```

[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 75 (Friday, April 18, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19051-19054]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-9952]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[PA069-4053, PA096-4053; FRL-5808-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania; Approval of Source-Specific RACT

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is approving State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 
submitted by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. These revisions 
establish and require reasonably available control technology (RACT) on 
three major sources. The intended effect of this action is to approve 
source-specific determinations made by the Commonwealth which establish 
and impose RACT requirements in accordance with the Clean Air Act 
(CAA). This action is being taken under section 110 of the CAA.

DATES: This final rule is effective June 17, 1997 unless by May 19, 
1997, adverse or critical comments are received. If the effective date 
is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to David L. Arnold, Chief, Ozone/CO & 
Mobile Sources Section, Mailcode 3AT21, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 
19107. Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available 
for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air, 
Radiation, and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107; 
the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460; and 
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air 
Quality, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 
17105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey M. Boylan, (215) 566-2094, at 
the EPA Region III office or via e-mail at 
[email protected]. While information may be requested via 
e-mail, comments must be submitted in writing to the above Region III 
address.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On August 1, 1995, June 10, 1996, and September 13, 1996, the 
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania submitted formal revisions to its State 
Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP revisions that are the subject of 
this rulemaking consist of RACT determinations for three facilities of 
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) 
located in Berks County Pennsylvania. These facilities are: (1) AT&T 
Corporation, (2) Garden State Tanning, Inc., and (3) The Glidden 
Company. In addition, on March 20, 1997, the Commonwealth of 
Pennsylvania submitted a letter amending the August 1, 1995 submittal 
pertaining to the AT&T Corporation.
    Pursuant to section 182(b)(2) and 182(f) of the CAA, Pennsylvania 
is required to implement RACT for all major VOC and NOX sources by 
no later than May 31, 1995. The major source size is determined by its 
location, the classification of that area, and whether it is located in 
the ozone transport region (OTR), which is established by the CAA. The 
Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton ozone 
nonattainment area consists of Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, 
and Philadelphia Counties and is classified as severe. The remaining 
counties in Pennsylvania are classified as either moderate or marginal 
nonattainment areas or are designated attainment for ozone. However, 
under section 184 of the CAA, at a minimum, moderate ozone 
nonattainment area requirements (including RACT as specified in section 
182(b)(2) and 182(f)) apply throughout the OTR. Pennsylvania is 
included within the OTR. Therefore, RACT is applicable statewide in 
Pennsylvania. The August 1, 1995 (amended March 20, 1997), June 10, 
1996, and September 13, 1996 Pennsylvania submittals that are the 
subject of this notice, consist of plan approvals and operating permits 
which were issued to satisfy the RACT requirements for three facilities 
in Berks County Pennsylvania.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

    The details of the RACT requirements for the source-specific plan 
approvals and operating permits can be found in the docket and 
accompanying Technical

[[Page 19052]]

Support Document (TSD), prepared by EPA on this rulemaking. Briefly, 
EPA is approving three RACT determinations as revisions to the 
Pennsylvania SIP. Several of the plan approvals and operating permits 
contain conditions irrelevant to the determination of VOC or NOX 
RACT. Consequently, these provisions are not being included in this 
approval for VOC or NOX RACT nor are they being made part of the 
SIP.

RACT Determination for the AT&T Corporation

    EPA is approving the plan approval (PA #06-1003) for AT&T 
Corporation located in Berks County. AT&T Corporation is an electronic 
components manufacturer and is considered to be a major source of VOC 
emissions. Although once considered to be a major source of NOX 
emissions, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA 
DEP) submitted a letter on March 20, 1997, withdrawing the NOX 
RACT determination portion of PA #06-1003 from its SIP revision request 
of August 1, 1995. AT&T Corporation has been issued a permit with 
conditions that limit facility wide NOX emissions to 99 TPY. Since 
AT&T Corporation has never had actual NOX emissions in excess of 
100 TPY (from 1990 and beyond), and is voluntarily accepting a NOX 
emission cap of less than 100 TPY, the facility is no longer determined 
to be a major source of NOX. Pennsylvania issued the permit to 
AT&T with an enforceable emissions cap required by a permit issued 
under Pennsylvania's approved Federally Enforceable State Operating 
Permit (FESOP) program.
    Plan approval PA #06-1003 limits the VOC emissions to a maximum of 
2.7 TPY for boilers #1 and #2. Although PA DEP has determined that the 
VOC emissions from the four (4) boilers, six (6) emergency generators, 
and seven (7) storage tanks source categories meet de minimis emission 
criteria of less than 3 lbs./hr, 15 lbs./day, or 2.7 TPY, this emission 
limitation is only applicable to 25 PA Code Section 129.52 for surface 
coating processes. Nevertheless, EPA is approving PA DEP's 
determination that VOC RACT for these sources is no controls.
    The manufacturing and support processes at AT&T Corporation take 
place in four (4) buildings located at the facility. The buildings are 
identified as #10, #13, #30, and #35. Building #13 is used primarily 
for product aging and is not a source of VOC emissions. There are over 
20 categories of VOC sources distributed in buildings #10, #30, and 
#35.
    AT&T grouped these VOC sources by building because of rapid changes 
in manufacturing processes and annual changes in operations. This makes 
examining individual source categories, such as hooded sinks, difficult 
because of the dynamic nature of company operations. AT&T considered 
various control options for each building. Carbon adsorption and 
incineration are considered to be the most effective control measures, 
but not considered by PA DEP to be cost effective. Therefore, plan 
approval PA #06-1003 enforceably establishes RACT for VOC emissions as 
current operations for buildings #10, #30, and #35.
    In addition, the plan approval PA #06-1003 requires the company to 
maintain detailed records of all purchases and disposals of VOC 
containing materials, and a list of all VOC sources and their 
locations.
    Condition #19 requires the facility to keep applicable records and 
reports in accordance with 25 PA Code Chapter 129.95 such that 
compliance with RACT requirements can be determined.

RACT Determination for Garden State Tanning, Inc.

    EPA is approving the plan approval (PA #06-1014) for Garden State 
Tanning, Inc. located in Berks County. Garden State Tanning, Inc. is a 
leather coating facility and is considered to be a major source of VOC 
emissions.
    Plan approval PA #06-1014 requires, among other things, air 
assisted airless spray guns, and photoelectric eyes to minimize 
overspray on automatic booths. Top coats/base coats will have a VOC 
content limit of 3.5 lbs. VOC/gal-H2O, and color coats/others will 
have a VOC content limit of 2.8 lbs. VOC/gal-H2O. No. 3 and 4 
coating lines are further restricted to a Best Available Technology 
(BAT) VOC content limit of 3.1 lbs. VOC/gal-H2O. In addition, the 
five (5) leather coating lines are restricted to the following limits 
on VOC emissions based on a twelve (12) month running total.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Leather coating line                  VOC emission limit     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. 1....................................  35.5 TPY.                    
No. 2....................................  46.6 TPY.                    
No. 3....................................  70.2 TPY.                    
No. 4....................................  55.0 TPY.                    
No. 5....................................  2.0 TPY.                     
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Plan approval PA #06-1014 requires the Roll Coater, No.5 Drying 
Oven to have a VOC content limit of 2.0 lbs. VOC/gal-H2O. The roll 
coater is further restricted to a limit on VOC emissions of 20 TPY 
based on a twelve (12) month running total.
    Although PA DEP has determined that the VOC emissions from the two 
(2) boilers, seven (7) storage tanks, one (1) hand spray station, and 
mixing/storage areas source categories meet de minimis emission 
criteria of less than 3 lbs./hr, 15 lbs./day, or 2.7 TPY, this emission 
limitation is only applicable to 25 PA Code Section 129.52 for surface 
coating processes. Nevertheless, EPA is approving PA DEP's 
determination that VOC RACT for these sources is no controls. Plan 
approval PA #06-1014 will establish a VOC emissions limit of 2.7 TPY 
(12 month running total) for each of the above remaining source 
categories except the mixing/storage areas, which use only water based 
coatings. In addition, the storage tanks will conform with presumptive 
VOC RACT requirements of 25 PA Code Section 129.57.
    The facility is required to keep monthly records of coating usage, 
VOC emissions including cleanup solvents such that compliance with RACT 
requirements can be determined. The company is also required to submit 
quarterly reports that include monthly VOC emissions for each coating 
line, twelve (12) month running totals of each coating line, and twelve 
(12) month running totals of all sources.
    Although EPA considers this facility to be subject to the VOC RACT 
requirements of 25 PA Code Section 129.52 for surface coating 
processes, Garden State Tanning, Inc., through the use of waterborne 
coatings has achieved approximately a 80% reduction in VOC emissions. 
Requiring the facility to comply with the fabric coating VOC content 
limit of 2.92 lbs. VOC/gal-H2O would not yield substantial VOC 
emission reductions. Subsequently, EPA is approving PA DEP's 
determination of RACT for this facility as described above.

RACT Determination for The Glidden Company

    EPA is approving the operating permit (OP #06-1035) for The Glidden 
Company located in Berks County. The Glidden Company is a paint 
manufacturing facility and is considered to be a major source of VOC 
emissions.
    The VOC emissions from the specialty production plant at the 
facility were based on a 2% solvent loss per total solvent used (lbs) 
as fugitive emissions exhausted to the atmosphere. Since 14 storage 
tanks located in building #56 and 16 storage tanks located in building 
#31 are part of this air space exhausted to the atmosphere, they are 
considered as part of the fugitive emissions. In EPA's review of this 
RACT determination, the 2% assumption of

[[Page 19053]]

fugitive emissions has not been substantiated by any additional 
information or testing results which would reasonably assure that the 
2% figure is acceptable. However, EPA is accepting the company's 
estimation as PA DEP did not raise any objections on this issue.
    Based on this 2% assumption, the technically feasible controls of 
recuperative thermal oxidation and regenerative thermal oxidation were 
calculated to have an average cost effectiveness of $11,935/ton removed 
and $10,214/ton removed respectively. Using this as a basis for 
determination, operating permit OP #06-1035 establishes VOC RACT for 
the specialty production plant as current operations. As a side note, 
if the fugitive solvent loss per total solvent used was assumed to be 
10% versus 2%, the average cost effectiveness for recuperative thermal 
oxidation and regenerative thermal oxidation would be reduced to 
$2,387/ton removed and $2,042/ton removed respectively.
    The VOC emissions from the emulsion production plant at the 
facility were based on a 1% solvent loss per total solvent used (lbs) 
as fugitive emissions exhausted to the atmosphere. Since 4 storage 
tanks located in building #51 are part of this air space exhausted to 
the atmosphere, they are considered as part of the fugitive emissions. 
In EPA's review of this RACT determination, the 1% assumption of 
fugitive emissions has not been substantiated by any additional 
information or testing results which would reasonably assure that the 
1% figure is acceptable. However, EPA is accepting the company's 
estimation as PA DEP did not raise any objections on this issue.
    Based on this 1% assumption, the technically feasible controls of 
recuperative thermal oxidation and regenerative thermal oxidation were 
calculated to have an average cost effectiveness of $63,567/ton removed 
and $57,070/ton removed respectively. Using this as a basis for 
determination, operating permit OP #06-1035 establishes VOC RACT for 
the emulsion production plant as current operations. As a side note, if 
the fugitive solvent loss per total solvent used was assumed to be 10% 
versus 1%, the average cost effectiveness for recuperative thermal 
oxidation and regenerative thermal oxidation would be reduced to 
$6,357/ton removed and $5,707/ton removed respectively.
    The VOC emissions from the resins production plant at the facility 
were based on a 5% conservative solvent loss factor, derived from high 
heat conditions of the process, a closed process operation, and a 
tested 93.2% destruction efficiency of the RTO. Since 4 storage tanks 
located in building #36A are part of this air space exhausted, they are 
considered part of the fugitive emissions.
    In August of 1994, a reaction which got out of control caused 
extensive damage to the inlet ducting, the RTO ducting and valves, and 
the RTO controls. Subsequently, The Glidden Company has decided to 
shutdown operations of its resin production plant. Operating permit OP 
#06-1035 establishes VOC RACT for the resin production plant as the 
company will not operate any sources associated with the resin 
production plant other than storage tanks identified in the company's 
January 17, 1996 letter to PA DEP.
    Although PA DEP has determined that the VOC emissions from the 
boilers source category meet de minimis emission criteria of less than 
3 lbs./hr, 15 lbs./day, or 2.7 TPY, this emission limitation is only 
applicable to 25 PA Code Section 129.52 for surface coating processes. 
Nevertheless, EPA is approving PA DEP's determination that VOC RACT for 
the boilers is present operations.
    The actual 1993 VOC emissions from the storage tanks not included 
in the plant operations were calculated using an API Tank Program 2.0. 
Operating permit OP #06-1035 establishes VOC RACT for 124 storage tanks 
as present operations, with all outside tanks being equipped with 
pressure/vacuum vents or complying with 25 PA Code Section 129.57.
    Operating permit OP #06-1035 requires the facility to keep detailed 
and accurate records of the throughput of each production area and each 
storage tank. In addition, the facility is required to record the 
quantity and identity of all VOC cleaning solvents on all production 
areas on a daily basis. VOC RACT for cleaning solvents requires that 
all process tanks being cleaned are kept closed, caustic cleaning 
solutions be used wherever possible, cleaning compounds in the 
specialty area be at ambient temperature, and no VOC cleaning compounds 
be used in the emulsion plant.
    The source-specific RACT emission limitations that are being 
approved into the Pennsylvania SIP are those that were submitted on 
August 1, 1995 (amended March 20, 1997), June 10, 1996, and September 
13, 1996, and are the subject of this rulemaking notice. These emission 
limitations will remain unless and until they are replaced pursuant to 
40 CFR Part 51 and approved by the EPA.
    EPA is approving these SIP revisions without prior proposal because 
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates 
no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal 
Register publication, EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision 
should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be 
effective June 17, 1997 unless, by May 19, 1997, adverse or critical 
comments are received.
    If EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn before 
the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will 
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be 
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a 
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this 
action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do 
so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is 
advised that this action will be effective on June 17, 1997.

Final Action

    EPA is approving three source-specific RACT determinations. Nothing 
in this action should be construed as permitting or allowing or 
establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any 
state implementation plan. Each request for revision to the state 
implementation plan shall be considered separately in light of specific 
technical, economic, and environmental factors and in relation to 
relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature 
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the 
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a 
July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for 
Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The EPA's actions under section 502 of the Act do not create any 
new requirements, but simply address operating permits programs 
submitted to satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR Part 70. Because this 
action does not impose any new requirements, it does not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities.

[[Page 19054]]

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, 
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 
50,000.
    SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the CAA 
do not create any new requirements but simply approve requirements that 
the Commonwealth is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal 
SIP approval does not impose any new requirements, the Administrator 
certifies that it does not have a significant impact on any small 
entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State 
relationship under the CAA, preparation of a flexibility analysis would 
constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state 
action. The CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such 
grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

C. Unfunded Mandates

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA 
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or 
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to 
private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA must 
select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative that 
achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with statutory 
requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan for 
informing and advising any small governments that may be significantly 
or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not 
include a federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the 
aggregate, or to the private sector. This federal action approves pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new 
Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, 
or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this 
action.

D. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

    Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted a report 
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, 
the U.S. House of Representatives and the Comptroller General of the 
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's 
Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 
U.S.C. 804(2).

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action, pertaining to the RACT approval for 
AT&T Corporation, Garden State Tanning, Inc., and The Glidden Company, 
must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate 
circuit by June 17, 1997. 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, Hydrocarbons, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: April 1, 1997.
W. Michael McCabe,
Regional Administrator, Region III.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart NN--Pennsylvania

    2. Section 52.2020 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(117) to read 
as follows:

Sec. 52.2020  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (117) Revisions to the Pennsylvania Regulations Chapter 129.91 
through 129.95 pertaining to VOC and NOX RACT, submitted on August 
1, 1995 (amended March 20, 1997), June 10, 1996, and September 13, 1996 
by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection:
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Three letters dated August 1, 1995, June 10, 1996, and 
September 13, 1996 from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental 
Protection transmitting three source-specific RACT determinations; two 
of which involve plan approvals and one which involves an operating 
permit. One letter dated March 20, 1997 amending the August 1, 1995 
submittal pertaining to NOX RACT for AT&T Corporation. The three 
sources are:
    (1) AT&T Corporation (Berks County)--electronics components 
manufacturer.
    (2) Garden State Tanning, Inc. (Berks County)--leather coating 
facility.
    (3) The Glidden Company (Berks County)--paint manufacturing 
facility.
    (B) Plan Approvals (PA), Operating Permits (OP):
    (1) AT&T Corporation--PA #06-1003, effective June 26, 1995, except 
for the expiration date of the plan approval, all conditions pertaining 
to NOX RACT determination, and conditions 18d & 18e pertaining to 
temporary operation regarding compliance extension and expiration date 
of the plan approval.
    (2) Garden State Tanning, Inc.--PA #06-1014, effective June 21, 
1995, except for the expiration date of the plan approval, conditions 
20, 21, 24, and 25 pertaining to visual/malodorous emissions, sulfur 
content, and water flow rates, and conditions 27d & 27e pertaining to 
temporary operation regarding compliance extension and expiration date 
of the plan approval.
    (3) The Glidden Company--OP #06-1035, effective February 15, 1996, 
except for the expiration date of the operating permit, conditions 13, 
14, and 16, pertaining to operating permit renewal, sulfur content, and 
visual/malodorous emissions.
    (ii) Additional material.
    (A) Remainder of August 1, 1995 (amended March 20, 1997), June 10, 
1996 and September 13, 1996 State submittals pertaining to AT&T 
Corporation, Garden State Tanning, Inc., and The Glidden Company.

[FR Doc. 97-9952 Filed 4-17-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```