . Pleas e leav e thi s provisio n unchanged

. 31 0 CM R7.18(8)(d

) Polaroi d applauds thi s lon g overdu e measure . I t

i s thi s typ e o f

rational perspectiv

e tha t serves to fre e u

p bot h Departmen

t an d facilit y resources withou t har mto th e environment . 31 0 CM R7.18(27

) A s th e Mai n Street, Waltha

mfacilit y currently hold s aRAC T approva l issue d on th e basi s o f thi s provision , Polaroi d wonder s a s to th e effec t o f eliminatin g th

e requirements . Ma

y we , withou t prejudice , submi

t aRAC T Pla

n fo r approva l base d o n th e generic RAC T requirements ? 31 0 CM R7, Appendi

x C(8)(c) 4 Th e Departmen

t ha s narrowed th

e scop e o f thi s provisio n fro mal l action s unde r 7.0 2 t o jus t 7.0 2 (4 ) an d (5) . However , thes

e type s o f

approval s ar

e no t require d fo r

modification s mad

e unde r aRAC T approval . Polaroi d believe s tha t th e sam e consideratio n should b e mad e fo r RAC T approval s issue

d b y th e Departmen

t an d request s tha t thi s section b

e additionally modifie d t

o s o reflect . Polaroi d thanks th

e Departmen

t fo r th e opportunit

y t o offe r these comments , an

d applaud s it s effort s t o simplif y an d improv e th

e 31 0 CM R7 regulations . Sincerely ;