Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 67 / Friday, April 7, 1995 / Proposed Rules 17743

in total or in part its Federal statutory

or regulatory provisions until the State

adopts and OSM approves, under 30

CFR Part 732, the State’s counterparts to

the required provisions. However, as

discussed in item number (1) above,

OSM could decide not to initiate direct

Federal enforcement and rely instead on

the 30 CFR Part 732 State program

amendment process.

In those situations where OSM

determined that direct Federal

enforcement was necessary, the ten-day

notice provisions of 30 CFR 843.12(a)(2)

would not apply. That is, when on the

basis of a Federal inspection OSM

determined that a violation of 30 CFR

817.41(j) or 817.121(c)(2) existed, OSM

would issue a notice of violation or

cessation order without first sending a

ten-day notice to the State.

Also under direct Federal

enforcement, the provisions of 30 CFR

817.121(c)(4) would apply. This

regulation states that if damage to any

noncommercial building or occupied

residential dwelling or structure related

thereto occurs as a result of earth

movement within an area determined by

projecting a specified angle of draw

from the outermost boundary of any

under ground mine workings to the

surface of the land (normally a 30

degree angle of draw), a rebuttable

presumption exists that the permittee

caused the damage.

Lastly, under direct Federal

enforcement, OSM would also enforce

the new definitions at 30 CFR 701.5 of

‘‘drinking, domestic or residential water

supply,’’ ‘‘material damage,’’ ‘‘noncommercial building,’’ ‘‘occupied

dwelling and structures related thereto,’’

and ‘‘replacement of water supply’’ that

were adopted with the new

underground mining performance

standards.

OSM would enforce 30 CFR 817.41(j),

817.121(c) (2) and (4), and 30 CFR 701.5

for operations conducted after October

24, 1992.

C. Enforcement in Ohio

By letter to Ohio dated December 15,

1994, OSM requested information from

Ohio that would help OSM decide

which approach to take in Ohio to

implement the new requirements of

section 720(a) of SMCRA and the

implementing Federal regulations

(Administrative Record No. OH–2073).

By letter dated January 18, 1995, Ohio

responded to his OSM request

(Administrative Record No. OH–2085).

Ohio provided a list of permitted

underground coal mining operations.

There are currently eight underground

coal mines that are producing coal. The

number of coal producing underground

coal mines in Ohio has been less than

fifteen at any given time since October

24, 1992. Ohio indicated that existing

State program provisions at the Ohio

Revised Code section 1513.152 and the

Ohio Administrative Code sections

1501:13–1–02(S); 1501:13–9–04(P); and

1501:13–12–03(C), (D), (E), (F), (H), (I)

are adequate State counterparts to

section 720 of SMCRA and the

implementing Federal regulations. Ohio

explained that it has enforced these

State program provisions requiring

replacement of water supplies impacted

by underground mining operations

since 1977 and enforced State program

provisions requiring repair or

compensation for subsidence related

structural damage since 1988. Ohio has

investigated 26 citizen complaints

alleging subsidence-caused structural

damage or water supply loss or

contamination as a result of

underground mining operations

conducted after October 24, 1992. To

date, Ohio has made a determination on

six of the complaints that water loss was

not mining related and on six of the

complaints that water loss was mining

related. Fourteen complaints are still

being investigated. Twelve of the 14 are

related to water supplies associated

with one underground coal mining

operation and are not subsidence

related.

II. Public Comment Procedures

OSM is requesting public comment to

assist OSM in making its decision on

which approach to use in Ohio to

implement the underground coal mine

performance standards of section 720(a)

of SMCRA, the implementing Federal

regulations, and any counterpart State

provisions.

A. Written Comments

Written comments should be specific,

pertain only to the issues addressed in

this notice, and include explanations in

support of the commenter’s

recommendations. Comments received

after the time indicated under DATES or

at locations other than the Columbia

Field Office will not necessarily be

considered in OSM’s final decision or

included in the Administrative Record.

B. Public Hearing

Persons wishing to speak at the public

hearing should contact the person listed

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT by 4:00 p.m., [Eastern Time

zone] on April 15, 1995. The location

and time of the hearing will be arranged

with those persons requesting the

hearing. If no one requests an

opportunity to testify at the public

hearing, the hearing will not be held.

Filing of a written statement at the

time of the hearing is requested as it

will greatly assist the transcriber.

Submission of written statements in

advance of the hearing will allow OSM

officials to prepare adequate responses

and appropriate questions.

The public hearing will continue on

the specified date until all persons

scheduled to speak have been heard.

Persons in the audience who have not

been scheduled to speak, and who wish

to do so, will be heard following those

who have been scheduled. The hearing

will end after all persons scheduled to

speak and persons present in the

audience who wish to speak have been

heard.

Any disabled individual who has

need for a special accommodation to

attend a public hearing should contact

the individual listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT.

C. Public Meeting

If only a few persons request an

opportunity to speak at a hearing, a

public hearing, rather than a public

hearing, may be held. Persons wishing

to meet with OSM representatives to

discuss recommendations on how OSM

and Ohio should implement the

provisions of section 720(a) of SMCRA,

the implementing Federal regulations,

and/or the counterpart State provisions,

may request a meeting by contacting the

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. All such meetings

will be open to the public and, if

possible, notices of meetings will be

posted at the locations listed under

ADDRESSES. A written summary of each

meeting will be made a part of the

Administrative Record.

Dated: March 31, 1995.

Richard J. Seibel,

Acting Assistant Director, Eastern Support

Center.

[FR Doc. 95–8636 Filed 4–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

30 CFR Part 946

Virginia Regulatory Program

AGENCY: Office of Surface Mining

Reclamation and Enforcement OSM),

Interior.

ACTION: Announcement of; public

comment period and opportunity for

public hearing.

SUMMARY: OSM is requesting public

comment that would be considered in

deciding how to implement in Virginia

underground coal mine subsidence

control and water replacement

provisions of the Surface Mining
17744 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 67 / Friday, April 7, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Control and Reclamation Act of 1977

(SMCRA), the implementing Federal

regulations, and/or the counterpart State

provisions. Recent amendments to

SMCRA and the implementing Federal

regulations require that underground

coal mining operations conducted after

October 24, 1992, promptly repair or

compensate for subsidence-caused

material damage to noncommercial

buildings and to occupied dwellings

and related structures. These provisions

also require such operations to promptly

replace drinking, domestic, and

residential water supplies that have

been adversely affected by underground

coal mining.

OSM must decide if the Virginia

regulatory program (hereinafter referred

to as the ‘‘Virginia program’’) currently

has adequate counterpart provisions in

place to promptly implement the recent

amendments to SMCRA and the Federal

regulations. After consultation with

Virginia and consideration of public

comments, OSM will decide whether

initial enforcement in Virginia will be

accomplished through the State program

amendment process or by State

enforcement, by interim direct OSM

enforcement, or by joint State and OSM

enforcement.

DATES: Written comments must be

received by 4:00 p.m., e.s.t. on May 8,

1995. If requested, OSM will hold a

public hearing on May 2, 1995

concerning how the underground coal

mine subsidence control and water

replacement provisions of SMCRA and

the implementing Federal regulations,

or the counterpart State provisions,

should be implemented in Virginia.

Requests to speak at the hearing must be

received by 4:00 p.m., e.s.t. on April 24,

1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments and

requests to speak at the hearing should

be mailed or hand-delivered to Robert

A. Penn, Director, Big Stone Gap Field

Office at the address listed below.

Copies of the applicable parts of the

Virginia program, SMCRA, the

implementing Federal regulations,

information provided by Virginia

concerning its authority to implement

State counterparts to SMCRA and the

implementing Federal regulations, a

listing of any scheduled public hearings,

and all written comments received in

response to this document will be

available for public review at the

address listed below during normal

business hours, Monday through Friday,

excluding holidays: Robert A. Penn,

Director, Big Stone Gap Field Office,

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation

and Enforcement, P.O. Drawer 1217, Big

Stone Gap, Virginia 24219, Telephone:

(703) 523–4303.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert A. Penn, Director, Big Stone Gap

Field Office, Telephone: (703) 523–

4303.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. The Energy Policy Act

Section 2504 of the Energy Policy Act

of 1992, Public Law 102-486, 106 Stat.

2776 (1992) added new section 720 to

SMCRA. Section 720(a)(1) requires that

all underground coal mining operations

promptly repair or compensate for

subsidence-caused material damage to

noncommercial buildings and to

occupied residential dwellings and

related structures. Repair of damage

includes rehabilitation, restoration, or

replacement of the structures identified

in section 720(a)(1), and compensation

must be provided to the owner in the

full amount of the reduction in value of

the damaged structures as a result of

subsidence. Section 720(a)(2) requires

prompt replacement of certain

identified water supplies if those

supplies have been adversely affected

by underground coal mining operations.

These provisions requiring prompt

repair or compensation for damage to

structures, and prompt replacement of

water supplies, went into effect upon

passage of the Energy Policy Act on

October 24, 1992. As a result,

underground coal mine permittees in

States with OSM-approved regulatory

programs are required to comply with

these provisions for operations

conducted after October 24, 1992.

B. The Federal Regulations

Implementing the Energy Policy Act

On March 31, 1995, OSM

promulgated regulations at 30 CFR Part

817 to implement the performance

standards of sections 720(a) (1) and (2)

of SMCA (60 FR 16722-16751).

30 CFR 817.121 (c)(2) requires in part

that:

The permitted must promptly repair, or

compensate the owner for, material damage

resulting from subsidence caused to any noncommercial building or occupied residential

dwelling or structure related thereto that

existed at the time of mining. * * * The

requirements of this paragraph apply only to

subsidence-related damage caused by

underground mining activities conducted

after October 24, 1992.

30 CFR 817.41(j) requires in part that:

The permittee must promptly replace any

drinking, domestic or residential water

supply that is contaminated, diminished or

interrupted by underground mining activities

conducted after October 24, 1992, if the

affected well or spring was in existence

before the date the regulatory authority

received the permit application for the

activities causing the loss, contamination or

interruption.

30 CFR 843.25 provide that by July

31, 1995, OSM will decide, in

consultation with each State regulatory

authority with an approved program,

how enforcement of the new

requirements will be accomplished. As

discussed below, enforcement may be

accomplished through the 30 CFR Part

732 State program amendment process,

or by State, OSM, or joint State and

OSM enforcement of the requirements.

OSM will decide which of the following

enforcement approaches to pursue.

(1) State program amendment

process. If the State’s promulgation of

regulatory provisions that are

counterpart to 30 CFR 817.41(j) and

817.121(c)(2) is imminent, the number

and extent of underground mines that

have operated in the State since October

24, 1992, is low, the number of

complaints in the State concerning

section 720 of SMCRA is low, or the

State’s investigation of subsidencerelated complaints has been thorough

and complete so as to assure prompt

remedial action, then OSM could decide

not to directly enforce the Federal

provisions in the State. In this situation,

the State would enforce its State

statutory and regulatory provisions once

it has amended its program to be in

accordance with the revised SMCRA

and to be consistent with the revised

Federal regulations. This program

revision process, which is addressed in

the Federal regulations at 30 CFR Part

732, is commonly referred to as the

State program amendment process.

(2) State enforcement. If the State has

statutory or regulatory provisions in

place that correspond to all of the

requirements of the above-described

Federal regulations at 30 CFR 817.41(j)

and 817.121(c)(2) and the State has

authority to implement its statutory and

regulatory provisions for all

underground mining activities

conducted after October 24, 1992, then

the State would enforce its provisions

for these operations.

(3) Interim direct OSM enforcement. If

the State does not have any statutory or

regulatory provisions in place that

correspond to the requirements of the

Federal regulations at 30 CFR 817.41(j)

and 817.121(c)(2), then OSM would

enforce in their entirety 30 CFR

817.42(j) 817.121(c)(2) for all

underground mining activities

conducted in the State after October 24,

1992.

(4) State and OSM enforcement. If the

State has statutory or regulatory
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 67 / Friday, April 7, 1995 / Proposed Rules 17745

provisions in place that correspond to

some but not all of the requirements of

the Federal regulations at 30 CFR

817.41(j) and 817.121(c)(2) and the State

has authority to implement its

provisions for all underground mining

activities conducted after October 24,

1992, then the State would enforce its

provisions for these operations. OSM

would then enforce those provisions of

30 CFR 817.41(j) and 817.121(c)(2) that

are not covered by the State provisions

for these operations.

If the State has statutory or regulatory

provisions in place that correspond to

some but not all of the requirements of

the Federal regulations at 30 CFR

817.41(j) and 817.121(c)(2) and if the

State’s authority to enforce its

provisions applies to operations

conducted on or after some date later

than October 24, 1992, the State would

enforce its provisions for these

operations on and after the provisions’

effective date. OSM would then enforce

30 CFR 817.41(j) and 817.121(c)(2) to

the extent the State statutory and

regulatory provisions do not include

corresponding provisions applicable to

all underground mining activities

conducted after October 24, 1992; and

OSM would enforce those provisions of

30 CFR 817.41(j) and 817.121(c)(2) that

are included in the State program but

are not enforceable back to October 24,

1992, for the time period from October

24, 1992, until the effective date of the

State’s rules.

As described in item numbers (3) and

(4) above, OSM would directly enforce

in total or in part its Federal statutory

or regulatory provisions until the State

adopts and OSM approves, under 30

CFR Part 732, the State’s counterparts to

the required provisions. However, as

discussed in item number (1) above,

OSM could decide not to initiate direct

Federal enforcement and rely instead on

the 30 CFR Part 732 State program

amendment process.

In those situations where OSM

determined that direct Federal

enforcement was necessary, the ten-day

notice provisions of 30 CFR 843.12(a)(2)

would not apply. That is, when on the

basis of a Federal inspection OSM

determined that a violation of 30 CFR

817.41(j) and 817.121(c)(2) existed,

OSM would issue a notice of violation

or cessation order without first sending

a ten-day notice to the State.

Also under direct Federal

enforcement, the provisions of 30 CFR

817.121(c)(4) would apply. This

regulation states that if damage to any

noncommercial building or occupied

residential dwelling or structure related

thereto occurs as a result of earth

movement within an area determined by

projecting a specified angle of draw

from the outermost boundary of any

underground mine workings to the

surface of the land (normally a 30

degree angle of draw), a rebuttable

presumption exists that the permitee

caused the damage.

Lastly, under direct Federal

enforcement, OSM would also enforce

the new definitions at 30 CFR 701.5 of

‘‘drinking, domestic or residential water

supply,’’ ‘‘material damage,’’ ‘‘noncommercial building,’’ ‘‘occupied

dwelling and structures related thereto,’’

and ‘‘replacement of water supply’’ that

were adopted with the new

underground mining performance

standards.

OSM would enforce 30 CFR 817.41(j)

and 817.121(c) (2) and (4), and 30 CFR

701.5 for operations conducted after

October 24, 1992.

C. Enforcement in Virginia

By letter to Virginia dated December

14, 1994, OSM requested information

from Virginia that would help OSM

decide which approach to take in

Virginia to implement the new

requirements of section 720(a) of

SMCRA and the implementing Federal

regulations (Administrative Record No.

VA–850. By letter dated January 13,

1995, Virginia responded to this OSM

request (Administrative Record No. VA–

851).

Virginia indicated that existing State

program provisions at Sections 45.1–243

and 45.1–258 of the Code of Virginia are

adequate State counterparts to section

720(a) of SMCRA. Virginia explained

that it will enforce these State program

provisions effective October 24, 1992.

Section 480–03–19.817.121(c)(2) of the

Virginia Coal Surface Mining

Reclamation Regulations concerning

subsidence control has been used by

Virginia since December 26, 1990. OSM

records show that approximately 325

underground coal mines have been

classified as active in Virginia since

October 24, 1992. Between October 24,

1992, and January 13, 1995, Virginia

investigated 262 citizen complaints

alleging subsidence-caused structural

damage or water supply loss or

contamination as a result of

underground mining operations. As of

January 13, 1995, Virginia had found

that no violation of the Act existed on

202 of the complaints, violations existed

on 35 of the complaints, and technical

reports and a final decision were

pending on 25 complaints.

II. Public Comment Procedures

OSM is requesting public comment to

assist OSM in making its decision on

which approach to use in Virginia to

implement the underground coal mine

performance standards of section 720(a)

of SMCRA, the implementing Federal

regulations, and any counterpart State

provisions.

A. Written Comments

Written comments should be specific,

pertain only to the issues addressed in

this notice, and include explanations in

support of the commenter’s

recommendations. Comments received

after the time indicated under DATES or

at locations other than the Big Stone

Gap Field Office will not necessarily be

considered in OSM’s final decision or

included in the Administrative Record.

B. Public Hearing

Persons wishing to speak at the public

hearing should contact the person listed

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT by 4:00 p.m., E.S.T. om April

24, 1995. The location and time of the

hearing will be arranged with those

persons requesting the hearing. If no one

requests an opportunity to testify at the

public hearing, the hearing will not be

held.

Filing of a written statement at the

time of the hearing is requested as it

will greatly assist the transcriber.

Submission of written statements in

advance of the hearing will allow OSM

officials to prepare adequate responses

and appropriate questions.

The public hearing will continue on

the specified date until all persons

scheduled have been heard. Persons in

the audience who have not been

scheduled to speak, and who wish to do

so, will be heard following those who

have been scheduled. The hearing will

end after all persons scheduled to speak

and persons present in the audience

who wish to speak have been heard.

Any disabled individual who has

need for a special accommodation to

attend a public hearing should contact

the individual listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT.

C. Public Meeting

If only a few persons request an

opportunity to speak at a hearing, a

public meeting, rather than a public

hearing, may be held. Persons wishing

to meet with OSM representatives to

discuss recommendations on how OSM

and Virginia should implement the

provisions of section 720(a) of SMCRA,

the implementing Federal regulations,

and/or the counterpart State provisions,

may request a meeting by contacting the

person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. All such meetings

will be open to the public and, if

possible, notices of meetings will be

posted at the locations listed under
17746 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 67 / Friday, April 7, 1995 / Proposed Rules

ADDRESSES. A written summary of each

meeting will be made a part of the

Administrative Record.

Dated: March 31, 1995.

Richard J. Seibel,

Acting Assistant Director, Easter Support

Center.

[FR Doc. 95–8637 Filed 4–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[VA36–1–6922; FRL–5185–7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans;

Commonwealth of Virginia: Non-CTG

Reasonably Available Control

Technology for Philip Morris, Inc.

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing conditional

approval of a State Implementation Plan

(SIP) revision submitted by the

Commonwealth of Virginia. This

revision establishes and requires the use

of reasonably available control

technology (RACT) to control volatile

organic compound (VOC) emissions

from the Philip Morris, Inc, (Philip

Morris), Manufacturing Center, in

Richmond, Virginia, which is part of the

Richmond ozone nonattainment area.

The SIP revision requires Philip Morris

to meet RACT by installing thermal

incinerators on process units that use

ethanol-based flavorings. An exemption

from this requirement is provided if the

company eliminates use of ethanolbased flavorings and there is no net

increase in VOC emissions. The

intended effect of this action is to

propose approval of the SIP revision on

the condition that deficiencies in the

exemption requirements are corrected

and submitted within one year of this

approval. If the State fails to do so, this

approval will convert to a disapproval.

This action is being taken under section

110 of the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before May 8, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

Marcia L. Spink, Associate Director, Air

Programs, Mailcode 3AT00, 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; Virginia Department of

Environmental Quality, 629 East Main

Street, Richmond, Virginia, 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kathleen Henry, (215) 597–0545.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

September 28, 1994, the Commonwealth

of Virginia submitted a revision to its

State Implementation Plan (SIP). The

SIP revision consists of a Consent Order

and Agreement (the Order) between the

Department of Environmental Quality

(DEQ) of the Commonwealth of Virginia

and Philip Morris, Inc.. The Order was

signed by Philip Morris’ Senior Vice

President of Manufacturing on June 14,

1994 and the Director of DEQ on June

27, 1994. The Order became effective on

June 27, 1994.

In the Federal Register on November

24, 1987, EPA’s Proposed Post-1987

Policy for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide

stated that air quality monitors revealed

continued exceedances of the National

Ambient Air Quality Standards

(NAAQS) for ozone and carbon

monoxide in Virginia and that a SIP call

would be issued. (See 52 FR 45044). On

May 26, 1988, the Regional

Administrator of EPA Region III notified

the Governor of Virginia that the

Commonwealth’s SIP was substantially

inadequate to achieve the ozone and

carbon monoxide NAAQS for certain

areas in Virginia, including Henrico

County in the Richmond-Petersburg

metropolitan statistical area, and

therefore required a SIP revision. As

prescribed by the SIP call, Virginia is

required to develop reasonably available

control technology (RACT) regulations

in all its nonattainment areas for all

VOC sources with the potential to emit

100 tons per year (TPY) or more for

which EPA has not issued a Control

Techniques Guidelines (CTG)

document. Such sources are known as

non-CTG sources. One of the non-CTG

sources identified as requiring RACT is

Philip Morris, Inc.’s Manufacturing

Center in Richmond, Virginia. The City

of Richmond is located in the Richmond

area, which is currently designated

nonattainment for ozone. Therefore,

Virginia is submitting this Order as a

SIP revision to fulfill part of its SIP call

obligation.

In addition, this SIP revision serves to

fulfill one of the RACT fix-up

requirements of the Virginia SIP

required by section 182(a)(2)(A) of the

Clean Air Act as amended by the Clean

Air Act Amendments of 1990, Public

Law 101–549. Areas classified as

marginal nonattainment areas for ozone

pursuant to section 181(a) of the Clean

Air Act, as amended, are required to

meet the RACT fix-up requirements.

Under section 182(a)(2)(A), a state is

required to submit, within six months of

such classification, a SIP revision to

correct requirements in (or add

requirements to) the plan concerning

RACT, as interpreted in guidance issued

by the Administrator under section 108

of the Act before November 15, 1990.

Summary of SIP Revision

The Philip Morris Manufacturing

Center processes, flavors and blends

various types of tobacco for the

production of cigarettes. The operations

include moisture addition, preflavoring,

blending, cutting, flavoring and

cigarette-making. VOC emissions result

primarily from the application and

evaporation of flavorings, particularly

ethanol-based flavorings. Total

uncontrolled stack and fugitive VOC

emissions are estimated to be 1259 tons

per year, based on 1990 throughput

data.

To accommodate the number and

diversity of stack emissions at the

Manufacturing Center, RACT was

determined by grouping exhaust streams

in various combinations and evaluating

the feasibility and cost of installing

control technology on the combined

exhaust streams. Virginia has

determined that the only grouping

amenable to control technology is the

combination of exhausts from the unit

processes associated with ethanol-based

flavorings. These combined waste

streams comprise 48% of the

uncontrolled stack emissions from the

Manufacturing Center and are made up

of emissions from burley casing

cylinders #1 and #2, aftercut flavor

cylinders #1 through #8, and aftercut

dryers #1 through #4.

The Order establishes RACT for these

units as the installation and operation of

two (2) 10,000 standard cubic feet per

minute (scfm) thermal oxidation units

having a VOC destruction efficiency of

at least 95% on a mass basis. The

thermal oxidation units are required to

be operated at the three-hour average

minimum temperature that

demonstrates 95% destruction

efficiency as determined by

performance testing. Thermal oxidation

units must be interlocked with process

equipment and exhaust fans such that

tobacco cannot be processed and VOC

laden exhaust air cannot flow to the

incineration units until the minimum

temperature is achieved. In addition, the

Order requires that a negative pressure

be maintained in the exhaust system as

demonstrated by continuous pressure

monitors and reported as three-hour