Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2004/09/16/04-20898/approval-of-section-112l-authority-for-hazardous-air-pollutants-maryland-equivalency-by-permit
Timestamp: 2018-03-20 07:11:49
Document Index: 336412921

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 63', '§ 63', 'art 63', 'art 70', 'art 63', 'art 63', 'art 63', 'art 63', 'art 63', 'art 63', '§\u200963', 'art 63', 'art 63', 'art 63']

This rule is effective on November 15, 2004 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by October 7, 2004. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take effect.
55759-55763 (5 pages)
MD001-1001a
FRL-7813-6
E. Demonstrate That the State Meets the General Approval Criteria Found at 40 CFR 63.91(d)
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/04-20898 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/04-20898
The EPA is approving a request from the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) for authority to implement and enforce state permit terms and conditions in place of those of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills, with respect to the operations of MeadWestvaco Company's Luke Mill, located in Luke, Maryland. Thus, the EPA is hereby granting the MDE the authority to implement and enforce alternative requirements in the form of Clean Air Act (CAA) Title V permit terms and conditions after EPA has approved the State's alternative requirements. EPA is approving this request because it has found that the MDE has satisfied the requirements.
Submit your comments, identified by MD001-1001, by one of the following methods: Start Printed Page 55760
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. MD001-1001. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, 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 regulations.gov or e-mail. The federal 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 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.
Pursuant to section 112 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgates NESHAP for various categories of air pollution sources. On January 12, 2001, EPA promulgated a NESHAP for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills, as codified at 40 CFR part 63, subpart MM, §§ 63.860 through 63.868. (See, 66 FR 3193.) MeadWestvaco Company operates a pulp and paper mill called the Luke Mill, located in Luke, Maryland which is subject to the requirements of this NESHAP.
The first step, obtaining EPA's “up-front approval” of a State's EBP program, enables EPA to ensure that: (1) A State meets the criteria at 40 CFR 63.91(d) for up-front approval common to all approval options; (2) a legal foundation exists for a State to replace the otherwise applicable Federal section 112 requirements with alternative, Federally enforceable requirements that will be reflected in final CAA Title V permit terms and conditions; and, (3) the specific source(s) and Federal emission standard(s) for which a State will be accepting delegation under the EBP program are clearly specified.
On March 26, 2004 (as amended on July 8, 2004) the MDE requested delegation of authority to implement and enforce State CAA Title V permit terms and requirements for MeadWestvaco Company's Luke Mill as an alternative to those of the NESHAP for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills, found at 40 CFR, part 63, subpart MM. The MDE states in its request that it intends for the submittal to fulfill only the requirements of step one of the EBP process, pertaining to obtaining “up-front approval” of its program. The MDE explains that it will later fulfill steps Start Printed Page 55761two and three of the EBP process by submitting substitute CAA Title V operating permit terms and conditions for EPA review and approval, and then proceeding with the CAA Title V permit issuance process. The MDE sought this authority pursuant to the provisions of 40 CFR 63.94 and 63.91, and the MDE submitted information addressing the requirements of those sections.
EPA has reviewed the MDE's submittal and has concluded that the MDE meets the requirements for “up-front approval” of its EBP program which are specified at 40 CFR 63.94(b) and 63.91(d). The requirements a State or local agency must meet can be summarized as follows: (1) Identify the source(s) for which the State seeks authority to implement and enforce alternative requirements; (2) request delegation (or have delegation) for any remaining sources required to be permitted by the State under 40 CFR part 70 that are in the same category as the source(s) for which it wishes to establish alternative requirements; (3) identify all existing and future CAA section 112 emission standards for which the State is seeking authority to implement and enforce alternative requirements; (4) demonstrate that the State has an approved CAA Title V operating permits program that permits the affected sources; and, (5) demonstrate that the State meets the general approval criteria set forth at 40 CFR 63.91(d).
EPA lists each requirement below and after each requirement explains its reasons for concluding that the MDE meets the requirement:
The MDE identified MeadWestvaco Company's Luke Mill, a pulp and paper mill located in Luke, Maryland, as the source for which it is seeking authority to implement and enforce alternative requirements. According to the MDE, MeadWestvaco Company's Luke Mill is the only operating pulp and paper mill in Maryland subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart MM. MeadWestvaco Company's Luke Mill is situated on the border of both Maryland and West Virginia. The portion of the Luke mill that is located in West Virginia is also subject to the requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart MM. However, this Direct Final Rule does not grant Maryland or West Virginia the authority to implement the EBP process in West Virginia. For this Direct Final Rule, the EBP process will only apply to MeadWestvaco's Luke Mill units that are subject to subpart MM and located in Maryland only.
The MDE is currently delegated the authority to implement and enforce the Federal requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart MM for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills. Subpart MM applies to “the owner or operator of each Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, or Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mill that is a major source of hazardous air pollutants * * *” (See, 40 CFR 63.860). On November 3, 1999, EPA delegated to the MDE the authority to implement and enforce EPA's NESHAP standards for affected sources of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), as defined in 40 CFR part 63, for all source categories which are located at major sources. EPA also delegated to the MDE the authority to implement and enforce all future EPA NESHAP standards applicable to such sources, on the condition that the MDE legally adopt such new standards with only approved wording changes and that the MDE provide notice to EPA of such adoption. The MDE subsequently adopted additional MACT standards which became effective on November 24, 2003. In a letter dated January 13, 2004, MDE notified EPA that they had adopted these additional MACT standards. The additional standards that the State adopted included 40 CFR part 63, subpart MM.
In its March 26, 2004 (as amended on July 8, 2004) submittal, the MDE requested only the authority to implement and enforce State permit requirements for MeadWestvaco Company's Luke Mill as alternatives to the Federal requirements applicable to that Mill found at 40 CFR part 63, subpart MM. The MDE confirmed that there are no other existing and future Federal CAA section 112 rules for which the State is seeking authority to implement and enforce alternative requirements.
EPA granted final full approval to Maryland's CAA Title V operating permits program on February 14, 2003 (68 FR 1974), and under this approved program the MDE has the authority to issue CAA Title V permits to all major stationary sources. In its March 26, 2004 (as amended on July 8, 2004) submittal, the MDE confirmed that MeadWestvaco Company's Luke Mill is a CAA Title V source and that it is subject to the State's CAA Title V permits program. The MDE noted the MeadWestvaco Company had submitted a CAA Title V permit application, and that the MDE was reviewing this application.
The provisions of 40 CFR 63.91(d) specify that “Interim or final CAA Title V program approval will satisfy the criteria set forth in § 63.91(d), up-front approval criteria.” As discussed in item D. above, EPA has fully approved Maryland's CAA Title V operating permits program.
EPA is granting the MDE “up-front” approval of an EBP program under which the MDE may establish and enforce alternative State requirements for MeadWestvaco Company's Luke Mill in lieu of those of the NESHAP for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills, found at 40 CFR part 63, subpart MM. The MDE may only establish alternative requirements for the Luke Mill which are equivalent to and at least as stringent as the otherwise applicable Federal requirements. (See, 40 CFR 63.94(d).) The MDE must, in order to establish alternative requirements for the Luke Mill under its EPA approved EBP program: (1) Submit to EPA for review pre-draft CAA Title V permit terms specifying alternative requirements which are at least as stringent as the otherwise applicable Federal requirements, (2) obtain EPA's written approval of the alternative pre-draft CAA Title V permit requirements, and (3) issue a CAA Title V permit for the Luke Mill which contains the approved alternative requirements. (See, 40 CFR 63.94(c) and (e).) Until EPA has approved the alternative permit terms and conditions and the MDE has issued a final CAA Title V permit incorporating them, MeadWestvaco Company's Luke Start Printed Page 55762Mill will remain subject to the Federal NESHAP requirements found at 40 CFR part 63, subpart MM.
EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comment. However, in the “Proposed Rules” section of today's Federal Register, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve if adverse comments are filed. This rule will be effective on November 15, 2004 without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by October 7, 2004. If EPA receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.
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. Section 804 exempts from section 801 the following types of rules: (1) Rules of particular applicability; (2) rules relating to agency management or personnel; and (3) rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect the rights or obligations of non-agency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA is not required to submit a rule report regarding today's action under section 801 because this is a rule of particular applicability establishing source-specific requirements for MeadWestvaco Company's Luke Mill located in Luke, Maryland.
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 November 15, 2004. 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 granting the MDE “up-front” approval of an EBP program under which the MDE may establish and enforce alternative State requirements for MeadWestvaco Company's Luke Mill in lieu of those of the NESHAP for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills found at 40 CFR part 63, subpart MM may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
Donald S Welsh,
2. Section 63.99 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(20)(iii) to read as follows:
(20) * * *Start Printed Page 55763
[FR Doc. 04-20898 Filed 9-15-04; 8:45 am]