[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 118 (Monday, June 21, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 34301-34302]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-13933]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 70

[Regional Docket Nos. II-2002-03, -04, -12; FRL -7776-3]


Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petitions for Objection 
to State Operating Permits for Sirmos Division of Bromante; the New 
York City Transit Authority's East New York Bus Depot; and the New York 
Organic Fertilizer Company

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final orders on petitions to object to three State 
operating permits.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces that the EPA Administrator has 
responded to three citizen petitions asking EPA to object to operating 
permits issued to three facilities by the New York State Department of 
Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). Specifically, the Administrator 
has partially granted and partially denied each of the petitions 
submitted by the New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG) to 
object to each of the State operating permits issued to the following 
facilities: Sirmos Division of Bromante Corp. (Sirmos) in Long Island 
City, NY; New York City Transit Authority's (NYCTA) East NY Bus Depot 
in Brooklyn, NY; and New York Organic Fertilizer Company's (NYOFCO) 
sludge pelletization facility in the Bronx, NY.
    Pursuant to section 505(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act (Act), 
Petitioner may seek judicial review of those portions of the petitions 
which EPA denied in the United States Court of Appeals for the 
appropriate circuit. Any petition for review shall be filed within 60 
days from the date this notice appears in the Federal Register, 
pursuant to section 307 of the Act.

ADDRESSES: You may review copies of the final orders, the petitions, 
and other supporting information at the EPA Region 2 Office, 290 
Broadway, New York, New York 10007-1866. If you wish to examine these 
documents, you should make an appointment at least 24 hours before 
visiting day. Additionally, the final orders for Sirmos, the NYCTA, and 
NYFCO are available electronically at: http://www.epa.gov/region07/programs/artd/air/title5/petitiondb/petitiondb2002.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Riva, Chief, Permitting 
Section, Air Programs Branch, Division of Environmental Planning and 
Protection, EPA, Region 2, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New York 
10007-1866, telephone (212) 637-4074.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Act affords EPA a 45-day period to 
review, and object to as appropriate, operating permits proposed by 
State permitting authorities. Section 505(b)(2) of the Act authorizes 
any person to petition the EPA Administrator within 60 days after the 
expiration of this review period to object to State operating permits 
if EPA has not done so. Petitions must be based only on objections to 
the permit that were raised with reasonable specificity during the 
public comment period provided by the State, unless the petitioner 
demonstrates that it was impracticable to raise these issues during the 
comment period or the grounds for the issues arose after this period.

I. Sirmos

    On April 11, 2002, the EPA received a petition from NYPIRG, 
requesting that EPA object to the issuance of the title V operating 
permit for Sirmos. The petition raises issues regarding the permit 
application, the permit issuance process, and the permit itself. NYPIRG 
asserts that: (1) The permit was issued without adequate opportunity 
for public comment through a public hearing; (2) the permit is based on 
an inadequate permit application; (3) the permit lacks an adequate 
statement of basis; (4) the permit distorts the annual certification 
requirements; (5) the permit does not require prompt reporting of all 
deviations; (6) the permit's startup/shutdown, malfunction, 
maintenance, and upset provision violates part 70; (7) the emergency 
defense provision is in violation of 40 CFR 70.6(g); (8) the permit 
lacks federally enforceable conditions that govern the procedures for 
permit renewal; and (9) the permit lacks monitoring that is sufficient 
to assure the facility's compliance with all applicable requirements 
and many individual permit conditions are not practicably enforceable. 
On May 24, 2004, the Administrator issued an order partially granting 
and partially denying the petition on Sirmos. The order explains the 
reasons behind EPA's conclusion that the NYSDEC must reopen the permit 
to: (1) Include adequate monitoring to assure

[[Page 34302]]

compliance with the facility's opacity limits; (2) include periodic 
monitoring to assure compliance with the VOC handling, storage and 
disposal requirements of 6 NYCRR section 228.10; and (3) indicate the 
environmental rating for each air contaminant from each emission source 
as required under 6 NYCRR section 212.2. The order also explains the 
reasons for denying NYPIRG's remaining claims.

II. NYCTA

    On May 16, 2002, the EPA received a petition from NYPIRG, 
requesting that EPA object to the issuance of the title V operating 
permit for the NYCTA's East New York Bus Depot facility. NYPIRG raises 
8 of the 9 issues raised in the Sirmos petition (all except for issue 
7, above). On May 24, 2004, the Administrator issued an order partially 
granting and partially denying the petition. The order explains the 
reasons behind EPA's conclusion that the NYSDEC must reopen the permit 
to: (1) hold permittee responsible for complying with the sulfur-in-
fuel limit; (2) require daily inspection of solvent storage containers 
to ensure compliance with 6 NYCRR section 226; (3) require periodic 
monitoring for opacity during operation of the spray paint booths to 
assure compliance with 6 NYCRR section 228; (4) require periodic 
testing for VOC content of surface coating materials to assure 
compliance with 6 NYCRR section 228; and (5) address an old PM emission 
limit that applies to any oil fired stationary combustion installation. 
The order also explains the reasons for denying NYPIRG's remaining 
claims.

III. NYOFCO

    On October 4, 2002, the EPA received a petition from NYPIRG, 
requesting that EPA object to the issuance of the title V operating 
permit for the NYOFCO's sludge pelletization facility. NYPIRG raises 7 
of the 9 issues raised in the Sirmos petition (issues 2 through 6, 8, 
and 9, above). In addition, NYPIRG raises four additional issues in the 
petition for NYOFCO: (1) NYSDEC violated the public participation and 
record requirements; (2) the permit incorrectly states that the 
facility is not subject to new source review; (3) the permit fails to 
include an adequate compliance schedule; and (4) the final permit 
contains errors that were noted in a document presented by NYPIRG and 
local community groups to NYSDEC Region 2. On May 24, 2004, the 
Administrator issued an order partially granting and partially denying 
the petition. The order explains the reasons behind EPA's conclusion 
that the NYSDEC must reopen the permit to: (1) add to the ``federal-
side'' of the permit the SIP-approved ``excuse'' provision of 6 NYCRR 
section 201.5(e); (2) add opacity requirements pursuant to 6 NYCRR 
section 212.6 or explain why NYOFCO is not subject to this requirement; 
(3) add particulate matter requirements pursuant to 6 NYCRR section 
212.4(b) or explain why NYOFCO is not subject to this requirement; (4) 
for the sulfur-in-fuel provision, correct the citation to the SIP-
approved requirement, explain that certain requirements came from the 
previously issued State permit to construct and certificate to operate, 
and add monitoring based on fuel supplier reports; and (5) revise the 
mercury provision to specify the emission limitation and the required 
periodic monitoring. The order also explains the reasons for denying 
NYPIRG's remaining claims.

    Dated: June 8, 2004.
Jane M. Kenny,
Regional Administrator, Region 2.
[FR Doc. 04-13933 Filed 6-18-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P