Jump to main content.


Project XL Logo

Andersen Corporation

Andersen Corporation: Proposed Rule and Request for Comments on Draft Final Project Agreement

[Federal Register: April 19, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 74)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 19097-19106]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr19ap99-19]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[FRL-6324-5]

Project XL Site-Specific Rulemaking for Andersen Corporation's
Facility in Bayport, Minnesota.

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments on draft final project agreement.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (``EPA'') is proposing to implement a project under the Project XL program for the Andersen Corporation (``Andersen'') facility located in Bayport, Minnesota. The terms of the project are defined in a draft Final Project Agreement (``FPA'') which is being made available for public review and comment by this document. In addition, EPA is proposing a site-specific rule, applicable only to the Andersen Bayport facility, to facilitate implementation of the project. By this document, EPA solicits comment on the proposed rule, the draft FPA, and the project generally.

This proposed site-specific rule is intended to provide regulatory changes under the Clean Air Act (``CAA'' or the ``Act'') to implement Andersen's XL project, which will result in superior environmental performance and, at the same time, provide Andersen with greater operational flexibility. The proposed site-specific rule would change some of the CAA requirements which apply to the Andersen Bayport facility for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (``PSD'') program, in particular existing synthetic minor limits that apply to some VOC sources in the Bayport facility. ``Synthetic minor'' limits are operational and control limitations which serve to limit the net emissions increase associated with proposed new or modified units or systems to less than the applicable significance level and thereby keep them out of PSD review.

DATES: Comments. All public comments must be received on or before May 19, 1999. If a public hearing is held, the public comment period would remain open until June 3, 1999

Public Hearing. A public hearing will be held, if requested, to provide interested persons an opportunity for oral presentation of data, views, or arguments concerning this proposed rule to implement Andersen's XL project. If anyone contacts the EPA requesting to speak at a public hearing by April 29, 1999, a public hearing will be held on May 3, 1999. Additional information is provided in the section entitled ADDRESSES.

Request to Speak at Hearing. Persons wishing to present oral testimony must contact Ms. Rachel Rineheart at the EPA by April 29, 1999. Additional information is provided in the section entitled ADDRESSES.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Written comments should be submitted in duplicate to: Ms. Rachel Rineheart, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77

[[Page 19098]]

West Jackson Boulevard (AR-18J), Chicago, IL, 60604-3590.

Docket. A docket containing supporting information used in developing this proposed rulemaking is available for public inspection and copying at U.S. EPA, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590, (312) 886-7017, 8:30 am-4:30 pm business days, and U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW, Room 3802, Washington, D.C. 20460, (202) 260-2601, during normal business hours, and at the Bayport Public Library, 582 North Fourth Street, Bayport, Minnesota 55003, (651) 439- 7454. A reasonable fee may by charged for copying.

Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held in Bayport, Minnesota. Persons interested in attending the hearing should contact Ms. Rachel Rineheart at (312) 886-7017 to verify that a hearing will be held.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Rachel Rineheart, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard (AR-18J), Chicago, IL 60604-3590, (312) 886- 7017.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Outline of This Document

I. Authority
II. Background
A. Overview of Project XL
B. Overview of the Andersen XL Project
1. Introduction
2. Andersen XL Project Description
a. Background
b. Project Details
3. Environmental Benefits
4. Stakeholder Involvement
III. Clean Air Act Requirements
A. Summary of Regulatory Requirements for the Andersen XL Project
B. Prevention of Significant Deterioration
C. Proposed Regulatory Changes
1. Synthetic Minor Limits
2. Duration 3. Duration of Flexibility
4. Summary
IV. Additional Information
A. Public Hearing
B. Executive Order 12866
C. Regulatory Flexibility
D. Paperwork Reduction Act
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
F. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
G. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing Intergovernmental Partnerships
H. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

I. Authority This regulation is being proposed under the authority of sections 101(b)(1), 110, 111, 161-169, and 301(a)(1) of the CAA. EPA has determined that this rulemaking is subject to the provisions of section 307(d) of the CAA.

II. Background

A. Overview of Project XL This proposed site-specific regulation will implement a project developed under Project XL, an EPA initiative to allow regulated entities to achieve better environmental results at less cost. Project XL--``eXcellence and Leadership''--was announced on March 16, 1995, as a central part of the National Performance Review and the EPA's effort to reinvent environmental protection. See 60 FR 27282 (May 23, 1995). Project XL provides a limited number of private and public regulated entities an opportunity to develop their own pilot projects to provide regulatory flexibility that will result in environmental protection that is superior to what would be achieved through compliance with current and reasonably anticipated future regulations. These efforts are crucial to the Agency's ability to test new regulatory strategies that reduce regulatory burden and promote economic growth while achieving better environmental and public health protection. The Agency intends to evaluate the results of this and other Project XL projects to determine which specific elements of the project(s), if any, should be more broadly applied to other regulated entities for the benefit of both the economy and the environment.

Under Project XL, participants in four categories--facilities, industry sectors, governmental agencies and communities--are offered the flexibility to develop common sense, cost-effective strategies that will replace or modify specific regulatory requirements, on the condition that they produce and demonstrate superior environmental performance. To participate in Project XL, applicants must develop alternative pollution reduction strategies pursuant to eight criteria: superior environmental performance; cost savings and paperwork reduction; local stakeholder involvement and support; test of an innovative strategy; transferability; feasibility; identification of monitoring, reporting and evaluation methods; and avoidance of shifting risk burden. They must have full support of affected Federal, state and tribal agencies to be selected. For more information about the XL criteria, readers should refer to the two descriptive documents published in the Federal Register (60 FR 27282, May 23, 1995 and 62 FR 19872, April 23, 1997), and the December 1, 1995 ``Principles for Development of Project XL Final Project Agreements'' document.

The XL program is intended to allow the EPA to experiment with untried, potentially promising regulatory approaches, both to assess whether they provide benefits at the specific facility affected, and whether they should be considered for wider application. Such pilot projects allow the EPA to proceed more quickly than would be possible when undertaking changes on a nationwide basis. As part of this experimentation, the EPA may try out approaches or legal interpretations that depart from or are even inconsistent with longstanding Agency practice, so long as those interpretations are within the broad range of discretion enjoyed by the Agency in interpreting statutes that it implements. The EPA may also modify rules, on a site-specific basis, that represent one of several possible policy approaches within a more general statutory directive, so long as the alternative being used is permissible under the statute.

Adoption of such alternative approaches or interpretations in the context of a given XL project does not, however, signal the EPA's willingness to adopt that interpretation as a general matter, or even in the context of other XL projects. It would be inconsistent with the forward-looking nature of these pilot projects to adopt such innovative approaches prematurely on a widespread basis without first determining whether or not they are viable in practice and successful in the particular projects that embody them. Furthermore, as EPA indicated in announcing the XL program, the Agency expects to adopt only a limited number of carefully selected projects. These pilot projects are not intended to be a means for piecemeal revision of entire programs. Depending on the results in these projects, EPA may or may not be willing to consider adopting the alternative interpretation again, either generally or for other specific facilities.

The EPA believes that adopting alternative policy approaches and interpretations, on a limited, site-specific basis and in connection with a carefully selected pilot project, is consistent with the expectations of Congress about EPA's role in implementing the environmental statutes (so long as the Agency acts within the discretion allowed by the statute). Congress' recognition that there is a need for experimentation and research, as well as ongoing re- evaluation of environmental programs, is reflected in a variety of statutory

[[Page 19099]]

provisions, such as sections 101(b) and 103 of the CAA.

B. Overview of the Andersen XL Project

1. Introduction
This proposed site-specific rule will facilitate issuance of a consolidated permit which will contain Federal and State permits as outlined in the Andersen Windows Project XL draft FPA. The draft FPA was developed by the Andersen Community Advisory Committee (``CAC''), Andersen, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (``MPCA''), Washington County, and