Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 75 / Friday, April 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 19051

(120) Revisions to the Pennsylvania

Regulations, Chapter 129.91 pertaining

to VOC and NOX RACT, submitted on

January 21, 1997, January 28, 1997, and

May 31, 1995 by the Pennsylvania

Department of Environmental Resources

(now known as the Pennsylvania

Department of Environmental

Protection):

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Four letters, dated January 21,

1997, January 28, 1997, May 31, 1995

and September 13, 1996, from the

Pennsylvania Department of

Environmental Protection transmitting

source-specific VOC and/or NOX RACT

determinations in the form of operating

permits, a plan approval and a

compliance permit for the following

sources:

(1) Texas Eastern Transmission

Corporation (Bernville, Berks County)—

natural gas compressor station;

(2) Texas Eastern Transmission

Corporation (Bechtelsville, Berks

County)—natural gas compressor;

(3) Carpenter Technology Corporation

(Reading/Muhlenberg Township, Berks

County)—steel manufacturer; and

(4) North American Fluoropolymers

Company (Ontelanunee, Berks

County)—manufacturer of teflon

crumbs.

(B) Operating Permits (OP), Plan

Approval (PA) and Compliance Permit

(CP):

(1) Texas Eastern Transmission

Corporation (Bernville)—(OP–06–1033)

effective January 31, 1997, except for the

expiration date of the operating permit.

(2) Texas Eastern Transmission

Corporation (Bechtelsville)—(OP–06–

1034) effective January 31, 1997, except

for the expiration date of the operating

permit.

(3) Carpenter Technology

Corporation—(OP–06–1007), effective

September 27, 1996, except for those

portions of conditions Nos. 28 through

41 and Nos. 43 through 54 pertaining to

non-VOC and non-NOX pollutants and

the expiration date of the operating

permit.

(4) North American Fluoropolymers

Company—(PA–06–1026) and (CP–06–

1026), effective April 19, 1995, except

for the expiration dates of the plan

approval and the compliance permit.

(ii) Additional material.

(A) Remainder of the Commonwealth

of Pennsylvania’s January 21, 1997,

January 27, 1997, and May 31, 1995

submittals.

(B) Additional material submitted by

Pennsylvania: Letter dated March 25,

1997 from Mr. James Salvaggio,

Director, Bureau of Air Quality Control,

Pennsylvania Department of

Environmental Resources to Mr.

Thomas Maslany, Director, Air,

Radiation and Toxics Division, EPA

Region III providing clarifying

information related to the Carpenter

Technology Corporation operating

permit and the North American

Fluoropolymers Company plan

approval.

[FR Doc. 97–9954 Filed 4–17–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

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

boylan.jeffrey@epamail.epa.gov. While

information may be requested via email, 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
19052 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 75 / Friday, April 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

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/galH2O, and color coats/others will have a

VOC content limit of 2.8 lbs. VOC/galH2O. 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
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 75 / Friday, April 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 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 sourcespecific 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.
19054 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 75 / Friday, April 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

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:

§ 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