[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 204 (Monday, October 24, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-25741]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: October 24, 1994]


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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63

[AD-FRL-5091-9]

 

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 
Source Categories: Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants From the Synthetic 
Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry and Other Processes Subject to 
the Negotiated Regulation for Equipment Leaks

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed amendments.

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to amend the national emission standards 
for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for the synthetic organic 
chemical manufacturing industry, and other processes subject to the 
equipment leaks rule, promulgated in the Federal Register on April 22, 
1994, and on June 6, 1994. The proposal would provide for an additional 
time period for owners or operators to conduct any necessary 
administrative procedures to ensure that a given plant site is 
designated as an area source and, hence, can be considered exempt from 
the requirements of the NESHAP. During this period, compliance 
requirements would be deferred so long as certain conditions were met, 
and sources continue to operate at actual emission levels below the 
threshold for major sources. This action is being proposed because the 
compliance date for certain equipment leak requirements of the NESHAP 
is approaching, and because the EPA believes in view of current 
circumstances that these requirements should not be imposed on sources 
that are likely to be designated as area sources in the relatively near 
future.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before November 23, 
1994.
    Public Hearing. Anyone requesting a public hearing must contact the 
EPA no later than November 23, 1994. If a hearing is held, it will take 
place on December 5, 1994, beginning at 10:00 a.m.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments should be submitted (in duplicate, if 
possible) to: Air Docket (LE-131), Attention Docket Number A-90-19 (see 
docket section below), room M1500, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. The EPA requests that 
a separate copy also be sent to the contact person listed below.
    Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at the 
EPA's Office of Administration Auditorium, Research Triangle Park, 
North Carolina. Persons interested in attending the hearing or wishing 
to present oral testimony should notify Ms. Theresa Adkins, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711, 
telephone (919) 541-5645.
    Docket. All information used in the development of this proposal is 
contained in the preamble below. However, Dockets No. A-90-19 through 
A-90-23, and A-89-10, containing the supporting information for the 
original NESHAP, is available for public inspection and copying between 
8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, at EPA's Air Docket 
Section, Waterside Mall, room M-6102, first floor, 401 M Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20460. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Tim Smith at (919) 541-4718, 
Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On April 22, 1994 (59 FR 19402), and June 6, 1994 (59 FR 29196) the 
EPA promulgated in the Federal Register NESHAP for the synthetic 
organic chemical manufacturing industry, and for several other 
processes subject to the equipment leaks portion of the rule. These 
regulations were promulgated as subparts F, G, H and I in 40 CFR part 
63, and are commonly referred to as the hazardous organic NESHAP, or 
the HON. Today's action amends Secs. 63.100 and 63.103 of subpart F, 
and Sec. 63.190 of subpart I. These sections describe the applicability 
requirements of the HON. One aspect of the applicability determination, 
pursuant to paragraphs 63.100(b)(3) and 63.190(b), is that the 
processing unit must be ``located at a plant site that is a major 
source as defined in section 112(a) of the Act.''
    Section 112(a) of the Act defines a ``major source'' as ``any 
stationary source or group of stationary sources located within a 
contiguous area and under common control that emits or has the 
potential to emit considering controls, in the aggregate, 10 tons per 
year or more of any hazardous air pollutant or 25 tons per year or more 
of any combination of hazardous air pollutants * * *'' (emphasis 
added). Any stationary source that does not emit, or have the potential 
to emit, these quantities, is defined by the Act as an ``area source.'' 
(see definition in subpart A, 59 FR 12408).
    On March 16, 1994, the EPA promulgated, in subpart A to 40 CFR part 
63 (commonly referred to as the ``general provisions'' to part 63), a 
definition of ``potential to emit'' as follows:

    ``Potential to emit'' means the maximum capacity of a stationary 
source to emit a pollutant under its physical and operational 
design. Any physical or operational limitation on the capacity of 
the stationary source to emit a pollutant, including air pollution 
control equipment and restrictions on hours of operation or on the 
type or amount of material combusted, stored, or processed, shall be 
treated as part of its design if the limitation or the effect it 
would have on emissions is federally enforceable.'' (emphasis added)

    A key aspect of the potential to emit definition is that 
restrictions must be federally enforceable. The subpart A general 
provisions define ``federally enforceable'' as follows:

    ``Federally enforceable'' means all limitations and conditions 
that are enforceable by the Administrator and citizens under the Act 
or that are enforceable under other statutes administered by the 
Administrator. Examples of federally enforceable limitations and 
conditions include, but are not limited to:
    (1) Emission standards, alternative emission standards, 
alternative emission limitations, and equivalent emission 
limitations established pursuant to section 112 of the Act as 
amended in 1990;
    (2) New source performance standards established pursuant to 
section 111 of the Act, and emission standards established pursuant 
to section 112 of the Act before it was amended in 1990;
    (3) All terms and conditions in a title V permit, including any 
provisions that limit a source's potential to emit, unless expressly 
designated as not federally enforceable;
    (4) Limitations and conditions that are part of an approved 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) or a Federal Implementation Plan 
(FIP);
    (5) Limitations and conditions that are part of a Federal 
construction permit issued under 40 CFR 52.21 or any construction 
permit issued under regulations approved by the EPA in accordance 
with 40 CFR Part 51;
    (6) Limitations and conditions that are part of an operating 
permit issued pursuant to a program approved by the EPA into a SIP 
as meeting the EPA's minimum criteria for Federal enforceability, 
including adequate notice and opportunity for EPA and public comment 
prior to issuance of the final permit and practicable 
enforceability;
    (7) Limitations and conditions in a State rule or program that 
has been approved by the EPA under subpart E of this part for the 
purposes of implementing and enforcing section 112; and
    (8) Individual consent agreements that the EPA has legal 
authority to create.

    The EPA is in the process of clarifying, through guidance and 
rulemaking, the administrative procedures that can be used by source 
owners or operators to create federally enforceable restrictions on 
their potential to emit. These procedures would also document when and 
how existing restrictions in State and local programs can be considered 
federally enforceable. Additionally, these procedures would enable 
state and local agencies to gain approval for programs and rules that 
can establish federally enforceable limitations on the potential to 
emit hazardous air pollutants.
    The EPA is aware of a number of instances of plant owners or 
operators who believe that their plants are operating under 
restrictions that ensure that actual emissions will be at area source 
emission levels. However, for many such instances, there may be 
additional administrative procedures that must be carried out to ensure 
that these restrictions are federally enforceable before applicable 
compliance dates. As previously noted, the Agency is in the process of 
providing additional clarification on the procedures by which HAP-
emitting facilities may obtain federally enforceable limits to achieve 
area source status. Pending establishment of federally enforceable 
limitations on the plant site's potential to emit, owners or operators 
of plants with actual emissions below the major threshold (but 
potential emissions above the threshold) are required to comply with 
the equipment leak standards in subpart H. In view of current 
circumstances, the EPA believes that if such sources can adequately 
document that they are actually emitting at area source levels, and 
will commit to maintaining their actual emissions at area source levels 
pending the establishment of federally enforceable limits, that such 
sources should be given additional time to achieve area source status 
by obtaining federally enforceable limits.
    The purpose of today's rulemaking is to provide a deferral of HON 
requirements for source owners or operators who wish to make such a 
certification, and to establish minimum documentation requirements. 
Elsewhere in today's Federal Register, EPA is announcing a 3-month 
partial stay and reconsideration of the NESHAP for certain qualifying 
sources, and is proposing to extend the compliance date for sources 
affected by the stay in the event that additional time is needed to 
complete this rulemaking.
    This proposal should not be viewed as a precedent for other 
categories of sources to be regulated under section 112 because it is 
based on unique circumstances that exist at this time. The Agency also 
wishes to stress that this proposal is strictly a compliance date 
extension for certain qualifying sources and sets no precedents 
regarding how or when facilities can achieve area source status.

II. Summary of and Rationale for Rule Changes

A. Deferral of Requirements for Sources Making an Area Source 
Certification

    The certification and documentation process would be established by 
adding a new paragraph (b)(4) to Sec. 63.100, a new paragraph (f) to 
Sec. 63.103, and new paragraphs (b)(7) and (b)(8) to Sec. 63.190. These 
provisions: (1) would require that the owner and operator provide a 
certification that the source is operating such that its total actual 
annual emissions are less than 10 tons of any one HAP and less than 25 
tons of multiple HAP and will continue to operate at or below this 
level pending the establishment of federally enforceable limits, (2) 
would require the owner or operator to maintain documentation of 
specific calculations, and (3) would allow the EPA the option of 
reviewing the documentation. Where, in the EPA's judgement, the source 
does not qualify based upon a review of the calculations, the source 
would be notified and would then become subject to the HON requirements 
within 90 days.
    The EPA believes that the certification and documentation process 
for today's deferral should be relatively straightforward. The EPA 
requests comment on the level of detail that should be required.
    In addition, the EPA requests comment on how the Agency should 
verify that facilities qualifying for the deferral continue to emit at 
area source levels during the deferral period. Today's proposal would 
require the owner or operator to provide updated emissions information 
at the Agency's request. The Agency seeks comment on what additional 
monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements may be needed 
given the purposes of today's rule, and on the frequency and level of 
detail of such requirements. For example, the EPA is considering 
requiring the owner or operator to submit an annual report on plantwide 
emission levels of each HAP. As an alternative, EPA is considering 
requiring owners and operators to re-certify annually that they qualify 
for the exemption and to maintain documentation of the updated 
emissions estimates used as the basis for the re-certification.
    The proposed deferral would extend until April 22, 1997, that is, 
the date 3 years after promulgation of the HON. This would give 
facilities significant additional time to obtain federally enforceable 
restrictions that limit hazardous air pollutant emissions. The Act does 
not permit extension of the deadline for existing major source 
compliance with the requirements of the rule beyond 3 years from the 
date of promulgation. Sources for which federally enforceable 
restrictions are not in place after 3 years would be subject to any 
applicable requirement of the HON, including the requirements of 
subpart G.
    Proposed paragraphs 63.100(b)(4)(ii) and 63.190(b)(7)(ii) are 
intended to clarify that sources which have federally enforceable 
restrictions, such that they can be considered area sources, are not 
subject to the recordkeeping requirements of the proposed amendments. 
Although these regulatory passages are not essential, because only 
``major sources'' are subject to the HON, the EPA believes that these 
paragraphs could eliminate any possible ambiguities that could be 
perceived. The EPA requests comment on these paragraphs.
    The EPA believes that implementation of these procedures could be 
delegated to State and local agencies.

B. Emission Calculations

    The EPA does not intend for the proposal, which would require the 
source owner to ``maintain documentation'' of emissions, to result in 
protracted technical discussions between the source owner and the EPA. 
It is important, however, to mention a few guidelines on the nature of 
the proposed emission rate documentation process.
    For purposes of emission calculations for organic chemical 
manufacturing facilities, the proposed rule lists as examples the 
equations in Sec. 63.150 of the HON and the documentation procedures in 
Secs. 63.74 (c), (d) and (g) of the rule implementing the early 
reductions program. These procedures are similar to the procedures in 
EPA-450/3-91-012a, Procedures for Establishing Emissions for Early 
Reduction Compliance Extensions, where applicable. This document 
contains work sheets for providing calculations for process vents, 
storage tanks, equipment leaks, loading operations, and wastewater 
operations. For emission points in other source categories not 
addressed by these techniques, the EPA recommends the use of EPA-
developed emission factors where available, and engineering judgement 
where such factors not available.
    The EPA emphasizes that it would not be sufficient for purposes of 
today's proposal for sources to merely provide a copy of plantwide 
totals reported to the toxic release inventory (TRI). The EPA believes 
that a deferral or exemption of requirements requires documentation on 
a point by-point basis of the parameters (operating characteristics and 
emission controls) used to make each calculation.
    In addition, the EPA wishes to emphasize that emissions from the 
entire plant site must be considered, not just those potentially 
affected by the HON. Today's amendment makes clear that the 
demonstration must include all emission points at the contiguous 
facility, including such non-HON sources as boilers, non-HON process 
units such as polymers and resins production facilities, cooling 
towers, and any other possible source of hazardous air pollutant 
emissions from the plant.
    At the same time, the EPA does not believe that the emission 
documentation records need to provide precise estimates for emitting 
sources that make a trivial contribution to the total. The EPA requests 
comment on whether specific language could be added to the amendments 
to define trivial contributors.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements of the previously 
promulgated NESHAP were submitted to and approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB). A copy of this Information Collection 
Request (ICR) document (OMB control number 1414.02) may be obtained 
from Sandy Farmer, Information Policy Branch (PM-223Y); U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency; 401 M Street, SW.; Washington, DC 
20460 or by calling (202) 260-2740.
    Today's changes to the NESHAP would have a minor impact on the 
information collection burden estimates made previously. The EPA 
estimates that there are a small number of sources (perhaps 20 to 40 
plant sites) with actual emission levels that would qualify for today's 
proposed amendment. For these plant sites, the EPA believes there would 
typically be one or two chemical production units, and consequently the 
number of calculations would be relatively low. Additionally, the 
impacts would be tempered by a reduction in the burden associated with 
compliance with the equipment leak provisions. As a result, the EPA 
believes that any additional impacts would have an insignificant effect 
on the burden estimate, within the uncertainty of the original 
analysis. Therefore, the ICR has not been revised.

B. Executive Order 12866 Review

    The HON rule promulgated on April 22, 1994 was considered 
``significant'' under Executive Order 12866 and a regulatory impact 
analysis (RIA) was prepared. The amendments proposed today would have a 
very small impact on the results of the RIA. As mentioned previously, 
the EPA believes that on balance the change is within the uncertainty 
of the analysis. The impacts on emission reductions are also believed 
to be negligible, because the impact calculations performed in the RIA 
were realized based on major sources affected by the standard, and no 
small sources were expected to be subject to the requirements of the 
HON.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 requires the identification 
of potentially adverse impacts of Federal regulations upon small 
business entities. The Act specifically requires the completion of a 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in those instances where small business 
impacts are possible. Because this rulemaking imposes no adverse 
economic impacts, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has not been 
prepared.
    Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 605(b), I hereby certify 
that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small business entities.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: October 11, 1994.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, part 63 of chapter I of 
title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended 
as follows.
    Title 40, chapter I, part 63, of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
proposed to be amended to read as follows:

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS 
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

    1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, 7412, 7414, 7416, and 7601.

    2. Section 63.100 is amended by revising paragraph (b) introductory 
text and adding paragraph (b)(4) to read as follows:


Sec. 63.100 Applicability and designation of source.

* * * * *
    (b) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(4) of this section, the 
provisions of subparts F, G, H of this part apply to chemical 
manufacturing process units that meet all the criteria specified in 
paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of this section:
* * * * *
    (4) The owner or operator of a chemical manufacturing processing 
unit is exempt from all requirements of subparts F, G, and H until not 
later than April 22, 1997 if the owner or operator certifies, in a 
notification to the Administrator, not later than [date 30 days after 
publication of the final rule] that the plant site at which the 
chemical manufacturing processing unit is located emits, and will 
continue to emit, during any 12-month period, less than 10 tons per 
year of any individual hazardous air pollutant, and less than 25 tons 
per year of any combination of hazardous air pollutants.
    (i) If such a determination is based on limitations and conditions 
that are not federally enforceable (as defined in subpart A of this 
part), the owner or operator shall document the basis for the 
determination as specified in paragraphs (b)(4)(i)(A) through 
(b)(4)(i)(C) and comply with the recordkeeping requirement in 
Sec. 63.103(f).
    (A) The owner or operator shall identify all HAP emission points at 
the plant site, including those emission points subject to and emission 
points not subject to subparts F, G, and H of this part;
    (B) The owner or operator shall calculate the amount of annual HAP 
emissions that have been released from each emission point, using 
acceptable measurement or estimating techniques for maximum operating 
conditions at the site. Examples of estimating procedures that are 
considered acceptable include the calculation procedures in Sec. 63.150 
of subpart G, the early reduction demonstration procedures specified in 
Sec. 63.74 (c)(2), (c)(3), (d)(2), (d)(3), and (g), or, for sources to 
which these procedures are not available, accepted engineering 
practices.
    (C) The owner or operator shall sum the amount of annual HAP 
emissions from all the emission points on the plant site. If the total 
emissions of any one HAP are less than 10 tons per year and the total 
emissions of any combination of HAP are less than 25 tons per year, the 
plant site qualifies for the exemption described in paragraph (b)(4) of 
this section, provided that emissions are kept below these thresholds.
    (ii) If such a determination is based on limitations and conditions 
that are federally enforceable (as defined in subpart A of this part), 
the owner or operator is not subject to the recordkeeping requirement 
in Sec. 63.103 (f).
* * * * *
    3. Section 63.103 is amended by adding paragraph (f) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 63.103  General compliance, reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

* * * * *
    (f) To qualify for the exemption specified in Sec. 63.100(b)(4), 
the owner or operator shall maintain the documentation of the 
information required pursuant to Sec. 63.100(b)(4)(i), and 
documentation of any update of this information requested by the 
Administrator, and shall provide the documentation to the Administrator 
upon request. The Administrator may notify the owner or operator, after 
reviewing such documentation, whether, in the Administrator's judgment, 
the source does not qualify for the exemption specified in 
Sec. 63.100(b)(4). The exemption provided for in Sec. 63.100 (b)(4) 
will expire 90 days from the date of such notification by the 
Administrator.
    4. Section 63.190 is amended by revising paragraph (b) introductory 
text and adding paragraph (b)(7) to read as follows:


Sec. 63.190  Applicability and designation of source.

* * * * *
    (b) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(7) of this section, the 
provisions of subparts I and H of this part apply to emissions of the 
designated organic hazardous air pollutants from the processes 
specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(6) of this section that are 
located at a plant site that is a major source as defined in section 
112(a) of the Act. The specified processes are further defined in 
Sec. 63.191.
* * * * *
    (7) The owner or operator of a process unit specified in paragraphs 
(b)(1) through (b)(6) of this section is exempt from all requirements 
of subpart I until not later than April 22, 1997, if the owner or 
operator certifies, in a notification to the Administrator, not later 
than [insert date 30 days after publication of the final rule] that the 
plant site at which the chemical manufacturing processing unit is 
located emits, and will continue to emit, during any 12-month period, 
less than 10 tons per year of any individual hazardous air pollutant, 
and less than 25 tons per year of any combination of hazardous air 
pollutants.
    (i) If such a determination is based on limitations and conditions 
that are not federally enforceable (as defined in subpart A of this 
part), the owner or operator shall document the basis for the 
determination as specified in paragraphs (b)(7)(i)(A) through 
(b)(7)(i)(C) of this section.
    (A) The owner or operator shall identify all HAP emission points at 
the plant site, including those emission points subject to and emission 
points not subject to subparts F, G, and H of this part;
    (B) The owner or operator shall calculate the amount of annual HAP 
emissions that have been released from each emission point, using 
acceptable measurement or estimating techniques for maximum operating 
conditions at the site. Examples of estimating procedures that are 
considered acceptable include the calculation procedures in Sec. 63.150 
of subpart G, the early reduction demonstration procedures specified in 
Sec. 63.74 (c)(2), (c)(3), (d)(2), (d)(3), and (g), or, for sources not 
covered by these procedures, accepted engineering practices.
    (C) The owner or operator shall sum the amount of annual HAP 
emissions from all the emission points on the plant site. If the total 
emissions of any one HAP are less than 10 tons per year and the total 
emissions of any combination of HAP are less than 25 tons per year, the 
plant site qualifies for the exemption described in paragraph (b)(7) of 
this section, provided that emissions are kept below these thresholds.
    (ii) If such a determination is based on limitations and conditions 
that are federally enforceable, and the plant site is not a major 
source as defined in subpart A of this part), the owner or operator is 
not subject to the recordkeeping requirement in Sec. 63.190(8).
* * * * *
    5. Section 63.192 is amended by adding a new paragraph (l) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 63.192 Standard.

* * * * *
    (l) To qualify for the exemption specified in Sec. 63.190(b)(7), 
the owner or operator shall maintain the documentation of the 
information required pursuant to Sec. 63.190(b)(7)(i), and 
documentation of any update of this information requested by the 
Administrator, and shall provide the documentation to the Administrator 
upon request. The Administrator will notify the owner or operator, 
after reviewing such documentation, whether, in the Administrator's 
judgment, the source does not qualify for the exemption specified in 
Sec. 63.190(b)(7). The exemption provided for in Sec. 63.190(b)(7) will 
expire 90 days after the date of such notification by the 
Administrator.

[FR Doc. 94-25741 Filed 10-21-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6360-50-P