[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 115 (Thursday, June 13, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29963-29965]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-14967]



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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52

[VA010-5545a; FRL-5514-6]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Virginia; Approval of Alternative Compliance Plans for the Reynolds 
Metals Graphic Arts Plants

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 
submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia. This revision establishes 
and requires four packaging rotogravure printing presses at the 
Reynolds Metals--Bellwood plant, located in Richmond, Virginia and six 
packaging rotogravure printing presses at the Reynolds Metals--South 
plant also located in Richmond, Virginia to meet emission limits by 
averaging emissions, on a daily basis, within each of the two plants. 
The intended effect of this action is to approve two graphic arts 
alternative compliance plans; one for the Reynolds Metals--Bellwood 
plant and one for the Reynolds Metals--South plant (also known as the 
Foil plant). This action is being taken under Section 110 of the Clean 
Air Act.

DATES: This final rule is effective July 29, 1996 unless within July 
15, 1996, 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 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; 
the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460; and the 
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 629 East Main Street, 
Richmond, Virginia 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marcia L. Spink, (215) 566-2104. email 
address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#dba8abb2b5b0f5b6baa9b8b2ba9bbeabbab6bab2b7f5beabbaf5bcb4ad"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="b5c6c5dcdbde9bd8d4c7d6dcd4f5d0c5d4d8d4dcd99bd0c5d49bd2dac3">[email protected]</span></a>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 4, 1986, the Virginia State Air 
Pollution Control Board (now known as the Virginia Department of air 
Pollution Control) submitted alternative compliance plans as a revision 
to its State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Reynolds Metals--
Bellwood plant and the Reynolds Metals--South plant, both located in 
Richmond, Virginia. Both of these facilities are subject to the 
federally approved Virginia graphic arts regulation, Section 4.55(m) 
[currently cited as Rule 4-36, Sections 120-04-3601 through 120-04-
3615]. The alternative compliance plans allow each of these facilities 
to average emissions, on a daily basis, in order to meet the applicable 
packaging rotogravure standard in Virginia Rule 4-36.
    The applicable Virginia SIP graphic arts regulation requires that 
packaging rotogravure sources reduce emissions by 65% by weight of 
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions on a line-by-line basis. The 
Virginia SIP further requires that compliance be based on daily 
averages.

Description of the Alternative Compliance Plan for the Bellwood 
Plant

    The printing presses participating in this alternative compliance 
plan are:

(1) Presses No. 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11
(2) Extrudes No. 1, 2, 3, 4
(3) Treating Station for Press #3
(4) Laminator No. 1 (by incineration)

    Included in the description of the Bellwood alternative compliance 
plan is a reasonably available control technology determination (RACT) 
determination for Laminator No. 3. Reynolds states that this operation 
is not a packaging rotogravure operation because of certain unique 
features. If, in fact, this source is not a packaging rotogravure 
operation, it would be considered a non-CTG source (i.e a source for 
which EPA has not issued a Control Technique Guideline). The 1990 Clean 
Air Act Amendments require that major sources in ozone nonattainment 
areas be subject to RACT. Richmond, where Reynolds is located, is a 
moderate ozone nonattainment area. Virginia's plan limits the total 
emissions from this operation to 2 tons per day, in lieu of any other 
limit. EPA is proposing to approve the 2 ton per day emission cap as 
RACT for Laminator No. 3.

Description of the Alternative Compliance Plan for the South (Foil) 
Plant

    The printing presses participating in this alternative compliance 
plan are:

(1) Cigarette Machines Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4
(2) Coloring Machines No. 7
(3) Glue Mounter Nos. 1, 23
(4) Reseal Machines Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5
(5) Coloring Machines Nos. 1, 2, 6 (unless exhausted to incinerator)
(6) In-line Machine No. 24 (unless exhausted to incinerator)

    The alternative compliance plan is configured such that if the 
equipment in items (5) and/or (6) above are exhausted to an 
incinerator, they will not participate in the plan.

SIP Submittal

    The November 4, 1986 SIP submittal package from Virginia consisted 
of the following documents:
    (1) Cover letter dated 11/4/86 from Richard Cook, VA to James Seif, 
EPA Region III.
    (2) Consent Order for South-Foil plant, DSE 412A-86 amended 10/86 
dated 10/30/86.
    (3) Consent Order for Bellwood plant, DSE 413A-86 amended 10/86 
dated 10/30/86.
    (4) Public hearing certification for 9/30/85 public hearing.
    (5) Letter to Ray Cunningham, EPA Region III, from Virginia 
submitting the SAPCB meeting agenda.
    (6) Letter dated 11/4/86 from John Daniel, VA to David Arnold, EPA 
Region III.
    The Consent Orders for South and for Bellwood each require that 65% 
emission reduction be achieved at the plant over the historical amount 
of solvent used to apply the same amount of solids. On December 5, 
1986, EPA

[[Page 29964]]

sent a letter to Virginia, requesting additional information concerning 
the formulas used to determine compliance and the effect of the revised 
alternative compliance plan configurations on the proposed Richmond 
SIP. On February 12, 1987, Virginia responded with additional 
information which included changes and clarification to the formulas.

Virginia Graphic Arts Regulations

    The Virginia graphic arts regulations were cited as being deficient 
in the June 14, 1988 follow-up letter to the May 26, 1988 SIP call. 
Specifically, the graphic arts regulation requires, for packaging 
rotogravure operations, a 65% reduction. The baseline from which this 
reduction is to be calculated is not specified. EPA's guidelines for 
graphic arts sources require that a waterborne ink (75% water/exempt 
solvent by volume) or a high-solids ink (60% solids) be used. If such 
inks are not used, the VOC content of those inks must be reduced by 65% 
for packaging rotogravure operations. Such a percentage reduction would 
be calculated based on the VOC content of the inks used each day. The 
reductions obtained by following EPA's guidelines would be larger than 
those calculated from a historical average, as Virginia is proposing 
for Reynolds. Therefore, the graphic arts regulation, 4.55(m), was not 
considered RACT. The deficiencies with the graphic arts regulation were 
identified in the June 14, 1988 follow-up letter to the May 26, 1988 
SIP call. On May 10, 1991, Virginia submitted a request to revise the 
graphic arts regulation, among other regulations, in response to the 
comments made in the June 14, 1988 EPA letter. The revised State 
regulations were effective July 10, 1991. EPA approved the amended 
version of Rule 4-36 as a revision to the Virginia SIP on March 31, 
1994 (59 FR 15117) and incorporated it by reference into the SIP at 
52.2420(c)(99)(i)(B)(3). Further details regarding the specifics of the 
alternative compliance plans for the two Reynolds Metals plants and 
issues relating to approval of these plans can be found in the 
accompanying technical support document.

Final Action

    EPA is approving the alternative compliance plans for the Reynolds 
Metals-Bellwood and Reynolds Metals-South plants, which were submitted 
on November 4, 1986 as a revision to the Virginia SIP.
    EPA is approving this SIP revision 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 July 29, 1996 unless, by July 15, 1996, 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 July 29, 1996.
    The Agency has reviewed this request for revision of the Federally-
approved State implementation plan for conformance with the provisions 
of the 1990 amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. The Agency has 
determined that this action conforms with those requirements 
irrespective of the fact that the submittal preceded the date of 
enactment.
    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.
    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 
Clean Air Act do not create any new requirements but simply approve 
requirements that the State 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 Clean Air Act 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).
    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 that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to 
the 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.
    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.
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 12, 1996. 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 EPA's 
action to approve alternative compliance plans for the Reynolds 
Metals--Bellwood and the Reynolds

[[Page 29965]]

Metals--South plants. 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, Incorporation by 
reference, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: May 17, 1996.
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 VV--Virginia

    2. Section 52.2420 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(110) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.2420   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (110) Alternative Compliance Plans submitted on November 4, 1986 by 
the Virginia State Air Pollution Control Board:
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Letter of November 4, 1986 from the Virginia State Air 
Pollution Control Board transmitting alternative compliance plans for 
the Reynolds Metals--Bellwood and South Plants, Richmond, Virginia.
    (B) The below-described Consent Agreements and Orders between the 
Commonwealth of Virginia and the Reynolds Metals Company, effective 
October 31, 1986:
    (1) DSE-413A-86--Consent Agreement and Order Addressing Reynolds 
Metals Company's Bellwood Printing Plant (Registration No. 50260).
    (2) DSE-412A-86--Consent Agreement and Order Addressing Reynolds 
Metals Company's Richmond Foil Plant (Registration No. 50534).
    (ii) Additional material.
    (A) Remainder of November 4, 1986 State submittal.
    (B) Letter of February 12, 1987 from the Virginia State Air 
Pollution Control Board.

[FR Doc. 96-14967 Filed 6-12-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>