[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 39 (Tuesday, March 1, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 9872-9875]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-3908]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[R01-OAR-2004-ME-0002a; A-1-FRL-7876-8 ]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Maine; Control of Total Reduced Sulfur From Kraft Pulp Mills

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a revision to Maine's plan for 
controlling air pollution according to section 111(d) of the Clean Air 
Act (i.e., a ``111(d) plan''). This revision changes state regulations 
controlling the emission of total reduced sulfur (``TRS'') from 
existing kraft paper mills by making April 17, 2007 the compliance date 
for brownstock washers. This action is being taken in accordance with 
section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act (``CAA'').

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective May 2, 2005, unless EPA 
receives adverse comments by March 31, 2005. If adverse comments are 
received, EPA 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 Lucy Edmondson, acting Unit 
Manager, Air Permits, Toxics and Indoor Program Unit, Office of 
Ecosystem Protection (mail code CAP), U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 
1100, Boston, MA 02114-2023. Comments may also be submitted 
electronically, or through hand delivery/courier. Please follow the 
detailed instructions described in Part (I)(B)(1)(i) through (iii) of 
the Supplementary Information section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ian D. Cohen, Air Permits, Toxics, and 
Indoor Air Programs Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New 
England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAP), Boston, 
MA 02114-2023, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?

    1. The Regional Office has established an official public 
rulemaking file available for inspection at the Regional Office. EPA 
has established an official public rulemaking file for this action 
under R01-OAR-2004-ME-0002. The official public file consists of the 
documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments 
received, and other information related to this action. Although a part 
of the official docket, the public rulemaking file does not include 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public rulemaking 
file is the collection of materials that is available for public 
viewing at the Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One Congress 
Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, 
you contact the contact listed in the For Further Information Contact 
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official 
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding 
Federal holidays.
    2. Copies of the State submittal and EPA's technical support 
document are also available for public inspection during normal 
business hours, by appointment at the State Air Agency. Department of 
Environmental Protection, First Floor of the Tyson Building, Augusta 
Mental Health Institute Complex, Augusta, ME 04333-0017; Division of 
Air Quality Control.
    3. Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document 
electronically through the Regulations.gov web site located at http://www.regulations.gov where you can find, review, and submit comments on 
Federal rules that have been published in the Federal Register, the 
Government's legal newspaper, and are open for comment.
    For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is 
that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, 
will be made available for public viewing at the EPA Regional Office, 
as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains 
copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing 
copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in 
the version of the comment that is placed in the official public 
rulemaking file. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted 
material, will be available at the Regional Office for public 
inspection.

[[Page 9873]]

B. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments?

    You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand 
delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the 
appropriate rulemaking identification number by including the text 
``Public comment on proposed rulemaking R01-OAR-2004-ME-0002'' in the 
subject line on the first page of your comment. Please ensure that your 
comments are submitted within the specified comment period. Comments 
received after the close of the comment period will be marked ``late.'' 
EPA is not required to consider these late comments.
    1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as 
prescribed below, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing 
address, and an e-mail address or other contact information in the body 
of your comment. Also include this contact information on the outside 
of any disk or CD-ROM you submit, and in any cover letter accompanying 
the disk or CD-ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the 
submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA 
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further 
information on the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that EPA 
will not edit your comment, and any identifying or contact information 
provided in the body of a comment will be included as part of the 
comment that is placed in the official public docket. If EPA cannot 
read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you 
for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
    i. E-mail. Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail) to 
[email protected], please include the text ``Public comment on 
proposed rulemaking R01-OAR-2004-ME-0002'' in the subject line. EPA's 
e-mail system is not an ``anonymous access'' system. If you send an e-
mail comment directly without going through Regulations.gov, EPA's e-
mail system automatically captures your e-mail address. E-mail 
addresses that are automatically captured by EPA's e-mail system are 
included as part of the comment that is placed in the official public 
docket.
    ii. Regulations.gov. Your use of Regulations.gov is an alternative 
method of submitting electronic comments to EPA. Go directly to 
Regulations.gov at http://www.regulations.gov, then click on the button 
``TO SEARCH FOR REGULATIONS CLICK HERE'', and select Environmental 
Protection Agency as Agency name to search on. The list of current EPA 
actions available for comment will be listed. Please follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. The system is an ``anonymous 
access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity, e-mail 
address, or other contact information unless you provide it in the body 
of your comment.
    iii. Disk or CD-ROM. You may submit comments on a disk or CD-ROM 
that you mail to the mailing address identified in Section 2, directly 
below. These electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect, 
Word or ASCII file format. Avoid the use of special characters and any 
form of encryption.
    2. By Mail. Send your comments to: Lucy Edmondson, acting Unit 
Manager, Air Permits, Toxics and Indoor Program Unit, Office of 
Ecosystem Protection (mail code CAP), U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 
1100, Boston, MA 02114-2023. Please include the text ``Public comment 
on proposed rulemaking R01-OAR-2004-ME-0002'' in the subject line on 
the first page of your comment
    3. By Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Lucy 
Edmondson, acting Unit Manager, Air Permits, Toxics and Indoor Program 
Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 
11th floor, (CAP), Boston, MA 02114-2023. Such deliveries are only 
accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The 
Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 
8:30 to 4:30 excluding Federal holidays.

C. How Should I Submit CBI to the Agency?

    Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI 
electronically to EPA. You may claim information that you submit to EPA 
as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI (if you 
submit CBI on disk or CD-ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as 
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the 
specific information that is CBI). Information so marked will not be 
disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 
2.
    In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes 
any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not 
contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion 
in the official public regional rulemaking file. If you submit the copy 
that does not contain CBI on disk or CD-ROM, mark the outside of the 
disk or CD-ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not 
marked as CBI will be included in the public file and available for 
public inspection without prior notice. If you have any questions about 
CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person 
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

II. Rulemaking Information

    Organization of this document. The following outline is provided 
to aid in locating information in this preamble.

A. Background and Purpose.
B. Summary of Change.

III. Summary of SIP Revision

A. What Is Total Reduced Sulfur?
B. What Is a Brownstock Washer?
C. What Is Maine's Requested Change to Chapter 124?
D. Why Is Maine requesting This Change?
E. What Actions Did Maine Take To Satisfy the Federal Public Hearing 
Requirement?
F. Why Is EPA Approving This Change?

IV. Final Action

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

II. Rulemaking Information

A. Background and Purpose

    Section 111(d) of the CAA allows EPA to approve state plans to 
regulate emissions from existing sources of ``designated pollutants,'' 
i.e., pollutants not listed as criteria pollutants under CAA section 
108(a) nor as hazardous air pollutants (``HAPs'') under section 
112(b)(1), but to which a standard of performance for new sources 
applies under section 111. TRS is a designated pollutant. EPA does not 
regulate emissions of TRS from existing sources.
    Maine DEP originally submitted chapter 124, ``Total Reduced Sulfur 
Control From Kraft Pulp Mills'' (``chapter 124'' or ``TRS Rule'') to 
EPA on February 15, 1990. EPA approved Maine's TRS Rule under CAA 
section 111(d) on September 19, 1990 (55 FR 38545). On October 4, 1994, 
EPA approved a revision to Chapter 124 (59 FR 50506). The revision 
extended the compliance date for brownstock washer systems from January 
1, 1994 to September 30, 1998. Maine extended the compliance date to 
give existing mills more time to comply with the National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Pulp and Paper Industry 
(Pulp and Paper MACT), which was in preparation at the time.
    EPA published the Pulp and Paper MACT on April 15, 1998 (63 FR 
18617, codified at 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart S). Although TRS compounds 
are not HAPs and therefore not subject to the Pulp and Paper MACT, 
Maine subsequently

[[Page 9874]]

submitted a request to revise Chapter 124 to apply certain control 
provisions from the MACT standard to TRS emissions. EPA approved this 
revision to the 111(d) plan on May 1, 2003 (68 FR 23209). The 
compliance date for brownstock washers in the revised TRS Rule was 
April 17, 2005, which is one year earlier than the compliance date for 
kraft pulping systems in the Pulp and Paper MACT. See 40 CFR 
63.440(d)(1).
    Maine's TRS Rule governs emissions of TRS from existing kraft pulp 
mills. New mills are subject to the New Source Performance Standards 
(NSPS) in 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart BB.

B. Summary of Change

    Maine is requesting one change to Chapter 124. The previous version 
called for existing kraft pulp mills to bring their brown stock washers 
into compliance by April 17, 2005. This is one year before such mills 
must be in compliance with the HAP emission standards in 40 CFR 63 
Subpart S. Maine has requested a 111(d) plan revision to extend the 
compliance date for brownstock washers in Chapter 124 to April 17, 
2007. EPA is approving this revision.

III. Summary of SIP Revision

A. What Is Total Reduced Sulfur?

    The term ``total reduced sulfur'' refers to a mixture of four 
compounds: hydrogen sulfide, methyl mercaptan, dimethyl sulfide, and 
dimethyl disulfide. These compounds are emitted when sulfur-based 
chemicals are used to dissolve wood chips as part of the paper making 
process. TRS compounds have a strong, unpleasant odor. In 
concentrations found near paper mills, they can cause health problems 
such as sore throats and nausea.

B. What Is a Brownstock Washer?

    Brownstock (sometimes called brown stock) washer systems are part 
of the kraft pulping system. After pulp has been made from dissolved 
wood chips, brownstock washers rinse the pulp and remove excess 
chemicals from it. If emissions from these systems are not controlled, 
they can release TRS into the atmosphere.

C. What Is Maine's Requested Revision to Chapter 124?

    On April 26, 2004, Maine revised Chapter 124 to extend the 
compliance date for brownstock washer controls from April 17, 2005 to 
April 17, 2007. On June 23, 2004, Maine submitted a request to revise 
its CAA 111(d) plan accordingly. EPA is approving this revision to 
Maine's 111(d) plan.

D. Why Is Maine Requesting This Change?

    Maine last revised its 111(d) plan on February 17, 2000. At the 
time it appeared that all of the affected mills would be able to bring 
their brownstock washers into compliance with Chapter 124 by April 17, 
2005. This has been more difficult than expected and three mills in 
Maine have requested extensions to April 2007.
    The compliance date for kraft pulping systems in the Pulp and Paper 
MACT is April 17, 2006. 40 CFR 63.440(d)(1). EPA or a state may, 
however, allow an extension of up to 1 year from a MACT compliance date 
if a source needs additional time to install controls. 40 CFR 
63.6(i)(4). Maine has determined that these mills need the additional 
time to obtain and install the best equipment for controlling TRS 
emissions.

E. What Actions Did Maine Take To Satisfy the Federal Public Hearing 
Requirement?

    Maine certified that a public hearing on the revision to Chapter 
124 was held in Augusta, ME on January 15, 2004 in accordance with the 
requirements of 40 CFR 60.23(d).

F. Why Is EPA Approving This Change?

    The change Maine wishes to make is consistent with Section 111(d) 
of the Clean Air Act and with the MACT compliance date for the control 
of HAPs. EPA has determined that this rule will benefit air quality by 
providing existing kraft paper mills with additional time to properly 
install pollution control equipment.
    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 
adverse comments be filed. This action will be effective May 2, 2005 
without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comments by March 
31, 2005.
    If 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. 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 May 2, 2005 and no 
further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

IV. Final Action

    EPA is approving the revised 111(d) plan controlling TRS emissions 
from existing kraft pulp mills as submitted by ME DEP on June 23, 2004. 
The revised plan, which consists of the revised regulation entitled 
``Chapter 124: Total Reduced Sulfur from Kraft Pulp Mills,'' will 
affect three existing kraft pulp mills in the State of Maine.
    EPA is publishing this action 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 
relevant adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective May 2, 
2005 without further notice unless the Agency receives relevant adverse 
comments by March 31, 2005.
    If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a notice 
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. EPA will not 
institute a second comment period on the proposed rule. Only parties 
interested in commenting on the proposed rule should do so at this 
time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this 
rule will be effective on May 2, 2005 and no further action will be 
taken 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.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    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

[[Page 9875]]

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 (P.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 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.
    In reviewing 111(d) plan revisions, 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 111(d) plan 
revision, to use VCS in place of a 111(d) plan revision 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 May 2, 2005. 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 62

    Environmental protection, Total reduced sulfur.

    Dated: February 10, 2005.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.

0
Part 62 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 62--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 62 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7411(d).

Subpart U--Maine

0
2. Section 62.4845 is amended by adding paragraph (b)(6) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  62.4845  Identification of plan.

* * * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (6) A revision to the plan controlling TRS from existing kraft pulp 
mills which extends the final compliance date for brownstock washers to 
April 17, 2007, was submitted on June 23, 2004.
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 05-3908 Filed 2-28-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P