[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 243 (Wednesday, December 18, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 77430-77432]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-31666]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[KY 139-200307(a); FRL-7423-3]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans for Kentucky: 
Source-Specific Revision for Lawson Mardon Packaging

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a source-specific revision to the State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. This 
revision allows Lawson Mardon Packaging, USA, Corporation to have an 
alternative compliance averaging period of 30 days instead of the 24-
hour averaging period specified by Kentucky air quality regulations 
59:210 and 59:212.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective February 18, 2003 without 
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by January 17, 
2003. If adverse comment is received, EPA 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.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to: Michele Notarianni, Air 
Planning Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 4, 61 
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. (404/562-9031 (phone) 
or [email protected] (e-mail).)
    Copies of the Commonwealth's submittal are available at the 
following addresses for inspection during normal business hours: 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Air Planning Branch, 61 
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. (Michele Notarianni, 
404/562-9031, [email protected])
    Commonwealth of Kentucky, Division for Air Quality, 803 Schenkel 
Lane, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601-1403. (502/573-3382)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michele Notarianni at address listed 
above or 404/562-9031 (phone) or [email protected] (e-mail).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Today's Action
II. EPA's Evaluation
III. Final Action

I. Today's Action

    The EPA is approving a source-specific revision into the Kentucky 
SIP for the Lawson Mardon Packaging, USA, Corporation (LMP) located in 
Shelby County, Kentucky. The revision was submitted to EPA by Kentucky 
on March 4, 2002. This revision allows LMP to use a 30-day averaging 
period instead of the required 24-hour averaging period as specified in 
Kentucky air quality regulations 59:210, ``New fabric, vinyl and paper 
surface coating operations,'' and 59:212, ``New graphic arts facilities 
using rotogravure and flexography.'' The effect of today's approval 
action is that once LMP's synthetic minor operating permit is 
finalized, LMP shall determine compliance with volatile organic 
compound (VOC) emission rates allowed by its permit every 30 days 
instead of every 24 hours.

II. EPA's Evaluation

    The LMP plant in Shelbyville, Kentucky manufactures flexible 
packaging for the food and pharmaceutical industries. LMP currently 
operates a total of 15 printing and/or laminating machines. The plant's 
proposed, facility-wide synthetic minor operating permit covers all 15 
machines,

[[Page 77431]]

and is conditioned on EPA's approval of the permit as a source-specific 
SIP revision.
    The Agency's policy regarding emissions time averaging for existing 
sources of VOCs is established and clarified in a January 20, 1984, EPA 
Memorandum from John O'Connor, Acting Director of the Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, to Air Directors in Regions I-X. The 
policy requires that SIP revisions relating to VOC control must 
maintain the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone. 
To allow VOC compliance averaging periods greater than 24 hours, the 
policy establishes four conditions which are summarized below along 
with EPA's analysis of the LMP submittal.
    Condition 1: Real reductions in actual emissions must be achieved, 
consistent with Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) levels 
in SIPs or Agency control technique guidelines. EPA Analysis: 
Incinerators are used as add-on controls on those production lines 
required to have them. These controls meet or exceed RACT control 
levels.
    Condition 2: Averaging periods must be as short as practicable, and 
in no case longer than 30 days. EPA Analysis: LMP has requested a 30-
day compliance averaging period, which meets this condition. LMP 
supported its request with a statistical analysis demonstrating that 
daily, maximum potential VOC emissions are significantly less than 
daily, maximum allowable VOC emissions. The level of confidence for the 
statistical analysis is 99.73 percent.
    Condition 3: A demonstration must be made that the use of averaging 
periods greater than 24 hours will not jeopardize the ozone NAAQS or 
the Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) plan for the area. EPA Analysis: 
LMP submitted a statistical analysis to compare 24-hour and 30-day 
compliance averaging results against maximum allowable permit VOC 
emission rates. The analysis accounts for potential daily emission 
fluctuations and shows that actual VOC emissions for eight of LMP's 
older machines are consistently and far below the allowable VOC 
emission rates. The analysis does not include data from seven, newer 
machines, which were installed after submittal of LMP's permit 
application, because data were not available at that time. However, 
because the seven, newer machines have better overall control 
efficiencies and less variation than the older machines, the 
statistical analysis for the existing machines may also be applied to 
the new machines as representative. A further consideration is that LMP 
uses continuous emission monitoring systems to ensure its control 
equipment is operating properly and within limits.
    Condition 4: Sources in areas with measured violations cannot be 
considered for longer term averaging until the SIP has been revised to 
demonstrate attainment of the ozone NAAQS and maintenance of RFP. EPA 
Analysis: Shelby County, Kentucky is currently classified as 
unclassified/attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and is currently 
attaining the standard. The closest, downwind monitor has not shown an 
exceedance of the 1-hour NAAQS within the last five years. Conditions 
addressing RFP plans are not applicable to 1-hour ozone attainment 
areas.

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving this source-specific revision to the Kentucky SIP 
allowing LMP to use a 30-day compliance averaging period because it is 
consistent with the requirements of the Clean Air Act and EPA policy. 
Use of an alternative averaging period is not expected to jeopardize 
maintenance of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in Shelby County for reasons 
discussed in section II.
    The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the 
Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal 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 
adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective February 18, 
2003 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments 
by January 17, 2003.
    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. All public comments received will then be addressed 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 no such comments are received, the public 
is advised that this rule will be effective on February 18, 2003 and no 
further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

V. 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). 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. 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.
    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

[[Page 77432]]

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. 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 this action under section 801 because 
this is a rule of particular applicability.
    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 February 18, 2003. 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, Intergovernmental 
relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 
organic compounds.

    Dated: December 5, 2002.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    Part 52 of chapter I, title 40, 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 et seq.

Subpart S--Kentucky

    2. Section 52.920(d) is amended by adding a new entry at the end of 
the table to read as follows:


Sec.  52.920  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *

                               EPA--Approved Kentucky Source-Specific Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        State effective                        Federal Register
         Name of source             Permit  number           date          EPA approval date        Notice
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Lawson Mardon USA Packaging       N/A...............  February 18, 2003.  December 18, 2002.  [Insert FR page
 Corporation.                                                                                  citation]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 02-31666 Filed 12-17-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P