[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 193 (Friday, October 4, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62179-62184]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-25158]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MA-083-7213a; A-1-FRL-7374-9]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Massachusetts; Volatile Organic Compound Reasonably Available Control 
Technology (RACT) Plans and Regulation

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

[[Page 62180]]


ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving several State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
revisions submitted by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. These 
revisions establish reasonably available control technology (RACT) 
requirements for major volatile organic compound (VOC) sources. The 
intended effect of this action is to approve these requirements into 
the Massachusetts SIP. EPA is taking this action in accordance with the 
Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective December 3, 2002, 
unless EPA receives relevant adverse comments by November 4, 2002. If 
EPA receives relevant adverse comments, we 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: Comments may be mailed to David Conroy, Unit Manager, Air 
Quality Planning, Office of Ecosystem Protection (mail code CAQ), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One 
Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02114-2023. Copies of the 
documents relevant to this action are available for public inspection 
during normal business hours, by appointment at the Office Ecosystem 
Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England 
Regional Office, One Congress Street, 11th floor, Boston, MA; Air and 
Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Room M-1500, 401 M Street, (Mail Code 6102), SW., Washington, 
DC [the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Room M-1500, 401 M Street, (Mail Code 
6102), SW., Washington, DC 20460 will be closed to the public from 
close of business Friday, August 9, 2002 until it re-opens Tuesday, 
August 27, 2002 at its new location--Air and Radiation Docket and 
Information Center, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Room B-108, 
1301 Constitution Avenue, (Mail Code 6102T) NW., Washington DC 20460]; 
and Division of Air Quality Control, Department of Environmental 
Protection, One Winter Street, 8th Floor, Boston, MA 02108.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne Arnold, (617) 918-1047.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This section is organized as follows:

    What Action Is EPA Taking?
    What are the Relevant Clean Air Act Requirements?
    What is a Control Techniques Guideline (CTG)?
    How has Massachusetts Addressed the New CTG Categories?
    What is EPA's Response to Massachusetts' Submittals for the New 
CTG Categories?
    What are the Regulations and Plan Approvals Massachusetts 
Submitted?
    Why is EPA Approving Massachusetts' Regulations and Plan 
Approvals?
    What is the Process for EPA to Approve These SIP Revisions?

What Action Is EPA Taking?

    EPA is approving VOC RACT plan approvals for four facilities in 
eastern Massachusetts. EPA is also approving Massachusetts' VOC RACT 
regulation 310 CMR 7.18 (17) as it applies to the Boston-Lawrence-
Worcester (eastern Massachusetts) ozone nonattainment area. In 
addition, EPA is also approving negative declarations Massachusetts 
submitted for certain VOC source categories and is determining that 
Massachusetts has met the CAA VOC RACT requirements for the aerospace 
coating and wood furniture manufacturing source categories through a 
combination of measures that are already federally enforceable.

What Are the Relevant Clean Air Act Requirements?

    Sections 182(b)(2) and 184(b) of the Clean Air Act contain the 
requirements relevant to today's action. 42 U.S.C. sections 7511a(b)(2) 
and 7511c(b). Section 182(b)(2) requires states to adopt RACT rules for 
all areas designated nonattainment for ozone and classified as moderate 
or above. There are three parts to the section 182(b)(2) RACT 
requirement: (1) RACT for sources covered by an existing Control 
Techniques Guideline (CTG)--i.e., a CTG issued prior to the enactment 
of the 1990 amendments to the CAA; (2) RACT for sources covered by a 
post-enactment CTG; and (3) all major sources not covered by a CTG, 
i.e., non-CTG sources.
    Pursuant to the CAA Amendments of 1990, all of Massachusetts was 
classified as serious nonattainment for ozone. Specifically, the 
following two areas were designated as serious ozone areas: the Boston-
Lawrence-Worcester (or eastern Massachusetts) area; and the Springfield 
(or western Massachusetts) area. See 56 FR 56694 (Nov. 6, 1991). These 
areas were, thus, subject to the section 182(b)(2) RACT requirement.
    In addition, Massachusetts is located in the Northeast Ozone 
Transport Region (OTR). The Commonwealth is, therefore, subject to 
section 184(b) of the CAA. Section 184(b) requires that RACT be 
implemented in the entire state for all VOC sources covered by a CTG 
issued before or after the enactment of the CAA Amendments of 1990 and 
for all major VOC sources (defined as 50 tons per year for sources in 
the OTR).

What Is a Control Techniques Guideline (CTG)?

    A CTG is a document EPA issues which establishes a ``presumptive 
norm'' for RACT for a specific VOC source category. Under the pre-
amended CAA, EPA issued CTG documents for 29 categories of VOC sources. 
Section 183 of the CAA requires that EPA issue 13 new CTGs. Appendix E 
of the General Preamble of Title I (57 FR 18077) lists the categories 
for which EPA plans to issue new CTGs.
    On November 15, 1993, EPA issued a CTG for Synthetic Organic 
Chemical Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI) Distillation Operations and 
Reactor Processes. Also, on August 27, 1996, EPA issued a CTG for 
shipbuilding and repair operations. On May 26, 1996, EPA issued a CTG 
for wood furniture finishing operations. Furthermore, on March 27, 
1998, EPA issued a CTG for aerospace coating operations.

How Has Massachusetts Addressed the New CTG Categories?

    In response to the requirements to adopt RACT for all sources 
covered by a new CTG, Massachusetts submitted negative declarations to 
EPA for the shipbuilding and repair operations and the SOCMI reactor 
processes CTG categories. Through these negative declarations, 
Massachusetts is confirming that there are no sources in the 
Commonwealth that would be subject to a rule for these categories.
    In addition, for the SOCMI distillation processes CTG category, 
Massachusetts stated in a letter, dated April 16, 1999, that Solutia 
Incorporated, in Springfield, is subject to this CTG. The letter also 
states that VOC emissions at this facility are currently controlled by 
a pollution control system with a required control efficiency of more 
than 85 percent and that this control requirement was determined to be 
best available control technology (BACT) in a federally enforceable 
plan approval issued pursuant to 310 CMR 7.02.
    Furthermore, for the wood products CTG category, Massachusetts 
submitted a letter, dated July 24, 2002, stating that there are six 
facilities in Massachusetts that exceed the 25 ton per year (tpy) 
applicability threshold for the wood furniture CTG. Three of these 
facilities (Athol Table, Mark Richey Woodwork, and Adden Furniture) are 
subject to 310 CMR 7.18(23), ``Wood Products Surface Coating.'' This 
rule applies to 50 tpy facilities and was approved into the

[[Page 62181]]

Massachusetts SIP on September 3, 1999 (64 FR 48297). In addition, one 
of the six facilities, Nichols and Stone, is subject to 310 CMR 
7.18(17), ``Reasonable Available Control Technology.'' RACT was 
determined for this facility several years prior to the issuance of 
EPA's wood furniture CTG and was submitted to EPA as a single source 
SIP revision on July 19, 1993. EPA approved this SIP revision on 
January 6, 1995 (60 FR 2017). Also, Massachusetts has issued the 
remaining two wood furniture facilities (Saloom Furniture and Eureka 
Manufacturing) federally enforceable BACT plan approvals pursuant to 
310 CMR 7.02. These BACT plan approvals contain the same emission 
limitations as those included in the wood furniture CTG.
    Finally, for the aerospace CTG, Massachusetts submitted a letter, 
dated July 24, 2002, stating that there are two facilities in 
Massachusetts that exceed the 25 tpy applicability threshold of the 
aerospace CTG. They are General Electric in Lynn and Raytheon in 
Lowell. The coating operations at these two facilities are covered by 
Massachusetts' miscellaneous metal parts and products coating 
regulation, 310 CMR 7.18(11). Also, the degreasing emissions at these 
two facilities are covered by Massachusetts' degreasing regulation 310 
CMR 7.18(8). Both 310 CMR 7.18(11) and 310 CMR 7.18(8) have been 
approved into the Massachusetts SIP. See 58 FR 34911 (June 30, 1993).

What Is EPA's Response to Massachusetts' Submittals for the New CTG 
Categories?

    EPA is approving Massachusetts' negative declarations as meeting 
the CAA section 182(b)(2) and section 184(b) requirements, as 
applicable, for the shipbuilding and repair operations and SOCMI 
reactor processes CTG categories. However, if evidence is submitted by 
November 4, 2002 that there are existing sources within Massachusetts 
that would be covered by the CTGs for these same categories,\1\ EPA 
would consider such comments adverse and we would withdraw this 
approval action on that negative declaration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The shipbuilding CTG applies to facilities that emit 50 tons 
of VOC or more per year. The applicability of the SOCMI reactors CTG 
is more complicated as it is determined on a per vent basis. For 
complete details on determining applicability for this CTG, see 
pages D-2 and D-3 of ``Control of Volatile Organic Compound 
Emissions from Reactor Processes and Distillation Operations 
Processes in the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing 
Industry,'' EPA-450/4-91-031, August 1993.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the SOCMI reactor distillation operations CTG category, the 
only source in Massachusetts subject to this CTG is meeting an 85 
percent control requirement which was determined to be BACT in a 
federally enforceable plan approval. EPA agrees that Massachusetts has 
met the VOC RACT requirements for this source category.
    For the wood furniture and aerospace CTG categories, Massachusetts 
has imposed requirements on the six facilities that are subject to the 
wood furniture CTG and on the two facilities that are subject to the 
aerospace CTG through a combination of measures (i.e., VOC regulations 
and BACT and RACT plan approvals) that are already federally 
enforceable. EPA has evaluated these measures and has found that they 
are generally consistent with the applicable CTGs. Therefore, EPA is 
approving these measures as meeting RACT for the aerospace and wood 
furniture CTG categories. The specific requirements imposed on the 
aerospace and wood furniture facilities and EPA's evaluation of these 
requirements are detailed in a memorandum dated August 20, 2002, 
entitled ``Technical Support Document--Massachusetts--VOC RACT'' (TSD). 
The TSD, as well as the various plan approvals on which EPA is relying 
to enforce RACT, are available in the docket supporting this action.

What Are the Regulations and Plan Approvals Massachusetts Submitted?

    On February 17, 1993, Massachusetts submitted 310 CMR 7.18(17) 
``Reasonable Available Control Technology.'' In addition, Massachusetts 
subsequently submitted SIP revisions for the following four facilities 
which are subject to 310 CMR 7.18(17):
    [sbull] Barnet Corporation of Peabody;
    [sbull] Rex Finishing Incorporated of Peabody;
    [sbull] Norton Company of Worcester; and
    [sbull] Gillette Company's Andover Manufacturing Center.
    Massachusetts' regulation and the plan approvals for the four 
facilities listed above are discussed in more detail below.

310 CMR 7.18(17), Reasonable Available Control Technology

    This regulation describes a process by which RACT can be defined, 
but does not specifically define RACT for each source applicable to the 
regulation. Therefore, in order to receive full approval, Massachusetts 
must define, and EPA must approve, RACT for all of the sources that are 
subject to 310 CMR 7.18(17). EPA previously approved this rule for the 
Springfield ozone nonattainment area. See 64 FR 48297 (September 3, 
1999). In this rulemaking, EPA noted that there were sources in the 
eastern Massachusetts ozone nonattainment area for which EPA had not 
yet approved RACT plans and that EPA would address 310 CMR 7.18(17) for 
the eastern Massachusetts area in a separate rulemaking, along with the 
case-specific RACT determinations. Massachusetts has defined RACT for 
Barnet, Rex Finishing, Gillette, and Norton as described below.

Barnet and Rex Finishing

    On April 16, 1999, Massachusetts submitted VOC RACT plan approvals 
for Barnet and Rex Finishing to EPA as a SIP revision. At these 
facilities, VOCs are emitted from leather finishing operations. 
Massachusetts determined that implementing low VOC coatings and certain 
work practice and equipment standards represent RACT for Barnet and Rex 
Finishing. The plan approvals require these facilities to meet specific 
emission limitations and to maintain daily records in order to 
demonstrate compliance with these limits.

Gillette

    On October 7, 1999, Massachusetts submitted a VOC RACT plan 
approval for Gillette to EPA as a SIP revision. Gillette manufactures 
shaving cream and deodorants at its Andover, Massachusetts facility. 
The majority of VOC emissions from the facility are hydrocarbon 
propellants (e.g., isobutane) and ethanol solvents from aerosol 
propellant filling. The plan approval requires Gillette to use through 
the valve filling (TTV) for all products that can be successfully TTV-
filled. TTV-filling is currently recognized as the lowest-emitting 
aerosol filling process available. The plan approval also caps VOC 
emissions to a maximum of 150 tons per rolling 12 month calendar period 
and 50 tons per month. Additionally, the plan approval requires 
Gillette to implement a leak detection and repair program. Finally, the 
plan approval also sets recordkeeping, reporting, and testing 
requirements.

Norton

    On October 7, 1999, Massachusetts submitted a VOC RACT plan 
approval for Norton Company to EPA as a SIP revision. Norton is a 
manufacturer of abrasive products, ceramic grinding wheels, and high 
performance refractories. VOCs are emitted in the manufacture of these 
products. Norton has reduced its VOC emissions by using material 
substitution, reformulation, emission controls, good housekeeping and 
better operating practices. The plan

[[Page 62182]]

approval requires Norton to meet several enforceable short and long 
term RACT limits which are specified and tracked by business unit or 
similar unit operation. In addition, the plan approval also sets the 
appropriate recordkeeping, reporting, and testing requirements in order 
to demonstrate compliance with these emission limits.
    In addition to the SIP revisions submitted for the four facilities 
discussed above, Massachusetts also submitted documentation regarding 
two other facilities subject to 310 CMR 7.18(17), namely Polaroid of 
Waltham and Globe Manufacturing of Fall River. The VOC RACT plan 
approval submitted for Polaroid on April 16, 1999 was subsequently 
superseded by two federally enforceable BACT plan approvals that were 
issued to Polaroid on December 22, 1999 and September 15, 2000. When 
taken together, these two BACT plan approvals cover all of the 
processes that were included in the previously issued RACT plan 
approval. In addition, the BACT plan approvals require emission 
reductions above and beyond those required by the RACT plan. Therefore, 
in a letter dated July 24, 2002, the Massachusetts DEP withdrew its 
April 16, 1999 SIP revision request for Polaroid. In addition, 
Massachusetts submitted documentation showing that the three VOC 
emitting processes at Globe (the reaction spin process; the dry spin 
process; and the rubber fiber process) are subject to federally 
enforceable requirements contained in two BACT plan approvals issued to 
the facility on June 6, 1996 and November 24, 1997.

Why Is EPA Approving Massachusetts' Regulations and Plan Approvals?

    EPA has evaluated the plan approvals submitted for the facilities 
listed above and has found that these plan approvals are consistent 
with EPA guidance and impose RACT at these facilities. Therefore, EPA 
is approving the plan approvals for Barnet, Rex, Gillette, and Norton 
into the Massachusetts SIP. EPA has also evaluated Massachusetts 310 
CMR 7.18(17) and has found that this regulation is generally consistent 
with EPA guidance, with the exception discussed above, and requires 
RACT to be developed at the facilities covered by the CAA. Since 
Massachusetts has, however, adequately addressed all of the applicable 
sources in the eastern Massachusetts serious ozone nonattainment area 
required to have RACT, EPA is approving this regulation as meeting the 
CAA requirements for this area. Finally, EPA has evaluated BACT plan 
approvals issued under 310 CMR 7.02 and has determined that they impose 
a level of control at least equivalent to RACT.
    The specific requirements of the plan approvals and of 
Massachusetts 310 CMR 7.18(17) and EPA's evaluation of these 
requirements are detailed in the TSD.
    Although EPA is not incorporating the BACT plan approvals issued 
under 310 CMR 7.02 into the SIP, because they are already federally 
enforceable under the SIP-approved section 7.02, these plan approvals 
are available for inspection in the docket supporting this action.

What Is the Process for EPA To Approve These SIP Revisions?

    The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the 
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no 
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this 
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document 
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should EPA 
receive relevant adverse comments. This action will be effective 
December 3, 2002 without further notice unless the EPA receives 
relevant adverse comments by November 4, 2002.
    If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document 
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will 
not take effect. EPA will then address all public comments in a 
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not 
institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting 
should do so at this time. If EPA receives no such comments, the public 
is advised that this rule will be effective on December 3, 2002 and EPA 
will take no further action on the proposed rule. Please note that if 
EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of 
this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of 
the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are 
not the subject of an adverse comment.
    Final Action: EPA is approving the VOC RACT plan approvals for 
Barnet, Rex Finishing, Gillette Company, and Norton Company. EPA is 
also approving Massachusetts' VOC RACT regulation 310 CMR 7.18 (17) as 
it applies to the eastern Massachusetts ozone nonattainment area. In 
addition, EPA is approving Massachusetts' negative declarations for the 
shipbuilding and repair operations and SOCMI reactor processes CTG 
categories. EPA is also approving the Solutia BACT permit as meeting 
the CAA VOC RACT requirements for the SOCMI distillation reactors 
category. Finally, EPA is approving a combination of already federally 
enforceable measures (namely, the VOC RACT regulations and the RACT and 
BACT plan approvals discussed above) as meeting the CAA VOC RACT 
requirements for the aerospace and wood furniture manufacturing 
operations CTG categories.

III. Administrative Requirements

    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. For this 
reason, 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). 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.). 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).
    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 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 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), because it 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. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety

[[Page 62183]]

Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.
    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. 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.)
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 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).
    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 3, 2002. Interested 
parties should comment in response to the proposed rule rather than 
petition for judicial review, unless the objection arises after the 
comment period allowed for in the proposal. 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 3, 2002.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.

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

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

Subpart W--Massachusetts

    2. Section 52.1120 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(129) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  52.1120  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (129) Revisions to the State Implementation Plan submitted by the 
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection on February 17, 
1993, April 16, 1999, and October 7, 1999.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) 310 CMR 7.18(17) ``Reasonable Available Control Technology,'' 
as it applies to the eastern Massachusetts ozone nonattainment area, 
effective in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on February 12, 1993.
    (B) Plan Approval issued by the Massachusetts Department of 
Environmental Protection to the Gillette Company Andover Manufacturing 
Plant on June 17, 1999.
    (C) Plan Approval issued by the Massachusetts Department of 
Environmental Protection to Norton Company on August 5, 1999 and letter 
from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, dated 
October 7, 1999, identifying the effective date of this plan approval.
    (D) Plan Approval issued by the Massachusetts Department of 
Environmental Protection to Rex Finishing Incorporated on May 10, 1991 
and letter from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental 
Protection, dated April 16, 1999, identifying the effective date of 
this plan approval.
    (E) Plan Approval issued by the Massachusetts Department of 
Environmental Protection to Barnet Corporation on May 14, 1991.
    (ii) Additional materials.
    (A) Letter from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental 
Protection, dated April 16, 1999, submitting negative declarations for 
certain VOC source categories.
    (B) Letter from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental 
Protection, dated July 24, 2002, discussing wood furniture 
manufacturing and aerospace coating requirements in Massachusetts.
    (C) 310 CMR 7.02 BACT plan approvals issued by the Massachusetts 
Department of Environmental Protection to Solutia, Saloom Furniture, 
Eureka Manufacturing, Moduform, Polaroid, and Globe.
* * * * *
    3. In Sec.  52.1167, Table 52.1167 is amended by adding new entries 
to existing state citation for 310 CMR 7.18(17).


Sec.  52.1167  EPA--approved Massachusetts State regulations.

* * * * *

[[Page 62184]]



                                                  Table 52.1167--EPA-Approved Massachusetts Regulations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                            Comments/
     State citation                  Title/Subject            Date submitted by   Date approved by   Federal Register     52.1120(c)        unapproved
                                                                    State               EPA              citation                            sections
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
310 CMR 7.18(17)........  Reasonable Available Control        2/17/93..........  10/4/02..........  [Insert FR         129.............  Approves VOC
                           Technology.                                                               citation from                        RACT
                                                                                                     published date].                     requirements
                                                                                                                                          for the
                                                                                                                                          eastern
                                                                                                                                          Massachusetts
                                                                                                                                          ozone
                                                                                                                                          nonattainment
                                                                                                                                          area. (These
                                                                                                                                          requirements
                                                                                                                                          were
                                                                                                                                          previously
                                                                                                                                          approved for
                                                                                                                                          the western
                                                                                                                                          Massachusetts
                                                                                                                                          ozone
                                                                                                                                          nonattainment
                                                                                                                                          area.)
310 CMR 7.18(17)........  Reasonable Available Control        10/7/99..........  10/4/02..........  [Insert FR         129.............  VOC RACT plan
                           Technology.                                                               citation from                        approval for
                                                                                                     published date].                     Gilette.
310 CMR 7.18(17)........  Reasonable Available Control        10/7/99..........  10/4/02..........  [Insert FR         129.............  VOC RACT plan
                           Technology.                                                               citation from                        approval for
                                                                                                     published date].                     Norton.
310 CMR 7.18(17)........  Reasonable Available Control        4/16/99..........  10/4/02..........  [Insert FR         129.............  VOC RACT plan
                           Technology.                                                               citation from                        approval for
                                                                                                     published date].                     Rex.
310 CMR 7.18(17)........  Reasonable Available Control        4/16/99..........  10/4/02..........  [Insert FR         129.............  VOC RACT plan
                           Technology.                                                               citation from                        Available for
                                                                                                     published date].                     Barnet.
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 02-25158 Filed 10-3-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P