[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 224 (Monday, November 22, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 63779-63783]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-30231]
[[Page 63779]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[AD-FRL-6478-7]
RIN 2060-AG91
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Generic
Maximum Achievable Control Technology (Generic MACT)
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed amendments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On June 29, 1999 (64 FR 34854), we issued the National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Generic Maximum
Achievable Control Technology (Generic MACT) rulemaking package. This
proposal amends the promulgated rule (40 CFR part 63, subpart YY)
regarding the regulation of surge control vessels and bottoms receiver
vessels. This proposal also clarifies that surge control vessels and
bottoms receiver vessels containing wastewater are covered by the
wastewater provisions.
DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before January 21,
2000.
Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA requesting to speak at a
public hearing by December 13, 1999, a public hearing will be held on
December 22, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Comments. Written comments should be submitted (in
duplicate, if possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket and Information
Center (6102), Attention, Docket No. A-97-17, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460. The EPA
requests that a separate copy of comments also be sent to Mr. David W.
Markwordt (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Public hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at
10:00 a.m. in the EPA's Office of Administration Auditorium, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina, or at an alternate site nearby.
Docket. Docket No. A-97-17 contains supporting information used in
developing the standards. The docket is located at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460
in room M-1500, Waterside Mall (ground floor), and may be inspected
from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information concerning
this document, contact Mr. David W. Markwordt; Policy, Planning, and
Standards Group; Emission Standards Division (MD-13); U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency; Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711; telephone: (919) 541-0837; facsimile: (919) 541-0942; e-mail
address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Docket
The docket is an organized and complete file of all the information
we considered in the development of this rulemaking. The docket is a
dynamic file because material is added throughout the rulemaking
process. The docketing system is intended to allow members of the
public and industries involved to readily identify and locate documents
so that they can effectively participate in the rulemaking process.
Along with the proposed and promulgated standards and their preambles,
the contents of the docket will serve as the record in the case of
judicial review. (See section 307(d)(7)(A) of the Clean Air Act (Act).)
The regulatory text and other materials related to this rulemaking are
available for review in the docket or copies may be mailed on request
from the Air Docket by calling (202) 260-7548. A reasonable fee may be
charged for copying docket materials.
Public Hearing
Persons interested in presenting oral testimony or inquiring as to
whether a hearing is to be held should contact Dorothy Apple; Policy,
Planning, and Standards Group; Emission Standards Division (MD-13);
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-4487 at least 2 days in
advance of the public hearing. Persons interested in attending the
public hearing must also call Dorothy Apple to verify the time, date,
and location of the hearing. The public hearing will provide interested
parties the opportunity to present data, views, or arguments concerning
these proposed emission standards.
Comments
Comments and data may be submitted by electronic mail (e-mail) to:
[email protected]. Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII
file to avoid the use of special characters and encryption problems and
will also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect version 5.1,
6.1 or Corel 8 file format. All comments and data submitted in
electronic form must note the docket number: A-97-17. No confidential
business information (CBI) should be submitted by e-mail. Electronic
comments may be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.
Commenters wishing to submit proprietary information for
consideration must clearly distinguish such information from other
comments and clearly label it as CBI. Send submissions containing such
proprietary information directly to the following address, and not to
the public docket, to ensure that proprietary information is not
inadvertently placed in the docket: Attention: Ms. Melva Toomer, U.S.
EPA, OAQPS Document Control Officer, 411 W. Chapel Hill Street, Room
944, Durham NC 27711. We will disclose information identified as CBI
only to the extent allowed by the procedures set forth in 40 CFR part
2. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies a submission when we
receive information, the information may be made available to the
public without further notice to the commenter.
Technology Transfer Network
In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
today's proposed amendments is also available through the Technology
Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature, a copy of the rule will be
posted on the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or
promulgated rules http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides
information and technology exchange in various areas of air pollution
control. If more information regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN
HELP line at (919) 541-5384.
Plain Language
In compliance with President Clinton's June 1, 1998 Executive
Memorandum on Plain Language in government writing, this preamble is
written using plain language. Thus, the use of ``we'' in this notice
refers to the EPA. The use of ``you'' refers to the reader, and may
include industry; State, local, and tribal governments; environmental
groups; and other interested individuals.
Regulated Entities
Entities potentially regulated are those that produce acetal resins
(AR), acrylic and modacrylic fiber (AMF), hydrogen fluoride (HF), and
polycarbonate (PC) and are major sources of hazardous air pollutants
(HAP) as defined in section 112 of the Act. Regulated categories and
entities include:
[[Page 63780]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Regulated entitiesa
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry............... Producers of homopolymers and/or copolymers of
alternating oxymethylene units.
Producers of either acrylic fiber or modacrylic
fiber synthetics composed of acrylonitrile
(AN) units.
Producers of, and recoverers of HF by reacting
calcium fluoride with sulfuric acid. For the
purpose of implementing the rule, HF
production is not a process that produces
gaseous HF for direct reaction with hydrated
aluminum to form aluminum fluoride (i.e., the
HF is not recovered as an intermediate or
final product prior to reacting with the
hydrated aluminum).
Producers of polycarbonate.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. This table lists the types of entities that the EPA is now
aware could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of
entities not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine
whether your facility, company, business, organization, etc., is
regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the
applicability criteria in Sec. 63.1104(a)(1), (b)(1), (c)(1), and
(d)(1) of the rule. If you have questions regarding the applicability
of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in
the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
I. What is the Background for the Proposed Amendments?
On June 29, 1999 (64 FR 34854), we published the National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Generic MACT final rulemaking
package. At that time, standards were promulgated for four major HAP
source categories (i.e., AR production, AMF fiber production, HF
production, and PC production). This proposal amends the promulgated
rulemaking package (40 CFR part 63, subpart YY) regarding the
regulation of surge control vessels and bottoms receiver vessels that
do not contain wastewater, and clarifies that surge control vessels and
bottoms receiver vessels that contain wastewater are covered by the
wastewater provisions of these standards. These proposed amendments
would parallel the intended subparts F, G, and H of part 63
(collectively known as the hazardous organic national emission
standards for hazardous air pollutants (HON)) level of control.
We are also making corrections to the promulgated rulemaking
package (40 CFR part 63, subparts SS, TT, UU, WW, and YY) under a
separate notice.
II. What is the Basis for the Proposed Amendments?
During the public comment period for the proposed wastewater
provisions (64 FR 34950) applicable to wastewater streams for the AR,
AMF, and PC production source categories, we received a comment that
stated that one part of the proposed provisions for liquid streams in
open systems under the generic MACT rule is inconsistent with the
wastewater requirements of the HON, and that the Generic MACT
wastewater provisions, as many other aspects of the Generic MACT
rulemaking package, are intended to parallel what is required under the
HON.
The commenter explained that, under the HON, a ``tank'' could
qualify as either a storage vessel or a surge control vessel if it met
the relevant size and vapor pressure criteria and that, as proposed,
Sec. 63.1106(c) of the Generic MACT wastewater provisions also applies
to ``tanks,'' and that a vessel could be subject to both requirements
(i.e., storage vessel/surge control vessel requirements and liquid
streams in open systems requirements). The commenter stated that the
overlap results in inconsistencies in emission control requirements and
suggested that we add clarifying changes to eliminate double-regulating
of a storage vessel that qualifies as a vessel subject to the liquid
streams in open systems requirements.
Under the Generic MACT rule, a vessel that qualifies as a vessel
subject to the liquid streams in open systems requirements would
contain material that qualifies as wastewater as defined under
Sec. 63.1101 (as proposed to be amended). Additionally, the definition
for ``storage vessel'' or ``tank'' under the Generic MACT promulgated
rule excludes ``vessels that store wastewater.'' Therefore, as proposed
under the wastewater provisions, ``vessels that store wastewater''
would not be subject to ``storage vessel'' or ``tank'' requirements.
Our assessment of the comment indicated that there was a need to modify
the definition of the promulgated definition for ``storage vessel'' to
clarify that applicable storage vessels or tanks that contain
wastewater are covered under the wastewater provisions. Therefore,
today's proposal adds this clarification to the definition of ``storage
vessel'' and is consistent with the HON.
Upon further evaluation of the comment, we discovered that we
omitted requirements for ``surge control vessels'' and ``bottoms
receivers.'' Under the HON, surge control vessels and bottoms receivers
are covered under equipment leak requirements, though their control
applicability criteria and requirements parallel what is required for
storage vessels. The Control Level 2 equipment leak subpart (40 CFR
part 63, subpart UU), which is cross-referenced under the Generic MACT
rule, parallels the level of control under the HON, except that it does
not specify requirements for bottoms receivers and surge control
vessels. The Control Level 2 equipment leak subpart referenced under
the Generic MACT rule mirrors what was developed under the Synthetic
Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI) Consolidated Air Rule
(CAR) development effort. Under the SOCMI CAR effort, bottoms receivers
and surge control vessels are regulated under the storage vessel
provisions.
Inadvertently, under the promulgated Generic MACT rule, we defined
``storage vessel'' as excluding ``bottoms receivers'' and ``surge
control vessels'' (which parallels the HON). This led to an omission of
specified requirements for bottoms receivers and surge control vessels,
and a need for clarification on how they were to be regulated.
Therefore, we are proposing to amend the definition for ``storage
vessel'' as including bottoms receivers and surge control vessels. As
intended, this proposed amendment would result in control of these
vessels that parallels what is done under the SOCMI CAR, which mirrors
the requirements of the HON, and would reduce confusion on how they are
to be regulated.
III. What Are the Impacts Associated With the Proposed Amendments?
The changes contained in the proposed amendments consist of
corrections and a clarification change that reflect what was intended
and accounted for in our control costs and emission reduction estimates
at the time of promulgation of 40 CFR part 63, subparts SS, TT, UU, WW,
and YY. Therefore, these proposed amendments will not affect the
estimated emissions reduction or the control costs for the standards
promulgated for AR, AMF, HF, and PC production source categories on
June 29, 1999 (64 FR 34854). These clarifying corrections should make
it easier for owners and operators of affected sources, and for local
and State authorities, to understand and implement the requirements of
the Generic MACT rule.
[[Page 63781]]
IV. Administrative Requirements
A. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements in this rule have been
submitted for approval to OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501, et seq. We submitted an Information Collection Request
(ICR) document (ICR No. 1871.02) and a copy may be obtained from Sandy
Farmer, OPPE Regulatory Information Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (2137), 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460 or by
calling (202) 260-2740. We may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is
not required to respond to a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers
for our regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.
The OMB approved the information collection requirements for the AR,
AMF, HF, and PC production source categories and assigned the OMB
control number 2060-0420 to the ICR. This approval expires September
30, 2002.
The proposed amendments would have no impact on the information
collection estimates made previously for the promulgated rule.
Therefore, the ICR has not been revised.
B. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), we must
determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and
therefore subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, we have determined
that these proposed amendments do not qualify as a ``significant
regulatory action'' and, therefore, are not subject to review by OMB.
C. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' Under
Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that has
federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance
costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA consults with
State and local officials early in the process of developing the
proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation that has
federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the Agency
consults with State and local officials early in the process of
developing the proposed regulation.
If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13132 requires EPA
to provide to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a federalism
summary impact statement (FSIS). The FSIS must include a description of
the extent of EPA's prior consultation with State and local officials,
a summary of the nature of their concerns and the agency's position
supporting the need to issue the regulation, and a statement of the
extent to which the concerns of State and local officials have been
met. Also, when EPA transmits a draft final rule with federalism
implications to OMB for review pursuant to Executive Order 12866, EPA
must include a certification from the agency's Federalism Official
stating that EPA has met the requirements of Executive Order 13132 in a
meaningful and timely manner.
This proposed rule will not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132.
This proposed rule has minimal direct affects on the 10 plants which
are impacted by this rule. This proposed rule has even less impacts on
States within which the plants reside. Thus, the requirements of
section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601,
et seq.), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), we are required to give special
consideration to the effect of Federal regulations on small entities
and to consider regulatory options that might mitigate any such
impacts. Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit
enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions.
These proposed amendments would not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities because they clarify and correct
the promulgated 40 CFR part 63, subparts SS, TT, UU, WW and YY, and do
not impose any additional regulatory requirements on owners or
operators of affected sources regulated by standards promulgated on
June 29, 1999 (64 FR 34854).
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of
1995, Pub. L. 104-4, we must prepare a budgetary impact statement to
accompany any proposed or final rule that includes a Federal mandate
that may result in estimated costs to State, local or tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100
million or more in any 1 year. Under section 203, we are required to
establish a plan for obtaining input from and informing, educating, and
advising any small governments that may be significantly or uniquely
affected by the rule.
Under section 205 of UMRA, we must identify and consider a
reasonable number of regulatory alternatives before promulgating a rule
for which a budgetary impact statement must be prepared. We are
required to select the least burdensome alternative for State, local,
and tribal governments and the private sector that achieves the
objectives of the rule, unless we explain why this alternative is not
selected or unless the selection of this alternative is inconsistent
with law.
Because these proposed amendments do not include a Federal mandate
that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State,
local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector
in any 1 year, we have
[[Page 63782]]
not prepared a budgetary impact statement or specifically addressed the
selection of the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative. In addition, because small governments will not be
significantly or uniquely affected by these proposed amendments, we are
not required to develop a plan with regard to small governments.
Therefore, the requirements of UMRA do not apply to these proposed
amendments.
F. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Under section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (the NTTAA), Pub. L. 104-113, section 12(d) (15
U.S.C. 272 note), we are directed to use voluntary consensus standards
instead of government-unique standards in our regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. By doing so, the Act is intended to reduce the cost to the
private and public sectors.
Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g.,
materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, etc.) that
are developed or adopted by one or more voluntary consensus standards
bodies. Examples of organizations generally regarded as voluntary
consensus standards bodies include the American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM), International Organization for Standardization (IOS),
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), American Petroleum
Institute (API), National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and the
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). Under the NTTAA, we are required
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when we decide not to
use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
As part of a larger effort, we are undertaking a project to cross-
reference existing voluntary consensus standards in testing, sampling,
and analysis, with current and future EPA test methods. When completed,
we will use this project to assist in identifying potentially
applicable voluntary consensus standards that can then be evaluated for
equivalency and applicability in determining compliance with future
regulations.
These proposed amendments do not require the use of any new
technical standards, therefore section 12(d) does not apply.
G. Executive Order 13045
Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997), applies to any rule that we determine (1) is economically
significant as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) the
environmental health or safety risk addressed by the rule has a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, we must evaluate the environmental health or safety
effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the planned
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives that we considered.
These proposed amendments are not subject to Executive Order 13045
because they do not constitute an economically significant regulatory
action as defined by Executive Order 12866 and because they do not
establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or
safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13084
Under Executive Order 13084, we may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
cost incurred by the tribal governments, or we consult with those
governments. If we comply by consulting, Executive Order 13084 requires
that we provide to OMB, in a separately identified section of the
preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of our prior
consultation with representatives of affected tribal governments, a
summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, we are required to develop
an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
Today's proposed amendments do not impose any duties or compliance
costs on Indian tribal governments. Further, the proposed amendments
provided herein do not significantly alter the control standards
imposed by 40 CFR part 63, subparts SS, TT, UU, WW, and YY, including
any that may effect communities of Indian tribal governments. Hence,
today's proposed amendments do not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian tribal governments. Accordingly, the requirements
of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to these proposed
amendments.
List of Subjects for 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Acetal resins production, Acrylic and
modacrylic fiber production, Air emissions control, Equipment,
Hazardous air pollutants, Hydrogen fluoride production, Polycarbonate
production, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Storage vessel.
Dated: November 15, 1999.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part
63 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended 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 et seq.
Subpart YY--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Source Categories: Generic Maximum Achievable
Control Technology Standards
2. Section 63.1101 is amended by revising the definitions for
equipment and storage vessel as follows:
Sec. 63.1101 Definitions.
* * * * *
Equipment means each of the following that is subject to control
under this subpart: pump, compressor, agitator, pressure relief device,
sampling collection system, open-ended valve or line, valve, connector,
instrumentation system in organic hazardous air pollutant service as
defined in Sec. 63.1103 for the applicable process unit, whose primary
product is a product produced by a source category subject to this
subpart.
* * * * *
Storage vessel or Tank, for the purposes of regulation under the
storage vessel provisions of this subpart, means a stationary unit that
is constructed primarily of nonearthen materials (such as wood,
concrete, steel, fiberglass, or plastic) that provides structural
support and is designed to hold an accumulation of liquids or other
materials. Storage vessel includes surge control vessels and bottoms
receiver vessels. For the purposes of regulation under the storage
vessel provisions of this subpart, storage vessel does not include
vessels
[[Page 63783]]
permanently attached to motor vehicles such as trucks, railcars,
barges, or ships; or wastewater storage vessels. Wastewater storage
vessels are covered under the wastewater provisions of Sec. 63.1106.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-30231 Filed 11-19-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P