[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 198 (Tuesday, October 14, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53242-53245]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27124]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[VA-5029a, FRL-5904-3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; VOC RACT for Phillip Morris, Hercules, Virginia Power
Station, and the Hopewell Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving six State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia. These revisions establish
and require volatile organic compound (VOC) reasonably available
control technology (RACT) on six major sources located in Virginia. The
intended effect of this action is to approve source-specific plan
approvals and Consent Agreements that establish the above-mentioned
RACT requirements in accordance with the Clean Air Act (the Act).
DATES: This action is effective November 28, 1997 unless notice is
received on or before October 29, 1997 that adverse or critical
comments will be submitted. If the effective date is delayed, timely
notice will be published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to David L. Arnold, Air, Radiation,
and Toxics Division, 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 the
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 629 East Main Street,
Richmond, Virginia 23219.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly Peck, (215) 566-2165, at the
EPA Region III address above.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 9, 1996, August 8, 16, 19, 23,
1996, and March 26, 1997, the Commonwealth of Virginia submitted formal
revisions to its SIP. These revisions consist of plan approvals and
Consent Agreements, signed by the companies and the Virginia Department
of Environmental Quality, to establish and impose source-specific VOC
RACT requirements for major sources of VOC. Today's rulemaking proposes
to approve the source-specific VOC RACT requirements for six companies.
All of the sources are located in the Richmond moderate ozone
nonattainment area.
I. Background
Under the pre-amended Clean Air Act (i.e., the Act prior to the
1990 Amendments), ozone nonattainment areas were required to adopt RACT
rules for VOC sources. EPA issued three sets of control technique
guideline documents (CTGs), establishing a ``presumptive norm'' for
RACT for various categories of VOC sources. The Richmond, Virginia area
was designated nonattainment under the pre-amended Act and was required
to adopt RACT for all CTG categories as well as non-CTG VOC sources
with a potential to emit 100 tons per year (TPY) or more. Under the
1990 amendments to the Act, amended sections 172(c)(1) and 182(a)(2),
required the Richmond, Virginia nonattainment area to correct its RACT
requirements in effect prior to enactment of the 1990 amendments.
Virginia submitted those RACT corrections as SIP revisions on May 10,
1991 and June 20, 1991. Among the regulations in that SIP revision, was
a provision (Rule 120-04-0407) establishing the legal basis for
imposing RACT on all individual major VOC sources subject to RACT in
the Northern Virginia and Richmond nonattainment areas not covered by
an existing state adopted VOC control regulation. The RACT correction
SIP was approved by EPA on March 31, 1994 (See 59 FR 15117). To
implement Rule 120-04-0407, the Commonwealth must submit an enforceable
RACT determination for all major VOC sources not otherwise controlled
under existing VOC RACT regulations of the SIP.
Sections 182(b)(2) (A), (B) and (C) of the Act require moderate and
above areas to adopt standards for all sources covered by any CTG
document issued by the Administrator after 1990 and before the area is
required to attain the standard; all sources covered by any CTG before
the date of enactment of the 1990 CAA amendments; and all major sources
of VOC not subject to a CTG. In addition, areas newly designated under
the 1990 amendments as ozone nonattainment areas are required to adopt
RACT rules consistent with those previously designated nonattainment.
This provision of the Act makes nonattainment areas that were
previously exempt from RACT requirements ``catch up'' to requirements
during the earlier period, and therefore, is known as the RACT catch-up
requirement. Because Rule 120-04-0407 imposed RACT on all major VOC
sources in the Northern Virginia and Richmond nonattainment areas on an
individual basis, this rule partially satisfied the RACT catch-up
requirement. On November 6, 1992, Virginia submitted a SIP revision
expanding the geographic boundaries of the VOC emission control areas
to coincide with the revised boundaries of the Richmond and Northern
Virginia ozone nonattainment areas resulting from the 1990 amendments.
This SIP was approved by EPA on March 12, 1997 (59 FR 52701). To
satisfy the RACT correction and catch-up requirements under sections
182(a)(2) and 182(b)(2)
[[Page 53243]]
(A), (B) and (C), and implement Rule 120-04-0407, Virginia has
submitted source specific VOC RACT determinations for the following six
companies in the Richmond, Virginia ozone nonattainment area:
(1) Philip Morris-Blended Leaf--2301 Everett Street, Richmond;
(2) Philip Morris-Park 500 Facility--Chesterfield County;
(3) Philip Morris-Tobacco Manufacturing Center--3601 Commerce Road,
Richmond;
(4) Virginia Electric and Power Station--Chesterfield County;
(5) Hercules Incorporated, Aqualon Division--Hopewell; and
(6) Hopewell Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
The details of the RACT requirements for the sources can be found
in the docket and accompanying technical support document (TSD). Below
is a summary of the facility type and the applicable RACT requirements
for each source. Each SIP revision consists of a Consent Agreement
signed by the source and the Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality. The Consent Agreements are enforceable documents which include
a description of the RACT technologies, control efficiencies, operating
parameters, monitoring and reporting requirements. For further details
on the sources' processes and how RACT was determined, refer to the TSD
associated with this rulemaking. EPA is approving revisions to the
Virginia SIP pertaining to the determination of RACT for six major
sources of VOC. This action is being taken under section 110 of the
Act.
1. Philip Morris--Blended Leaf, Richmond
Philip Morris--Blended Leaf is a tobacco processing facility that
has potential VOC emissions greater than 100 TPY. Tobacco by-products
from other Philip Morris facilities are combined to form a continuous
tobacco sheet at the Blended Leaf Plant. These by-products are combined
with dry and liquid low-VOC flavorings, and mixed into a slurry. The
slurry is dried in a natural gas-fired dryer, cut, and packed into
hogsheads for shipment. There are three drying lines each consisting of
two natural gas-fired dryers. The Plant operates 24 hours each day,
seven days each week, and 50 weeks per year. Based on 1991 throughput
data, the total uncontrolled stack VOC emissions from the facility were
estimated to be 238.4 tons per year.
RACT as prescribed in the Consent Agreement, Registration Number
50080, dated February 27, 1996 is determined to be no controls as
Virginia determined that add-on controls were not economically feasible
or cost effective. The Consent Agreement does require the continued use
of low-VOC flavorings as well as record keeping and reporting
requirements.
2. Philip Morris--Park 500, Chesterfield
Philip Morris--Park 500 is a tobacco processing facility that has
potential VOC emissions greater than 100 TPY. The tobacco processing
facility consists of two separate, distinct facilities which are
located on adjoining property: the Reconstituted Leaf (R/L) Plant and
the Bermuda Hundred Facility. At the R/L Plant, all VOC emissions are
generated primarily from the tobacco drying processes and from the raw
materials blending area. The uncontrolled stack VOC emissions from the
R/L Plant are estimated to be 143 tons per year. At the Bermuda Hundred
Facility, all VOC emissions are generated primarily from the tobacco
drying processes and from the application of final flavoring to the
tobacco. The uncontrolled stack VOC emissions from the Bermuda Hundred
Facility are estimated to be 236.4 tons per year.
RACT as prescribed in the Consent Agreement, Registration Number
50722, dated March 26, 1997 is determined to be no controls as Virginia
determined that add-on controls were not economically infeasible or
cost-effective.
3. Philip Morris, Tobacco Manufacturing Center, Richmond
Philip Morris, Incorporated is a cigarette manufacturing center
that has potential VOC emissions greater than 100 TPY. RACT as
prescribed in the Consent Agreement, Registration Number 50076, dated
July 12, 1996 requires, among other provisions, that the VOC emissions
from the flavor cylinders where high-VOC-emitting flavorings are
applied and the aftercut dryers in Process Lines #1 and #2 shall be
controlled by a thermal oxidation unit(s) having a destruction
efficiency of at least 95% on a mass basis. Each thermal oxidization
unit shall be equipped with a continuous temperature monitor, automatic
control dampers which prevent the flow of VOC laden process exhaust air
to each unit until the minimum temperature is attained, and a pressure
gauge in the duct prior to the oxidation units) to continuously monitor
and insure that a negative pressure is being maintained in the exhaust
system. Data from the continuous monitoring devices shall be recorded
as one-minute readings and reduced to 3-hour averages on a rolling
basis. A minimum temperature requirement will be established using EPA
Reference Method 25 within 180 days of initial startup of the thermal
oxidation units.
If Philip Morris desires to reformulate any flavorings associated
with the flavor cylinders and the aftercut dryers in Process Lines #1
and #2, the respective equipment in which the reformulated flavorings
are implemented will be exempt from the thermal oxidation unit(s)
provided the following conditions are met:
(1) Emissions resulting from any such change in formulation must be
verified by stack sampling using appropriate EPA test methods and
material balance.
(2) On a daily basis, Philip Morris shall track production and
flavoring throughputs. Philip Morris must calculate the emissions, in
pounds per day, emanating through the stack and the emissions that
would have occurred on January 1, 1993 prior to the reformulation with
the affected equipment being exhausted to the thermal oxidation
unit(s). Philip Morris must compare the results of these two equations.
Emissions from the reformulated flavoring must always be less than the
emissions which would have been emanating had the reformulation had not
occurred and the affected equipment were exhausted to the thermal
oxidation unit(s).
Philip Morris shall maintain records of all operating parameters
necessary to demonstrate compliance. Pre-RACT facility-wide
uncontrolled emissions were calculated at 1250 TPY. Post-RACT facility-
wide emissions are 684 TPY.
4. Virginia Power--Chesterfield Station, Chesterfield
Virginia Power--Chesterfield Station is an electric utility that
has potential VOC emissions greater than 100 TPY.
RACT as prescribed in the Consent Agreement, Registration Number
50396, dated May 30, 1996 requires, among other provisions, that the
VOC emissions from boilers 3, 4, 5, and 6 be good combustion practices.
Compliance shall be demonstrated by Implementation of a Work Planning
and Tracking System (WATS). Virginia Power shall maintain records of
operation, malfunctions, continuous monitoring and all completed
scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, with the exception of minor
repairs initiated and performed by individual employees in the conduct
of their routine duties. No additional controls were determined to be
economically feasible or cost-effective. Both pre-RACT and post-
[[Page 53244]]
RACT annual VOC emissions calculate to 183.6 TPY.
5. Hercules, Incorporated--Aqualon Division, Hopewell
Hercules, Incorporated--Aqualon Division is a synthetic organic
chemical manufacturing facility that has potential VOC emissions
greater than 100 TPY. RACT as prescribed in the Consent Agreement,
Registration Number 50363, dated July 12, 1996 is as follows:
1. VOC emissions from the Cloacal Process area shall be controlled
by solvent recovery and process scrubbers having an overall control
efficiency of at least 96% on a mass basis, respectively, calculated
monthly as a six-month rolling average. VOC flow from the Cloacal
Process area shall be measured and the totalized flow recorded for each
batch.
2. VOC emissions from the Ethyl cellulose (E.C.) Process area shall
be controlled by solvent recovery and process scrubbers having an
overall control efficiency of at least 90% on a mass basis,
respectively, calculated monthly as a six-month rolling average.
3. VOC emissions from the Carboxymethyl cellulose (CBC) Process
area shall be controlled by solvent recovery and process scrubbers
having an overall control efficiency of at least 98% on a mass basis,
respectively, calculated monthly as a six-month rolling average. For
the CBC area, VOC still output shall be continuously measured and the
totalized flow recorded once per shift.
4. VOC emissions from the Nitrosyl Process area shall be controlled
by solvent recovery and process scrubbers having an overall control
efficiency of at least 98% on a mass basis, respectively, calculated
monthly as a six-month rolling average. For the Nitrosyl area, VOC
still output shall be continuously measured and the totalized flow
recorded once per shift.
5. VOC emissions from the Monochloroacetic Acid (MCA) Process area
and the Technical Facility shall be controlled by solvent recovery and
process scrubbers. Each area, the MCA Process area and the Technical
Facility, shall not exceed 15 tons of VOCs per year.
Compliance from the Cloacal, E.C., CBC, and Nitrosyl process areas
shall be demonstrated by specific equations designated in the Consent
Agreement. Compliance for the MCA Process area and the Technical
Facility require record keeping and reporting. Pre-RACT uncontrolled
VOC emissions from this facility were calculated to be 246,743 TPY.
Post-RACT controlled VOC emissions from this facility calculate to 5474
TPY.
6. Hopewell Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility, Hopewell
Hopewell Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility has potential VOC
emissions greater than 100 TPY.
RACT as prescribed in the Consent Agreement, Registration Number
50735, dated May 30, 1996 requires, among other provisions, that the
VOC emissions from the Grit Chambers/Parshall Flume shall be controlled
by a cover and vent. Total post-RACT emissions calculate to 225.6 TPY.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving all of the provisions in the plan approvals and
Consent Agreements, for the six sources discussed above, submitted by
the Commonwealth of Virginia as SIP revisions. All the Consent
Agreements were effective on the date of signature by both signatory
parties. The Consent Agreements do not contain expiration dates.
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 November 28, 1997 unless, by October 29, 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 November 28, 1997. If
adverse comments are received that do not pertain to all documents
subject to this rulemaking action, those documents not affected by the
adverse comments will be finalized in the manner described here. Only
those documents that receive adverse comments will be withdrawn.
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.
IV. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
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 Commonwealth is already imposing. Therefore,
because the federal SIP approval does not impose any new requirements,
the EPA 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).
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 settlement 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
[[Page 53245]]
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
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
D. Petitions for Judicial 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 December 15, 1997. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Regional 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 to approve VOC RACT
determinations for six individual sources in Virginia as a revisions to
the Commonwealth's SIP 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: September 26, 1997.
William T. Wisniewski,
Acting 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 paragraphs (c)(120 ) to
read as follows:
Sec. 52.2420 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(120) Revisions to the State Implementation Plan submitted on April
9, 1996, August 8, 16, 19, 23, 1996, and March 26, 1997 by the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality regarding non-CTG VOC RACT
requirements for six sources:
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Letters submitted by the Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality transmitting source-specific VOC RACT determinations in the
form of consent agreements on the following dates: April 9, 1996,
August 8, 16, 19, 23, 1996, and March 26, 1997.
(B) Consent agreements:
(1) Philip Morris--Blended Leaf, City of Richmond, VA, Consent
Agreement Registration No. 50080, effective on February 27, 1996.
(2) Philip Morris--Park 500, Chesterfield County, VA, Consent
Agreement Registration No. 50722, effective on March 26, 1997.
(3) Philip Morris Tobacco Manufacturing Center, City of Richmond,
VA, Consent Agreement Registration No. 50076, effective on July 12,
1996.
(4) Virginia Power--Chesterfield Station, Chesterfield County, VA,
Consent Agreement Registration No. 50396, effective on May 30, 1996.
(5) Hercules Incorporated--Aqualon Division, City of Hopewell, VA,
Consent Agreement Registration No. 50363, effective on July 12, 1996.
(6) Hopewell Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility, City of
Hopewell, VA, Consent Agreement Registration No. 50735, effective on
May 30, 1996.
(ii) Additional material.
(A) Technical Support Documents submitted as part of the RACT
determinations in paragraph (c)(120) (i) of this section by the
Commonwealth of Virginia on April 9, 1996, August 8, 16, 19, 23, 1996,
and March 26, 1997.
[FR Doc. 97-27124 Filed 10-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P