[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 247 (Monday, December 23, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67469-67472]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-32371]


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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52

[IL144-1a; FRL 5648-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Illinois

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On January 10, 1996, the State of Illinois submitted a State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision request to the EPA which grants a 
variance to Rexam Medical Packaging Inc. facility located in Mundelein, 
Lake County, Illinois (Rexam). This variance extends the date by which 
certain flexographic printing presses operated by Rexam must comply 
with Illinois' Volatile Organic Material (VOM) Reasonably Available 
Control Technology (RACT) rules. This rulemaking action approves, 
through direct final, this SIP revision request; the rationale for this 
approval is set forth in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. Elsewhere in this 
Federal Register, EPA is proposing approval and soliciting comment on 
this direct final action; if adverse comments are received, EPA will 
withdraw the direct final and address the comments received in a new

[[Page 67470]]

final rule. Unless this direct final is withdrawn, no further 
rulemaking will occur on this requested SIP revision.

DATES: The ``direct final'' is effective on February 21, 1997, unless 
EPA receives adverse or critical comments by January 22, 1997. If the 
effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the 
Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of this SIP revision request are available for 
inspection at the following address: U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson 
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. (It is recommended that you 
telephone Mark J. Palermo at (312) 886-6082 before visiting the Region 
5 Office.)
    Written comments should be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, 
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark J. Palermo at (312) 886-6082.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Section 182(a)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act (Act) requires states to 
``fix-up'' deficient RACT regulations for ozone nonattainment areas, 
and section 182(b)(2) of the Act requires States with severe ozone 
nonattainment areas to ``catch-up'' by revising the RACT applicability 
threshold from 100 tons per year (TPY) potential to emit to 25 TPY 
potential to emit. On September 9, 1994, EPA approved, as a revision to 
the Illinois SIP for ozone, a number of VOM RACT regulations, including 
35 Illinois Administrative Code part 218, subpart H (section 218.401 
through 218.405), which governs the control of VOM from printing and 
publishing operations in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area (59 FR at 
46562). These regulations were submitted in order to meet the State's 
``fix-up'' requirement for the Chicago severe ozone nonattainment area. 
This area includes Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, Will Counties and 
Aux Sable and Goose Lake Townships in Grundy County and Oswego Township 
in Kendall County.
    On January 26, 1996, EPA promulgated a direct final rulemaking 
approving a second set of Illinois VOM RACT regulations, part of which 
includes a revision to section 218.402, which changed the RACT 
applicability threshold to include sources with flexographic and/or 
rotogravure printing line(s) with a potential to emit of 25 TPY or more 
of VOM (including emissions from solvents used for cleanup operations 
associated with the flexographic and rotogravure printing line(s)), in 
order to comply with the RACT ``catch-up'' requirements. Also included 
was a revision to section 218.106, the general compliance date 
provisions for regulations under part 218 (61 FR 2423). This revision 
provides a compliance date of March 15, 1995, for sources newly subject 
to the 25 TPY applicability threshold. The direct final approval was 
withdrawn on March 25, 1996 (61 FR 12030), due to an adverse comment 
addressing an issue unrelated to the new applicability requirements for 
printing presses. The comment will be addressed in a new final rule in 
an upcoming Federal Register.
    Section 218.401(a) of subpart H requires subject sources to apply 
no coating or ink on any flexographic or rotogravure printing line 
unless the VOM content does not exceed either 40% VOM by volume of the 
coating/ink as applied (minus water and any compounds specifically 
exempted from the definition of VOM), or 25% VOM by volume of the 
volatile content in the coating and ink. Section 218.401(b) allows 
daily-weighted averaging to comply with the above listed VOM content 
limits, whereby coatings/inks with higher VOM content can be used if 
offset by lower VOM content coatings/inks. Section 218.401(c) allows 
for alternative compliance with the VOM content limits through 
operation of a control device which reduces captured VOM emissions by 
at least 90% by weight, in a capture system with the control device 
which provides an overall reduction in VOM emissions of at least 75% 
for publication rotogravure printing lines, 65% for packaging 
rotogravure printing lines, and 60% for flexographic printing lines.

II. Summary of SIP Submittal

    Rexam manufactures sterilizable flexible packaging and other film 
products such as bags, pouches, and rollstock for sterilization 
protection of medical devices and products. The packages are sold to 
medical device manufacturers and health care providers, and are 
designed to permit gas sterilization and aeration of the contents while 
maintaining sterility until the packages are opened. To meet customer 
approval, the packages must be printed with user instructions which 
will stay adhered to the packages and not contaminate the medical 
product when opened. In addition, the packages must be printed with 
special inks used as sterilization indicators. These inks change color 
to indicate whether the medical product inside the package has been 
sterilized.
    On March 14, 1995, Rexam filed a petition for variance with the 
Illinois Pollution Control Board (Board). At the time of the petition, 
the Rexam facility operated 18 flexographic printing presses subject to 
the RACT requirements of subpart H and the compliance date of March 15, 
1995. In the petition, Rexam indicated that in 1990, the facility began 
a process to install and test press equipment for the application of 
water-based ink that would not only meet VOM content requirements, but 
customer approval, as well. Rexam indicated that this process was 
difficult because the use of water-based inks was new to the medical 
packaging industry. On March 15, 1995, 13 of the 18 presses were 
applying water-based inks to medical packaging which both complied with 
VOM content requirements and met customer specifications. The 5 presses 
not in compliance included, Inline Press No. 105, Inline Press No. 107, 
Inline Press No. 111, Offline 32-inch press, and Offline 36-inch press.
    Rexam contended Inline Press No. 105 and Offline 32-inch press, the 
presses used to print indicator inks, were out of compliance because no 
trialed technology for water-based indicator inks was available. 
Further, the remaining presses were out of compliance because, 
according to Rexam, customer approval to convert the presses to water-
based technology had not yet been obtained. Rexam indicated the delay 
in customer approval was due primarily to the extensive validation and 
testing trial period used by the customers to determine the integrity 
of the water-based inks and the packaging's sterilization capability. 
Because of these compliance difficulties, Rexam requested a compliance 
date extension to install and operate a catalytic oxidizer in 
accordance with subpart H, which would control emissions from the 
presses applying indicator inks. In addition, the extended compliance 
would allow the customer approval process for the remaining presses to 
reach completion. The petition also requested that a proposed 42-inch 
offline press to apply indicator inks also be covered under the 
variance Subsequent to the petition, Inline Press No. 107 was converted 
to water-based ink.
    A public hearing on the variance petition was held on August 18, 
1995, in Libertyville, Illinois, before the Board. On October 19, 1995, 
the Board granted a variance (PCB 95-99) from subpart H to Rexam for 
its Inline Press No. 105, Inline Press No. 111, Offline 32-inch Press, 
Offline 42-inch Press, and

[[Page 67471]]

Offline 36-inch Press. The variance extends the compliance date for the 
5 presses from March 15, 1995, until June 15, 1996, or upon submittal 
of the ``certificate of compliance'' required under section 218.404 of 
subpart H, whichever occurs first. The variance includes a compliance 
plan requiring the installation and use of a catalytic oxidizer to 
control emissions from Inline Press No. 105, Inline Press No. 111, 
Offline 32-inch Press, and Offline 42-inch Press. The remaining press, 
Offline 36-inch Press, is required to convert to water-based ink, or be 
controlled by the oxidizer if the press is not converted by March 1, 
1996. The variance is contingent upon certain compliance milestone 
conditions intended to assure that all the presses are in compliance by 
June 15, 1996.
    The variance was granted because Rexam presented adequate proof to 
the Board that immediate compliance with subpart H would result in an 
arbitrary or unreasonable hardship which outweighs the public interest 
in attaining immediate compliance with regulations designed to protect 
the public. Such a burden of proof is required by Illinois law before a 
variance can be granted. The effective date of the variance is March 
15, 1995. The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency formally 
submitted the variance to EPA on January 10, 1996, as a revision to the 
Illinois SIP for ozone.

III. EPA Evaluation of Submittal

    Section 182(b)(2) requires state rules intended to meet RACT 
``catch-up'' requirements be implemented by May 31, 1995. Under this 
variance, Rexam's compliance with Illinois' rule would extend beyond 
this date. However, based on the information provided in the SIP 
submittal, the EPA finds that the variance for Rexam is justified, and 
the compliance milestone provisions required by the variance represent 
a reasonable approach to bringing the Rexam facility into compliance in 
a timely manner. Therefore, the EPA finds this SIP submittal 
approvable.

IV. Final Rulemaking Action.

    The EPA approves, through direct final, the Illinois SIP revision 
request. With the effective date of this approval, the October 19, 1995 
variance, PCB 95-99, for Rexam, becomes federally enforceable.
    The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because 
EPA views this as a noncontroversial revision and anticipates no 
adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal 
Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision 
should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be 
effective on February 21, 1997 unless, by January 22, 1997, adverse or 
critical comments on the approval are received.
    If the EPA receives adverse comment by the date listed above, the 
direct final will be withdrawn before the effective date by publishing 
a subsequent rulemaking that will withdraw the final action. All public 
comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on 
this action serving as a proposed rule. The 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 February 21, 1997.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing 
or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any 
SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be considered 
separately in light of specific technical, economic, and environmental 
factors and in relation to relevant statutory and regulatory 
requirements.

VII. Administrative Requirements

    A. Executive Order 12866. 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 D. 
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation. The Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this regulatory action from 
Executive Order 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility

    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 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 Act, preparation of a flexibility analysis would 
constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of the 
State action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions 
concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. EPA., 427 U.S. 
246, 256-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

C. Unfunded Mandates

    Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 
signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must undertake various actions 
in association with 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 the private sector, of $100 million 
or more. 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 the private sector, result from this action.

D. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by February 21, 1997. 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, Incorporation by 
reference, Ozone, Volatile Organic Compounds.

    Dated: September 27, 1996.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, title 
40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 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.

[[Page 67472]]

Subpart O--Illinois

    2. Section 52.720 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(131) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.720  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (131) On January 10, 1996, the State of Illinois submitted a site-
specific State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision request for ozone, 
which extends the required deadline for the Rexam Medical Packaging 
Inc. facility in Mundelein, Lake County, Illinois (Rexam), to comply 
with 35 Illinois Administrative Code, part 218, subpart H, as it 
applies to its Inline Press Number No.105, Inline Press No. 111, 
Offline 32-inch Press, Offline 36-inch Press, and Offline 42-inch 
press. The compliance date is extended from March 15, 1995, until June 
15, 1996, or upon submittal of the ``certificate of compliance'' 
required under section 218.404 of subpart H, whichever occurs first. 
The variance includes a compliance plan requiring the installation and 
use of a catalytic oxidizer to control emissions from Inline Press No. 
105, Inline Press No. 111, Offline 32-inch Press, and Offline 42-inch 
Press. The Offline 36-inch Press is required to convert to water-based 
ink, or be controlled by the oxidizer if the press is not converted by 
March 1, 1996. The variance is contingent upon certain compliance 
milestone conditions.
    (i) Incorporation by reference. (A) Illinois Pollution Control 
Board Final Opinion and Order, PCB 95-99, adopted on October 19, 1995, 
and effective March 15, 1995. Certification of Acceptance dated 
November 29, 1996, by Rexam.

[FR Doc. 96-32371 Filed 12-20-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P