Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petition for Objection to State Operating Permit for Louisville Gas and Electric Company-Trimble County Generating Station; Bedford (Trimble County), KY, 48731 [E9-23077]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 184 / Thursday, September 24, 2009 / Notices
the public participating in focus group
discussions.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
180.
Frequency of Response: Once.
Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden:
308.
Estimated Total Annual Cost: $1,380;
includes $0 annualized capital or O&M
costs.
Changes in the Estimates: This is a
new ICR.
Dated: September 17, 2009.
John Moses,
Director, Collection Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. E9–23075 Filed 9–23–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[Petition IV–2008–3; FRL–8962–8 ]
Clean Air Act Operating Permit
Program; Petition for Objection to
State Operating Permit for Louisville
Gas and Electric Company—Trimble
County Generating Station; Bedford
(Trimble County), KY
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of final order on petition
to object to a state operating permit.
Pursuant to Clean Air Act
(CAA) Section 505(b)(2) and 40 CFR
70.8(d), the EPA Administrator signed
an Order, dated August 12, 2009,
partially granting and partially denying
a petition to object to a state operating
permit issued by the Kentucky Division
for Air Quality (KDAQ) to Louisville
Gas and Electric (LG&E) for its Trimble
County Generating Station located in
Bedford, Trimble County, Kentucky.
This Order constitutes a final action on
the petitions submitted by Save the
Valley, Sierra Club, and Valley Watch
(Petitioners) on April 28, 2008 (Petition
2), and March 2, 2006 (Petition 1),
respectively. Pursuant to section
505(b)(2) of the CAA, 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 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 Order
is also available electronically at the
following address: https://www.epa.gov/
region07/programs/artd/air/title5/
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:27 Sep 23, 2009
Jkt 217001
petitiondb/petitions/
lg&e_2nddecision2006.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 CAA
affords EPA a 45-day period to review
and, as appropriate, the authority to
object to operating permits proposed by
state permitting authorities under title V
of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7661–7661f.
Section 505(b)(2) of the CAA 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 45day 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.
Petitioners submitted the first of two
petitions regarding the LG&E Trimble
County Generating Station on March 2,
2006, requesting that EPA object to
Revision 2 to the LG&E merged
prevention of significant deterioration
and title V operating permit. The second
petition, regarding Revision 3 to the
merged permit, was submitted on April
29, 2008. On September 10, 2008, EPA
issued a ‘‘Partial Order Responding to
March 2, 2006, Petition and Denying in
Part and Granting in Part Request for
Objection to Permit Revision 2.’’ In the
September 2008 Order, EPA explained
that some issues raised in Petition 1
were affected by permit Revision 3 and
also discussed in Petition 2. At this
time, EPA is addressing all the
remaining issues identified by
Petitioners in Petitions 1 and 2.
Petitioners alleged that the permit was
not consistent with the CAA for the
following reasons: (1) Public
participation procedures were not
adequate; (2) the permit failed to
include requirements for addressing
green house gases; (3) the best available
control technology (BACT) analysis for
nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide was
not adequate; (4) BACT for the auxiliary
boiler and emergency diesel generator
were not adequate; (5) BACT for support
operations was not adequate; (6) BACT
for particulate matter (PM) and
particulate matter with a diameter less
than or equal to ten micrometers (PM10)
was not adequate; (7) BACT for sulfuric
acid mist (SAM) was not adequate; (8)
the permit failed to consider particulate
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
48731
matter with a diameter less than or
equal to 2.5 micrometers; (9) the permit
failed to express limits in an adequate
manner; (10) BACT analyses did not
include clean fuels; (11) the permit
lacked a maximum achievable control
technology determination for mercury
and other hazardous air pollutants; (12)
the emission limits for SAM, PM/PM10,
and mercury were not enforceable
(compliance assurance monitoring
concerns); and (13) the permit
improperly relied on manufacturer
specifications that are not included in
the permit, did not identify test
methods, and additional concerns
regarding netting.
On August 12, 2009, 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 issues 4 and 8, above, and
denying on the other issues.
Dated: September 14, 2009.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. E9–23077 Filed 9–23–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[FRL–8955–1; Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–ORD–
2009–0115]
Draft Toxicological Review of 1,1,2,2Tetrachloroethane: In Support of the
Summary Information in the Integrated
Risk Information System (IRIS)
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of public comment
period and listening session.
SUMMARY: EPA is announcing a public
comment period and a public listening
session for the external review draft
document titled, ‘‘Toxicological Review
of 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane: In Support
of Summary Information on the
Integrated Risk Information System
(IRIS)’’ (EPA/635/R–09/001). The draft
document was prepared by the National
Center for Environmental Assessment
(NCEA) within the EPA’s Office of
Research and Development (ORD). The
public comment period and the external
peer-review workshop, which will be
scheduled at a later date and announced
in the Federal Register, are separate
processes that provide opportunities for
all interested parties to comment on the
document. EPA intends to forward the
public comments that are submitted in
accordance with this notice to the
external peer-review panel prior to the
E:\FR\FM\24SEN1.SGM
24SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 184 (Thursday, September 24, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 48731]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-23077]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[Petition IV-2008-3; FRL-8962-8 ]
Clean Air Act Operating Permit Program; Petition for Objection to
State Operating Permit for Louisville Gas and Electric Company--Trimble
County Generating Station; Bedford (Trimble 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 (CAA) Section 505(b)(2) and 40 CFR
70.8(d), the EPA Administrator signed an Order, dated August 12, 2009,
partially granting and partially denying a petition to object to a
state operating permit issued by the Kentucky Division for Air Quality
(KDAQ) to Louisville Gas and Electric (LG&E) for its Trimble County
Generating Station located in Bedford, Trimble County, Kentucky. This
Order constitutes a final action on the petitions submitted by Save the
Valley, Sierra Club, and Valley Watch (Petitioners) on April 28, 2008
(Petition 2), and March 2, 2006 (Petition 1), respectively. Pursuant to
section 505(b)(2) of the CAA, 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 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 Order is also available
electronically at the following address: https://www.epa.gov/region07/programs/artd/air/title5/petitiondb/petitions/lg&e_2nddecision2006.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 CAA affords EPA a 45-day period to
review and, as appropriate, the authority to object to operating
permits proposed by state permitting authorities under title V of the
CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7661-7661f. Section 505(b)(2) of the CAA 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.
Petitioners submitted the first of two petitions regarding the LG&E
Trimble County Generating Station on March 2, 2006, requesting that EPA
object to Revision 2 to the LG&E merged prevention of significant
deterioration and title V operating permit. The second petition,
regarding Revision 3 to the merged permit, was submitted on April 29,
2008. On September 10, 2008, EPA issued a ``Partial Order Responding to
March 2, 2006, Petition and Denying in Part and Granting in Part
Request for Objection to Permit Revision 2.'' In the September 2008
Order, EPA explained that some issues raised in Petition 1 were
affected by permit Revision 3 and also discussed in Petition 2. At this
time, EPA is addressing all the remaining issues identified by
Petitioners in Petitions 1 and 2.
Petitioners alleged that the permit was not consistent with the CAA
for the following reasons: (1) Public participation procedures were not
adequate; (2) the permit failed to include requirements for addressing
green house gases; (3) the best available control technology (BACT)
analysis for nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide was not adequate; (4)
BACT for the auxiliary boiler and emergency diesel generator were not
adequate; (5) BACT for support operations was not adequate; (6) BACT
for particulate matter (PM) and particulate matter with a diameter less
than or equal to ten micrometers (PM10) was not adequate;
(7) BACT for sulfuric acid mist (SAM) was not adequate; (8) the permit
failed to consider particulate matter with a diameter less than or
equal to 2.5 micrometers; (9) the permit failed to express limits in an
adequate manner; (10) BACT analyses did not include clean fuels; (11)
the permit lacked a maximum achievable control technology determination
for mercury and other hazardous air pollutants; (12) the emission
limits for SAM, PM/PM10, and mercury were not enforceable
(compliance assurance monitoring concerns); and (13) the permit
improperly relied on manufacturer specifications that are not included
in the permit, did not identify test methods, and additional concerns
regarding netting.
On August 12, 2009, 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 issues 4 and 8,
above, and denying on the other issues.
Dated: September 14, 2009.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. E9-23077 Filed 9-23-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P