Document ID: EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0542-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Direct Final Approval of the Wisconsin site-specific revision for Cook Composites and Polymers Co.
Posted Date: 2007-03-16T04:00Z

[Federal Register: March 16, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 51)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 12565-12568]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr16mr07-10]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0542; FRL-8285-3]

 
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Wisconsin; Cook Composites and Polymers Company

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving Wisconsin's April 25, 2006, submittal of 
a source specific revision to revise its State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) for the control of volatile organic compounds. The revision 
consists of language contained in an Administrative Decision, dated 
February 24, 2005, approving an equivalent control system to meet 
reasonably available control technology (RACT) emission control 
requirements for Cook Composites and Polymers Company located in 
Saukville, Wisconsin, in Ozaukee County.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective May 15, 2007, unless 
EPA receives adverse comments by April 16, 2007. If adverse comments 
are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final 
rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will 
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2006-0542, by one of the following methods:
    1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 

submitting comments.
    2. E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov.

[[Page 12566]]

    3. Fax: (312) 886-5824.
    4. Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air 
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant 
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such 
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of 
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are 
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal 
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2006-0542. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 

unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to 
be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, 

which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information 
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://www.regulations.gov 

your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part 
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available 
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends 
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of 
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read 
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic 
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of 
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the 
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson 
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30 
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. We 
recommend that you telephone Charles Hatten, Environmental Engineer, at 
(312) 886-6031 before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Hatten, Environmental 
Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6031, Hatten.Charles@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information 
section is arranged as follows:

    I. General Information
    II. Review of Wisconsin's Plan
    III. What Change is Wisconsin Requesting?
    IV. Why is the Request Approvable?
    V. What Action is EPA Taking Today?
    VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. General Information

    This rulemaking applies to Cook Composites and Polymers Company 
located in Saukville, Wisconsin, in Ozaukee County, and the control of 
volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions from its synthetic resin 
manufacturing operations. The revision consists of language contained 
in a Administrative Decision (AM-05-200), dated February 24, 2005, 
approving the use of a high efficiency thermal oxidizer as an 
equivalent control system to meet VOC reasonably available control 
technology (RACT) emission control requirements in section NR 
412.05(2)(a)(2) of the Wisconsin Administrative Code.

II. Review of Wisconsin's Plan

Wisconsin's Current SIP

    On August 15, 1994, EPA approved rule NR 421.05 of the Wisconsin 
Administrative Code, as a VOC RACT requirement to control emissions 
from synthetic resin manufacturing facilities. See Federal Register 59 
FR 41709. Under the existing federally-approved SIP for Wisconsin, the 
requirements in NR 421.05 apply to stationary sources located in the 
counties of Kenosha, Milwaukee, Ozaukee, Racine, Washington and 
Waukesha.

Applicability of Wisconsin Rule NR 412.05

    In chapter NR 421 of Wisconsin Administrative Code, section NR 
421.05, this VOC RACT requirement specifically applies to the control 
of VOC emissions from ``reaction tanks, thinning tanks, blending tanks 
and other process vessels used in any synthetic resin manufacturing 
facility.'' The RACT rule prescribes the use of a surface condenser 
system for control of VOC emissions, but also allows for the use of an 
alternative control technology. The rule establishes a procedure for 
the State and EPA approval of alternative control technology. Section 
NR 421.05(2)(a) states, ``any equally effective control method or 
equivalent system approved by the department under this paragraph shall 
be submitted to, and will not become effective for federal purposes 
until approved by, the administrator or designee as a source-specific 
revision to the department's state implementation plan for ozone. The 
emission control system shall be one of the following:
    1. A surface condenser, or equally effective control device 
approved by the department, and a vapor recovery or control system that 
reduces emissions from the surface condenser or equally effective 
device by 85%.
    2. An equivalent system or approach demonstrated to reliably 
control emissions from a process that does not include a condenser by 
not less than 90% as approved by the department.''

III. What Change Is Wisconsin Requesting?

    On April 25, 2006, Wisconsin submitted to EPA a source specific SIP 
revision in the form of an Administrative Decision (AM-05-200) 
requesting approval to establish VOC RACT requirements for Cook 
Composites and Polymers Company, applicable to its synthetic resin 
manufacturing facility. Because Cook Composites and Polymers Company 
installed a thermal oxidizer instead of a surface condenser system as 
an emission control system, section NR 421.05(2)(a) requires Wisconsin 
to submit a request to EPA to approve the use of the thermal oxidizer 
as a source specific revision to Wisconsin's SIP. The VOC RACT 
requirement in section NR 421.05(2)(a)(2) requires an ``equivalent 
control system or approach demonstrated to reliably control VOC 
emissions from a process that does not include a condenser by not less 
than 90%.'' The Administrative Decision (AM-05-200) includes a decision 
by the State of Wisconsin approving the use of

[[Page 12567]]

a high-efficiency thermal oxidizer to meet the VOC RACT emission 
control requirement in section NR 421.05(2)(a)(2).

IV. Why Is the Request Approvable?

    The findings of fact contained in the Administrative Decision (AM-
05-200), along with a copy of the compliance emission test report, show 
that the thermal oxidizer meets VOC RACT emission control requirements 
contained in section NR 421.05(2)(a)(2). The test to determine the 
thermal oxidizer's VOC destruction and removal efficiency demonstrated 
an average VOC destruction and removal efficiency of 99.7%, well within 
the parameters of ``an equivalent system or approach demonstrated to 
reliably control emissions from a process that does not include a 
condenser by not less than 90%.''

V. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

    Based on the rationale set forth above, EPA is approving the 
revision to the Wisconsin SIP regarding Administrative Decision (AM-05-
200), concerning Cook Composites and Polymers Company (synthetic resin 
manufacturing facility) and its use of a high-efficiency thermal 
oxidizer to be an equivalent control system or approach to meet VOC 
RACT emission control requirements contained in section NR 
421.05(2)(a)(2).
    We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we 
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse 
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal 
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will 
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse 
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective May 15, 2007 
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written 
comments by April 16, 2007. If we receive such comments, we will 
withdraw this action 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 the proposed action. The EPA will not institute a second 
comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action 
should do so at this time. If we do not receive any comments, this 
action will be effective May 15, 2007.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and, therefore, is 
not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.

Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use

    Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action 
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning 
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that 
this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 
601 et seq.).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state 
law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that 
required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).

Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal 
Governments

    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (59 
FR 22951, November 9, 2000).

Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action also does not have Federalism implications because it 
does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the 
relationship between the national government and the states, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a 
federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the 
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air 
Act.

Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health 
and Safety Risks

    This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 
et seq.).

Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit 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 United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
section 804(2).

[[Page 12568]]

    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 May 15, 2007. 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, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Ozone, and Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: February 27, 2007.
Steve Rothblatt,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, of title 40 
of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart YY--Wisconsin

0
2. Section 52.2570 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(115) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  52.2570  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (115) On April 25, 2006, Wisconsin submitted source specific SIP 
revision to revise its State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the control 
of volatile organic compounds (VOC) from synthetic resin manufacturing 
operations. The revision consists of language contained in an 
Administrative Decision (AM-05-200), dated February 24, 2005, approving 
the use of a high efficiency thermal oxidizer as an equivalent control 
system or approach to meet VOC RACT emission control requirements for 
Cook Composites and Polymers Company located in Saukville, Wisconsin, 
in Ozaukee County.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) The Administrative Decision (AM-05-200), dated February 24, 
2005, issued by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 
establishes VOC RACT for Cook Composites and Polymers Company synthetic 
resin manufacturing facility located in Saukville, Wisconsin, in 
Ozaukee County.
 [FR Doc. E7-4771 Filed 3-15-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P