Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Approval of Alternative Compliance Plans for the Reynolds Metals Graphic Arts Plants

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[VA010-5545a; FRL-5514-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

Virginia; Approval of Alternative Compliance Plans for the Reynolds

Metals Graphic Arts Plants

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision

submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia. This revision establishes

and requires four packaging rotogravure printing presses at the

Reynolds Metals--Bellwood plant, located in Richmond, Virginia and six

packaging rotogravure printing presses at the Reynolds Metals--South

plant also located in Richmond, Virginia to meet emission limits by

averaging emissions, on a daily basis, within each of the two plants.

The intended effect of this action is to approve two graphic arts

alternative compliance plans; one for the Reynolds Metals--Bellwood

plant and one for the Reynolds Metals--South plant (also known as the

Foil plant). This action is being taken under Section 110 of the Clean

Air Act.

DATES: This final rule is effective July 29, 1996 unless within July

15, 1996, adverse or critical comments are received. If the effective

date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Marcia L. Spink, Associate

Director, Air Programs, Mailcode 3AT00, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

19107. Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available

for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air,

Radiation, and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107;

the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460; and the

Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 629 East Main Street,

Richmond, Virginia 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marcia L. Spink, (215) 566-2104. email

address: [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 4, 1986, the Virginia State Air

Pollution Control Board (now known as the Virginia Department of air

Pollution Control) submitted alternative compliance plans as a revision

to its State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Reynolds Metals--

Bellwood plant and the Reynolds Metals--South plant, both located in

Richmond, Virginia. Both of these facilities are subject to the

federally approved Virginia graphic arts regulation, Section 4.55(m)

[currently cited as Rule 4-36, Sections 120-04-3601 through 120-04-

3615]. The alternative compliance plans allow each of these facilities

to average emissions, on a daily basis, in order to meet the applicable

packaging rotogravure standard in Virginia Rule 4-36.

The applicable Virginia SIP graphic arts regulation requires that

packaging rotogravure sources reduce emissions by 65% by weight of

volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions on a line-by-line basis. The

Virginia SIP further requires that compliance be based on daily

averages.

Description of the Alternative Compliance Plan for the Bellwood

Plant

The printing presses participating in this alternative compliance

plan are:

(1) Presses No. 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11

(2) Extrudes No. 1, 2, 3, 4

(3) Treating Station for Press #3

(4) Laminator No. 1 (by incineration)

Included in the description of the Bellwood alternative compliance

plan is a reasonably available control technology determination (RACT)

determination for Laminator No. 3. Reynolds states that this operation

is not a packaging rotogravure operation because of certain unique

features. If, in fact, this source is not a packaging rotogravure

operation, it would be considered a non-CTG source (i.e a source for

which EPA has not issued a Control Technique Guideline). The 1990 Clean

Air Act Amendments require that major sources in ozone nonattainment

areas be subject to RACT. Richmond, where Reynolds is located, is a

moderate ozone nonattainment area. Virginia's plan limits the total

emissions from this operation to 2 tons per day, in lieu of any other

limit. EPA is proposing to approve the 2 ton per day emission cap as

RACT for Laminator No. 3.

Description of the Alternative Compliance Plan for the South (Foil)

Plant

The printing presses participating in this alternative compliance

plan are:

(1) Cigarette Machines Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4

(2) Coloring Machines No. 7

(3) Glue Mounter Nos. 1, 23

(4) Reseal Machines Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5

(5) Coloring Machines Nos. 1, 2, 6 (unless exhausted to incinerator)

(6) In-line Machine No. 24 (unless exhausted to incinerator)

The alternative compliance plan is configured such that if the

equipment in items (5) and/or (6) above are exhausted to an

incinerator, they will not participate in the plan.

SIP Submittal

The November 4, 1986 SIP submittal package from Virginia consisted

of the following documents:

(1) Cover letter dated 11/4/86 from Richard Cook, VA to James Seif,

EPA Region III.

(2) Consent Order for South-Foil plant, DSE 412A-86 amended 10/86

dated 10/30/86.

(3) Consent Order for Bellwood plant, DSE 413A-86 amended 10/86

dated 10/30/86.

(4) Public hearing certification for 9/30/85 public hearing.

(5) Letter to Ray Cunningham, EPA Region III, from Virginia

submitting the SAPCB meeting agenda.

(6) Letter dated 11/4/86 from John Daniel, VA to David Arnold, EPA

Region III.

The Consent Orders for South and for Bellwood each require that 65%

emission reduction be achieved at the plant over the historical amount

of solvent used to apply the same amount of solids. On December 5,

1986, EPA

[[Page 29964]]

sent a letter to Virginia, requesting additional information concerning

the formulas used to determine compliance and the effect of the revised

alternative compliance plan configurations on the proposed Richmond

SIP. On February 12, 1987, Virginia responded with additional

information which included changes and clarification to the formulas.

Virginia Graphic Arts Regulations

The Virginia graphic arts regulations were cited as being deficient

in the June 14, 1988 follow-up letter to the May 26, 1988 SIP call.

Specifically, the graphic arts regulation requires, for packaging

rotogravure operations, a 65% reduction. The baseline from which this

reduction is to be calculated is not specified. EPA's guidelines for

graphic arts sources require that a waterborne ink (75% water/exempt

solvent by volume) or a high-solids ink (60% solids) be used. If such

inks are not used, the VOC content of those inks must be reduced by 65%

for packaging rotogravure operations. Such a percentage reduction would

be calculated based on the VOC content of the inks used each day. The

reductions obtained by following EPA's guidelines would be larger than

those calculated from a historical average, as Virginia is proposing

for Reynolds. Therefore, the graphic arts regulation, 4.55(m), was not

considered RACT. The deficiencies with the graphic arts regulation were

identified in the June 14, 1988 follow-up letter to the May 26, 1988

SIP call. On May 10, 1991, Virginia submitted a request to revise the

graphic arts regulation, among other regulations, in response to the

comments made in the June 14, 1988 EPA letter. The revised State

regulations were effective July 10, 1991. EPA approved the amended

version of Rule 4-36 as a revision to the Virginia SIP on March 31,

1994 (59 FR 15117) and incorporated it by reference into the SIP at

52.2420(c)(99)(i)(B)(3). Further details regarding the specifics of the

alternative compliance plans for the two Reynolds Metals plants and

issues relating to approval of these plans can be found in the

accompanying technical support document.

Final Action

EPA is approving the alternative compliance plans for the Reynolds

Metals-Bellwood and Reynolds Metals-South plants, which were submitted

on November 4, 1986 as a revision to the Virginia SIP.

EPA is approving this SIP revision without prior proposal because

the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates

no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal

Register publication, EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision

should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be

effective July 29, 1996 unless, by July 15, 1996, adverse or critical

comments are received.

If EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn before

the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this

action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do

so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is

advised that this action will be effective on July 29, 1996.

The Agency has reviewed this request for revision of the Federally-

approved State implementation plan for conformance with the provisions

of the 1990 amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. The Agency has

determined that this action conforms with those requirements

irrespective of the fact that the submittal preceded the date of

enactment.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or

allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for

revision to any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to

the state implementation plan shall be considered separately in light

of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA

must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of

any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.

Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small

entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,

and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than

50,000.

SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the

Clean Air Act do not create any new requirements but simply approve

requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the

Federal SIP approval does not impose any new requirements, the

Administrator certifies that it does not have a significant impact on

any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the

Federal-State relationship under the CAA, preparation of a flexibility

analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base

its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S.

EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or

final that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated

costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to

the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA

must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative

that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan

for informing and advising any small governments that may be

significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not

include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100

million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves pre-

existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new

Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local,

or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this

action.

This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature

by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the

Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a

July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for

Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has

exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

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 August 12, 1996. 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 EPA's

action to approve alternative compliance plans for the Reynolds

Metals--Bellwood and the Reynolds

[[Page 29965]]

Metals--South plants. 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, Incorporation by

reference, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: May 17, 1996.

W. Michael McCabe,

Regional Administrator, Region III.

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart VV--Virginia

2. Section 52.2420 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(110) to read

as follows:

Sec. 52.2420 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(110) Alternative Compliance Plans submitted on November 4, 1986 by

the Virginia State Air Pollution Control Board:

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Letter of November 4, 1986 from the Virginia State Air

Pollution Control Board transmitting alternative compliance plans for

the Reynolds Metals--Bellwood and South Plants, Richmond, Virginia.

(B) The below-described Consent Agreements and Orders between the

Commonwealth of Virginia and the Reynolds Metals Company, effective

October 31, 1986:

(1) DSE-413A-86--Consent Agreement and Order Addressing Reynolds

Metals Company's Bellwood Printing Plant (Registration No. 50260).

(2) DSE-412A-86--Consent Agreement and Order Addressing Reynolds

Metals Company's Richmond Foil Plant (Registration No. 50534).

(ii) Additional material.

(A) Remainder of November 4, 1986 State submittal.

(B) Letter of February 12, 1987 from the Virginia State Air

Pollution Control Board.

[FR Doc. 96-14967 Filed 6-12-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P