[Federal Register: October 12, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 197)]
[Notices]
[Page 58078]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr12oc07-43]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[Petition IV-2006-4; FRL-8481-1]
Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petition for Objection to
State Operating Permit for East Kentucky Power Cooperative--Hugh L.
Spurlock Generating Station; Maysville (Mason County), KY
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of final order on petition to object to a state
operating permit.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to Clean Air Act Section 505(b)(2) and 40 CFR
70.8(d), the EPA Administrator signed an Order, dated August 30, 2007,
partially granting and partially denying a petition to object to a
state operating permit issued by the Kentucky Division for Air Quality
(KDAQ) to East Kentucky Power Cooperative--Hugh L. Spurlock Generating
Station (Spurlock Station) located in Maysville, Mason County,
Kentucky. This Order constitutes final action on the petition submitted
by Sierra Club (Petitioner). Pursuant to section 505(b)(2) of the Clean
Air Act (the Act), any person may seek judicial review of the Order in
the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit within
60 days of this notice under section 307(b) of the Act.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the final Order, the petition, and all pertinent
information relating thereto are on file at the following location: EPA
Region 4, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The final Order is also
available electronically at the following address: http://www.epa.gov/region07/programs/artd/air/title5/petitiondb/petitions/
spurlock--
decision2006.pdf.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Art Hofmeister, Air Permits Section,
EPA Region 4, at (404) 562-9115 or hofmeister.art@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Act affords EPA a 45-day period to
review and, as appropriate, to object to operating permits proposed by
state permitting authorities under title V of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7661-
7661f. Section 505(b)(2) of the Act and 40 CFR 70.8(d) authorize any
person to petition the EPA Administrator to object to a title V
operating permit within 60 days after the expiration of EPA's 45-day
review period if EPA has not objected on its own initiative. 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.
Petitioner submitted a petition on August 17, 2006, requesting that
EPA object to a state title V operating permit issued by KDAQ to
Spurlock Station. Petitioner alleges that the permit is inconsistent
with the Act for the following reasons: (1) The permit does not specify
whether continuous opacity monitoring data will be available (as
credible evidence) to prove a violation of the opacity standard for
Unit 1; (2) the permit does not include a heat rate input limit for
Unit 2; (3) the permit does not contain a compliance schedule for
bringing Unit 2 into compliance with prevention of significant
deterioration requirements; (4) the permit improperly omits an
applicable requirement to construct and operate Unit 3 consistent with
and in accordance to the specifications provided in its permit
application; (5) the permit contains erroneous best available control
technology (BACT) limits at Unit 3 for several pollutants; (6) the
permit contains unenforceable limits related to particulate matter and
hazardous air pollutant emissions from Unit 3; and (7) the permit
contains erroneous BACT limits for Unit 4.
On August 30, 2007, the Administrator issued an Order partially
granting and partially denying the petition. The Order explains EPA's
rationale for granting the petition with respect to Issue 2 (heat rate
input limit) and Issue 7 (concerning the BACT determination for sulphur
dioxide and low sulfur coal at Unit 4). The Order also provides the
basis for denying the petition with respect to: Issue 1 (whether
continuous opacity monitoring data will be available as credible
evidence); Issue 3 (compliance schedule for Unit 2); Issue 4 (omission
of an applicable requirement to construct and operate Unit 3); Issue 5
(BACT limits for several pollutants at Unit 3); Issue 6 (unenforceable
limits related to particulate matter and hazardous air pollutants from
Unit 3); and Issue 7 (concerning the BACT determination for sulfur
dioxide and coal washing, particulate matter, mercury and beryllium,
and consideration of Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle technology
at Unit 4).
Dated: September 25, 2007.
J.I. Palmer, Jr.,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. E7-20173 Filed 10-11-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P