[Federal Register: July 3, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 127)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 36404-36406]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr03jy07-21]
[[Page 36404]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2005-VA-0011; FRL-8333-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Commonwealth of Virginia; Control of Particulate Matter From Pulp and
Paper Mills
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality. The revisions pertain to
amendments to an existing regulation to control particulate matter from
pulp and paper mills. This action is being taken under the Clean Air
Act (CAA or the Act).
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 2, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2005-VA-0011 by one of the following methods:
A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. E-mail: cripps.christopher@epa.gov
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2005-VA-0011, Christopher Cripps, Acting
Chief, Air Quality and Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2005-VA-0011. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change, and may be made available
online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access''
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through
http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. 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. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal
are available at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 629
East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LaKeshia N. Robertson, (215) 814-2113,
or by e-mail at robertson.lakeshia@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 21, 2005, the Commonwealth of
Virginia submitted revisions to its State Implementation Plan (SIP)
plan for Pulp and Paper mills. The revisions pertain to the control of
particulate matter (9 VAC 5, Chapter 40, Article 13, Rule 4-13).
I. Background
The revisions consist of amendments to existing regulations that
implement emission standards for particulate matter from pulp and paper
mills (9 VAC 5, Chapter 40, Article 13, Rule 4-13.) The changes will
control particulate matter emissions.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
The following provisions consist of changes to the Commonwealth of
Virginia's regulation for the control and abatement of air pollution (9
VAC 5, Chapter 40, Article 13, Rule 4-13). The modifications below are
the subject of this rulemaking.
Revision 1: 9 VAC 5-40-1660. Applicability and designation of
affected facilities. Section A is revised to read as follows: The
affected facilities in pulp and paper mills to which the provisions of
this article apply are: Each recovery furnace each smelt dissolving
tank, each lime kiln, each slaker tank, and each kraft wood pulping
operation. For the purpose of this article, a kraft wood pulping
operation is comprised only of any combination of the following units:
Recovery furnaces, lime kilns, digester systems, multiple-effect
evaporator systems, condensate stripper systems and smelt dissolving
tanks.
Revision 2: 9 VAC 5-40-1670. Definitions. Section C: The definition
of agreement is deleted and the following terms are added: (1) Neutral
sulfite semichemical pulping operation means any operation in which
pulp is produced from wood by cooking (digesting) wood chips in a
solution of sodium sulfite and sodium bicarbonate, followed by
mechanical defibrating (grinding); (2) new design recovery furnace
means a straight kraft recovery furnace that has both membrane wall or
welded wall construction and emission control designed air systems. A
new design furnace shall have stated in its contract a TRS performance
guarantee or that it was designed with air pollution control as an
objective; (3) pulp and paper mill means any kraft pulp mill or any
paper mill using a semichemical pulping process; and (4) semichemical
pulping process means any pulp manufacturing process in which the
active chemicals of the liquor used in cooking (digesting) wood chips
to their component parts in a pressurized vessel (digester) are
primarily a liquor of sodium hydroxide and sodium carbonate. The major
difference between all semichemical techniques and those of kraft and
acid sulfite processes is that only portion of the lignin is removed
during the cooking (digesting), after which the pulp is further reduced
by mechanical disintegration. In addition, these terms were amended:
Cross recovery furnace; straight kraft recovery furnace; and total
reduced sulfur.
Revision 3: 9 VAC 5-40-1690. Standard for total reduced sulfur.
Section A is revised to read as follows: No owner or other person shall
cause or permit to be discharged into the atmosphere from any kraft
wood pulping operation unit specified below any total reduced sulfur
emissions in
[[Page 36405]]
excess of the following limits. Section B is deleted and replaced by
Section C. In addition, Section D is deleted.
Revision 4: 9 VAC 5-40-1750. Compliance. In Section A, the letter A
is deleted and the provision remains the same. Sections B through D are
deleted and no longer relevant to the regulation.
Revision 5: 9 VAC5-40-1770. Monitoring. Section B clarifies that
the owner of a kraft pulp mill shall comply with monitoring provisions
by October 1, 1990. Section C (1) has been revised to include the
language ``Part'' to reference information used in the regulation.
Revision 6: 9 VAC5-40-1810. Permits. The paragraph which states the
permit requirements shall read as follows: A permit may be required
prior to beginning any of the activities specified below if the
provisions of 9 VAC 5 Chapter 50 (9 VAC 5-50-10 et seq.) apply. Owners
contemplating such action should review those provisions and contact
the appropriate regional office for guidance on whether those
provisions apply. Also, under the numeric rationale for permits, an
additional activity, which is number ``6'' is added to read as follows:
Operation of a facility.
III. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia
In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to
certain conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit)
``privilege'' for voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a
regulated entity. The legislation further addresses the relative burden
of proof for parties either asserting the privilege or seeking
disclosure of documents for which the privilege is claimed. Virginia's
legislation also provides, subject to certain conditions, for a penalty
waiver for violations of environmental laws when a regulated entity
discovers such violations pursuant to a voluntary compliance evaluation
and voluntarily discloses such violations to the Commonwealth and takes
prompt and appropriate measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's
Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-
1198, provides a privilege that protects from disclosure documents and
information about the content of those documents that are the product
of a voluntary environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not
extend to documents or information (1) that are generated or developed
before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2)
that are prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) that
demonstrate a clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public
health or environment; or (4) that are required by law.
On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the
Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the
Privilege law,Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege
to documents and information ``required by law,'' including documents
and information ``required by Federal law to maintain program
delegation, authorization or approval,'' since Virginia must ``enforce
Federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less
stringent than their Federal counterparts * * *.'' The opinion
concludes that ``[r]egarding Sec. 10.1-1198, therefore, documents or
other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one of
these programs could not be privileged because such documents and
information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required
by Federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or
approval.''
Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that
``[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by Federal
law,'' any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a
state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute,
regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from
administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12,
1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute
inapplicable to enforcement of any Federally authorized programs, since
``no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal
penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with
Federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.''
Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and
Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its
program consistent with the Federal requirements. In any event, because
EPA has also determined that a state audit privilege and immunity law
can affect only state enforcement and cannot have any impact on Federal
enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under
the Clean Air Act, including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211
or 213, to enforce the requirements or prohibitions of the state plan,
independently of any state enforcement effort. In addition, citizen
enforcement under section 304 of the Clean Air Act is likewise
unaffected by this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity law.
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is approving the Commonwealth of Virginia's SIP submitted on
June 21, 2005 to control particulate matter emissions. EPA is
soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered before taking final action.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed 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 proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that
this proposed 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 proposes to approve 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 proposed rule also does 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), nor will it 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 proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal
requirement, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This
proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it
[[Page 36406]]
approves a state rule implementing a Federal standard.
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. As required by section 3
of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing
this proposed rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate
drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and
provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied
with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining
the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order.
This proposed rule, pertaining to Virginia's control of particulate
matter from pulp and paper mills, does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 22, 2007.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E7-12838 Filed 7-2-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P