Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petition for Objection to State Operating Permit for Onyx Environmental Services, 54814-54815 [E6-15537]

Download as PDF pwalker on PRODPC60 with NOTICES 54814 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 181 / Tuesday, September 19, 2006 / Notices section situated perpendicular to the main spillway and the canal spillway, containing ten opening, each 16-feetwide; (5) a 353 acre reservoir with a normal water surface elevation of 355.8 feet above msl; (6) two powerhouses separated by a retaining wall, consisting of: (a) Great Falls powerhouse: Containing eight horizontal Francis-type turbines directly connected to eight generators rated at 3,000 kW for an installed capacity of 24.0 MW, and (b) Dearborn powerhouse: containing three vertical Francis-type turbines directly connected to three generators rated at 15,000 kW for an installed capacity of 42.0 MW, for a total installed capacity of 66.0 MW; and (7) other appurtenances. (X) The Rocky Creek-Cedar Creek development consists of the following existing facilities: (1) A U-shaped concrete gravity overflow spillway with (a) A 130-foot-long section (on the east side) that forms a forebay canal to the Cedar Creek powerhouse and contains two Stoney gate, each 45-feet-wide by 25-feet-high; (b) a 1,025-foot-long, 69foot-high concrete gravity overflow spillway; and (c) a 213-foot-long section (on the west side) that forms the upper end of the forebay canal for the Rocky Creek powerhouse; (2) a 450-foot-long concrete gravity bulkhead section that completes the lower end of the Rocky Creek forebay canal; (3) a 748 acre reservoir with a normal water surface elevation of 284.4 feet above msl; (4) two powerhouses consisting of: (a) Cedar Creek powerhouse (on the east): containing three vertical Francis-type turbines directly connected to three generators, one rated at 15,000 kW, and two rated at 18,000 kW for an installed capacity of 43.0 MW; and (b) Rocky Creek powerhouse (on the west): Containing eight horizontal twin-runner Francis-type turbines directly connected to eight generators, six rated at 3,000 kW and two rated at 4,500 kW for an installed capacity of 25.8 MW, for a total installed capacity of 68.8 MW; and (5) other appurtenances. (XI) The Wateree development consists of the following existing facilities: (1) The Wateree dam consisting of: (a) A 1,450 foot-long uncontrolled concrete gravity ogee spillway; and (b) a 1,370-foot-long earth embankment; (2) a 13,025 acre reservoir with a normal water surface elevation of 225.5 feet above msl; (3) a powerhouse integral to the dam, situated between the spillway and the earth embankment, containing five vertical Francis-type turbines directly connected to five generators, two rated at 17,100 kW and three rated at 18,050 kW for a total VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:49 Sep 18, 2006 Jkt 208001 installed capacity of 82.0 MW; and (4) other appurtenances. o. A copy of the application and settlement agreement is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission’s Web site at https:// www.ferc.gov using the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or tollfree at 1–866–208–3676, or for TTY, (202) 502–8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. You may also register online at https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. p. With this notice, we are initiating consultation with the North Carolina State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the South Carolina SHPO, as required by 106, National Historic Preservation Act, and the regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 36, CFR, at 800.4. q. Procedural schedule and final amendments: The application will be processed according to the following Hydro Licensing Schedule. Revisions to the schedule will be made as appropriate. Issue Acceptance or Deficiency Letter: October 2006. Issue Scoping Document for comments: January 2007. Notice of application is ready for environmental analysis: April 2007. Notice of the availability of the draft EIS: October 2007. Notice of the availability of the final EIS: March 2008. Ready for Commission’s decision on the application: June 2008. Final amendments to the application must be filed with the Commission no later than 30 days from the issuance date of the notice of ready for environmental analysis. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6–15524 Filed 9–18–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [Regional Docket No. V–2005–1, FRL–8220– 9] Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petition for Objection to State Operating Permit for Onyx Environmental Services Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of final amended order on petition to object to a title V operating permit. AGENCY: SUMMARY: This document announces that the EPA Administrator has responded to a citizen petition asking EPA to object to a Clean Air Act (Act) title V operating permit proposed by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA). Specifically, the Administrator has partially granted and partially denied the petition submitted by the Sierra Club and American Bottom Conservancy to object to the proposed operating permit for Onyx Environmental Services. EPA originally responded to the petition in an order dated February 1, 2006. However, EPA has become aware of a factual error in the February 1, 2006, order. To correct that error, on August 9, 2006, the Administrator signed an order amending the February 1, 2006, order by striking out the section entitled ‘‘VI. Monitoring’’, and replacing it with the language as described below. The remainder of the February 1, 2006, order remains undisturbed and in effect. Pursuant to section 505(b)(2) of the Act, a petitioner may seek in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit judicial review of those portions of the petition which EPA denied. Any petition for review shall be filed within 60 days from the date a notice appears in the Federal Register, pursuant to section 307 of the Act. ADDRESSES: You may review copies of the final amended order, the petitions, and other supporting information at the EPA Region 5 Office, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. If you wish to examine these documents, you should make an appointment at least 24 hours before visiting day. Additionally, the final order for Onyx Environmental Services is available electronically at: https://www.epa.gov/ region07/programs/artd/air/title5/ petitiondb/petitiondb2004.htm. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Air Permitting Section, Air Programs Branch, Air and Radiation Division, EPA, Region 5, 77 E:\FR\FM\19SEN1.SGM 19SEN1 pwalker on PRODPC60 with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 181 / Tuesday, September 19, 2006 / Notices West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, telephone (312) 886– 4447. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Act affords EPA a 45-day period to review, and to object to as appropriate, a title V operating permit proposed by a state permitting authority. Section 505(b)(2) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7661d(b)(2), authorizes any person to petition the EPA Administrator within 60 days after the expiration of the EPA review period to object to a title V operating permit 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, unless the petitioner demonstrates that it was impracticable to raise the issues during the comment period, or the grounds for the issues arose after the public comment period. On February 18, 2004, the EPA received from the Sierra Club and American Bottom Conservancy a petition requesting that EPA object to the proposed title V operating permit for Onyx Environmental Services. The Sierra Club and American Bottom Conservancy alleged that the proposed permit (1) Violated EPA’s commitments and obligations to address environmental justice issues; (2) lacked a compliance schedule and certification of compliance; (3) did not address modifications Onyx took that allegedly triggered new source review requirements; (4) was based on an eightyear old application; (5) lacked practically enforceable conditions; (6) contained a permit shield that broadly insulates it from ongoing and recent violations; (7) failed to include conditions that meet the legal requirements for monitoring; (8) did not contain a statement of basis; (9) did not require prompt reporting of violations; and (10) failed to establish annual mercury and lead limits. On February 1, 2006, the Administrator signed an order partially granting and partially denying the petition. The order explains the reasons behind EPA’s conclusion that the IEPA must: (1) Address the significant comments concerning the possible need for a compliance schedule in the proposed permit; (2) require Onyx Environmental Services to submit a current compliance certification; (3) address comments concerning modifications made at the Onyx facility and the potential applicability of new source review requirements; (4) require Onyx Environmental Services to submit an updated application that reflects all applicable requirements for the source; (5) make clear either in the permit or VerDate Aug<31>2005 16:49 Sep 18, 2006 Jkt 208001 statement of basis what constitutes ‘‘normal’’ operating conditions; (6) amend the permit to limit Onyx Environmental Service’s election to regulatory requirements applicable to hazardous waste incinerators; (7) define the terms ‘‘container’’ and ‘‘containerized solids,’’ or explain in the statement of basis where the terms are defined; (8) provide information on where the applicable specifications pertaining to ‘‘manufacturer’s specifications’’ can be located; (9) provide a statement of basis that complies with the requirements of EPA regulations and post its statement of basis on a Web site, or make available to the public on the Web site a notice telling the public where it can obtain the statement of basis; and (10) explain how a thirty day reporting requirement for all deviations is prompt or require a shorter reporting period for deviations as is provided for in 40 CFR Part 71. The order also explains the reasons for denying Sierra Club and American Bottom Conservancy’s remaining claims. The August 9, 2006, amended order grants the petition for the claim that the permit lacks monitoring required under other provisions of 40 CFR Part 70.6. EPA directs IEPA to revise the permit to incorporate all particulate matter monitoring required for the facility under 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart EEE, including a leak detection system. Dated: September 12, 2006. Norman Niedergang, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. E6–15537 Filed 9–18–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [IL227–1; FRL–8220–8] Notice of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Final Determination for Prairie State Generating Company Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of final action. 54815 42 U.S.C. 7607(b)(1), judicial review of this permit decision, to the extent it is available, may be sought by filing a petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit within 60 days of September 19, 2006. ADDRESSES: The documents relevant to the above action are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the following address: Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard (AR–18J), Chicago, Illinois 60604. To arrange viewing of these documents, call Genevieve Damico at (312) 353– 4761. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Genevieve Damico, Air and Radiation Division, Air Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 W. Jackson Boulevard (AR– 18J), Chicago, Illinois 60604. Anyone who wishes to review the EAB decision can obtain it at https://www.epa.gov/eab/ . Notification of EAB Final Decision The IEPA, acting under authority of a PSD delegation agreement, issued a PSD permit to Prairie State Generating Company on April 28, 2005, granting approval to construct two coal-fired steam electric generating units, each with a nominal generating capacity of 750 net megawatts in Washington County, Illinois. The American Bottom Conservancy, American Lung Association of Metropolitan Chicago, Clean Air Task Force, Health and Environmental Justice-St. Louis, Lake County Conservation Alliance, Sierra Club and Valley Watch filed a petition for review with the EAB on June 8, 2005. The EAB denied review of the petition on August 24, 2006. The permit became effective on August 24, 2006. Dated: September 11, 2006. Bharat Mathur, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. E6–15538 Filed 9–18–06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P AGENCY: SUMMARY: This notice announces that on August 24, 2006, the Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) of the EPA denied a petition for review of a Federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit issued to Prairie State Generating Company by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA). DATES: The effective date for the EAB’s decision is August 24, 2006. Pursuant to Section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL–8095–5] Temporary Changes to the EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The EPA Docket Center (EPA/ DC) Public Reading Room in Washington, DC will be temporarily inaccessible to the public due to E:\FR\FM\19SEN1.SGM 19SEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 19, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54814-54815]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-15537]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Regional Docket No. V-2005-1, FRL-8220-9]


Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petition for Objection to 
State Operating Permit for Onyx Environmental Services

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of final amended order on petition to object to a title 
V operating permit.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces that the EPA Administrator has 
responded to a citizen petition asking EPA to object to a Clean Air Act 
(Act) title V operating permit proposed by the Illinois Environmental 
Protection Agency (IEPA). Specifically, the Administrator has partially 
granted and partially denied the petition submitted by the Sierra Club 
and American Bottom Conservancy to object to the proposed operating 
permit for Onyx Environmental Services. EPA originally responded to the 
petition in an order dated February 1, 2006. However, EPA has become 
aware of a factual error in the February 1, 2006, order. To correct 
that error, on August 9, 2006, the Administrator signed an order 
amending the February 1, 2006, order by striking out the section 
entitled ``VI. Monitoring'', and replacing it with the language as 
described below. The remainder of the February 1, 2006, order remains 
undisturbed and in effect.
    Pursuant to section 505(b)(2) of the Act, a petitioner may seek in 
the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit judicial 
review of those portions of the petition which EPA denied. Any petition 
for review shall be filed within 60 days from the date a notice appears 
in the Federal Register, pursuant to section 307 of the Act.

ADDRESSES: You may review copies of the final amended order, the 
petitions, and other supporting information at the EPA Region 5 Office, 
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. If you wish to 
examine these documents, you should make an appointment at least 24 
hours before visiting day. Additionally, the final order for Onyx 
Environmental Services is available electronically at: https://
www.epa.gov/region07/programs/artd/air/title5/petitiondb/
petitiondb2004.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Air Permitting 
Section, Air Programs Branch, Air and Radiation Division, EPA, Region 
5, 77

[[Page 54815]]

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, telephone (312) 886-
4447.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Act affords EPA a 45-day period to 
review, and to object to as appropriate, a title V operating permit 
proposed by a state permitting authority. Section 505(b)(2) of the Act, 
42 U.S.C. 7661d(b)(2), authorizes any person to petition the EPA 
Administrator within 60 days after the expiration of the EPA review 
period to object to a title V operating permit 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, 
unless the petitioner demonstrates that it was impracticable to raise 
the issues during the comment period, or the grounds for the issues 
arose after the public comment period.
    On February 18, 2004, the EPA received from the Sierra Club and 
American Bottom Conservancy a petition requesting that EPA object to 
the proposed title V operating permit for Onyx Environmental Services. 
The Sierra Club and American Bottom Conservancy alleged that the 
proposed permit (1) Violated EPA's commitments and obligations to 
address environmental justice issues; (2) lacked a compliance schedule 
and certification of compliance; (3) did not address modifications Onyx 
took that allegedly triggered new source review requirements; (4) was 
based on an eight-year old application; (5) lacked practically 
enforceable conditions; (6) contained a permit shield that broadly 
insulates it from ongoing and recent violations; (7) failed to include 
conditions that meet the legal requirements for monitoring; (8) did not 
contain a statement of basis; (9) did not require prompt reporting of 
violations; and (10) failed to establish annual mercury and lead 
limits.
    On February 1, 2006, the Administrator signed an order partially 
granting and partially denying the petition. The order explains the 
reasons behind EPA's conclusion that the IEPA must: (1) Address the 
significant comments concerning the possible need for a compliance 
schedule in the proposed permit; (2) require Onyx Environmental 
Services to submit a current compliance certification; (3) address 
comments concerning modifications made at the Onyx facility and the 
potential applicability of new source review requirements; (4) require 
Onyx Environmental Services to submit an updated application that 
reflects all applicable requirements for the source; (5) make clear 
either in the permit or statement of basis what constitutes ``normal'' 
operating conditions; (6) amend the permit to limit Onyx Environmental 
Service's election to regulatory requirements applicable to hazardous 
waste incinerators; (7) define the terms ``container'' and 
``containerized solids,'' or explain in the statement of basis where 
the terms are defined; (8) provide information on where the applicable 
specifications pertaining to ``manufacturer's specifications'' can be 
located; (9) provide a statement of basis that complies with the 
requirements of EPA regulations and post its statement of basis on a 
Web site, or make available to the public on the Web site a notice 
telling the public where it can obtain the statement of basis; and (10) 
explain how a thirty day reporting requirement for all deviations is 
prompt or require a shorter reporting period for deviations as is 
provided for in 40 CFR Part 71. The order also explains the reasons for 
denying Sierra Club and American Bottom Conservancy's remaining claims.
    The August 9, 2006, amended order grants the petition for the claim 
that the permit lacks monitoring required under other provisions of 40 
CFR Part 70.6. EPA directs IEPA to revise the permit to incorporate all 
particulate matter monitoring required for the facility under 40 CFR 
Part 63, Subpart EEE, including a leak detection system.

    Dated: September 12, 2006.
Norman Niedergang,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
 [FR Doc. E6-15537 Filed 9-18-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.