Document 1gXzbOnNxkm7X5624LmMk5v4a

Federal Register / Vol. 51. No. 119 / Friday, /une 20, 1986 / Proposed Rules 22535 (b) Every license issued under this Pari shall be subject lo the following conditions, even if they are not explicitly stated herein: (6)(i) Each licensee shall notify the appropriate NRC Regional Administrator, in writing, immediately following.the filing of a voluntary or involuntary petition for bankruptcy under any Chapters of Title 11 (Bankruptcy) of the United States Code by or against: (A) A licensee. (B) An entity (as that term is defined in 11 U.S.C 1101(14)) controlling a license or licensee as property of the estate; or (C) An affiliate (as that term is defined in 11 U.S.C. 101(2)) of thelicensee. (ii) This notification must indicate: (A) The bankruptcy court in which thepetition for bankruptcy was filed; and (B) The dale of the filing of the petition. * * ** Dated at Bethesda. Maryland this 9th day ot June. 1986 For the Nuclear Regulatory Commissiun. Victor Stelto, |r;, Bxecutive Directorfor Operations. |FR Doc. 86-13998 Filed 8-19-88: 8:45 am) BILLING CODE. 7590-01-M ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY .40 CFR Part 65 [A-5-FRL-3034-8] Proposed Delayed Compliance Order for General Motors Corporation, Truck and Bus Group agency; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). ACTION: Proposed rulemaking. summary: The USEPA proposes to approve a Delayed Compliance Order (DCO)'issued by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) to the Ceneral. Motors Corporation for its plants located at 660 South Boulevard. East: 820 South Opdyke Road; and 275 Franklin Boulevard in Pontiac, Michigan. The Order requires the company to bring volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from its plants into compliance with the.limits established by the Michigan Administrative Code 1980 AACS. R338.1621. which is part of the federally approved Michigan State Implementation Plan (SIP). DATE; Written comments must be received on or before July 21,1988. ADDRESSES: Copies of the State order, supporting materials, and public comments received in response to this rulemaking are available for inspection at the following address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Branch (5AR-26), 230 South Dearborn Street. Chicago, Illinois 60604. Comments on this proposed action should be addressed to: Gary Gulezian, Chief, Regulatory Analysis Section, Air and Radiation Branch (5AR-26). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago. Illinois 60604. .FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lars Johnson, Air Compliance Branch (5AC-26), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, 230 South Dearborn Street. Chicago. Illinois 60604, (312) 8866315. . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 2,1985, the MDNR submitted to USEPA for review and approval a DCO which it had issued to General Motors Corporation, Truck and Bus Group for its plants located in Pontiac, Michigan. The Order under consideration addresses the emission of VOCs from two small parts coating operations and a maintenance coating operation at Plant T; the small parts dip prime operation, instrument panel and blackout topcoating operations, and spray prime operation at Plant 2; the chassis coating operation, the side panel coating operation, and the repair coating operation at Plant 4; and the mediumduty truck, sheet metal, wheel, and small parts enamel topcoating operations at Plant 6. These emissions are subject to Michigan Administrative Code 1980 AACS, R336.1621, which is part of the federally approved Michigan SIP. The Order requires final compliance by December 31,1988. The company has agreed to the terms of the Order and has agreed to meet the increments established in the Order. USEPA evaluated the Order using criteria set forth in section 113(d) of the Clean Air Act (the Act), and in an April 26,1983, memorandum from Kathleen M. Bennett, then Assistant Administrator for Air, Noise and Radiation, and determined that it meets all requirements as shown below: 1.The Order must provide forfinal compliance with the requirements of the applicable implementation plan as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than July 1,1979, or 3 years after the date for final compliance specified in the SIP, whichever is later. The emission sources addressed in the Order are all subject to Michigan Air Pollution Control Commission (MAPCC) Rule 336.1621, which has a final compliance date of December 31.1983. The latest compliance date in the Order is December 31,1988, satisfying this first requirement. 2. The Order must include reasonable requirements for monitoring and reporting.This criterion is met by the Order, which requires quarterly reports demonstrating complance with the provisions contained in it. 3. The Order must include reasonable and practicable interim controls. The Order contains interim VOC emission limits. 4. The Order must include a finding that the source is currently unable to ' comply with the SIP requirements. The Order contains such a finding. 5. Notice and opportunity for public hearing must be provided. Public hearings were held on July 23,1964, and January 15.1965. 6. The Order must include a schedule for compliance. The Order includes schedules for some emission sources which contain increments of progress, as specified in 40 CFR Section 51.1(q), and calls for immediate compliance for other sources. 7. If the Order Is for a major source, it must notify the source of its possible liability for noncompliance penalties under Section 120 of the Act. This is provided for in the Order. Because this Order has been issued to a major source of VOC emissions and permits a delay in compliance with the applicable regulations, It must be. approved by USEPA before it becomes effective as a DCO under section 113(b) of the Act. If the Order is approved by USEPA, source compliance with its terms would preclude Federal . enforcement action under section 113(b) of the Act against the source for violations of the regulations covered by the Order during the period the Order is in effect. Enforcement against the source under the citizen suit provision of the Act (section 304) would be similarly precluded. If approved, the Order would constitute an addition to the Michigan SIP. However, source compliance with the Order will not preclude assessment of any noncompli'ance penalties under section 120 of the Act, unless the source is otherwise entitled lo an exemption under section 120(a)(2)(B) or (C). All interested persons are invited lo submit written comments on the proposed Order. Written comments received by the date specified above will be considered in determining whether USEPA may approve the Order. After the public comment period, the GLEASON-000800