[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 138 (Friday, July 18, 2003)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42603-42605]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-18001]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[OAR-2002-0045, FRL-7528-3]
RIN 2060-AK53


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 
Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and 
Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; amendments.

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

SUMMARY: On February 18, 2003, the EPA promulgated amendments to the 
national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for 
chemical recovery combustion sources at kraft, soda, sulfite, and 
stand-alone semichemical pulp mills, as a direct final rule with a 
parallel proposal. We indicated in that action that we would withdraw 
any part of the rule on which we received adverse comment. We received 
timely adverse comment on certain provisions of the direct final rule, 
but our withdrawal notice was not printed in the Federal Register 
before the May 19, 2003 effective date of the provisions. This action 
amends the subpart MM rule by deleting the provisions which were the 
subject of adverse comment. We are also amending portions of the 
subpart MM rule added by the February 18, 2003 direct final rule to 
correct a typographical error and a cross-referencing error.

DATES: These amendments are effective July 18, 2003.

ADDRESSES: Docket number OAR-2002-0045, containing supporting 
information used in the development of this notice, is available for 
public viewing at the EPA Docket Center (Air Docket), EPA West, Room B-
108, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20460. The Docket 
Center is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is 
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 
566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jeff Telander, Minerals and 
Inorganic Chemicals Group, Emission Standards Division (C504-05), 
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, Research 
Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone number (919) 541-5427, facsimile 
number (919) 541-5600, electronic mail (e-mail) address 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Docket. The EPA has established an official 
public docket for this action under Docket ID No. OAR-2002-0045. The 
official public docket consists of the documents specifically 
referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other 
information related to this action. Although a part of the official 
docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business 
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted 
by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials 
that is available for public viewing at the Air Docket in the EPA 
Docket Center, Room 108, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC 
20460. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. 
to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The 
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744. The 
telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742.
    Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document 
electronically through the EPA Internet under the Federal Register 
listings at http://www/epa.gov/fedrgstr/.
    An electronic version of the public docket is available through 
EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may 
use EPA Dockets at http://www.epa.gov.edocket/ to view public comments, 
access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, 
and to access those documents in the public docket that are available 
electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available 
electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available 
docket materials through the docket facility identified above. Once in 
the system, select ``search,'' then key in the

[[Page 42604]]

appropriate docket identification number.
    Background. On February 18, 2003, we published a direct final rule 
(68 FR 7706) and a parallel proposal (68 FR 7735) amending the NESHAP 
for chemical recovery combustion sources at kraft, soda, sulfite, and 
stand-alone semichemical pulp mills (40 CFR part 63, subpart MM). The 
amendments clarified and consolidated the monitoring and testing 
requirements and added a site-specific alternative standard for one 
pulp mill. We stated in the preamble to the direct final rule and 
parallel proposal that if we received significant adverse comment by 
March 20, 2003 on one or more distinct provisions in the direct final 
rule, we would withdraw those provisions. We subsequently received 
timely adverse comments on seven of the amendments:
    [sbull] 40 CFR 63.864(a) through (c), related to a site-specific 
monitoring plan;
    [sbull] 40 CFR 63.864(d)(1) and (2), related to monitoring 
specifications for continuous opacity monitoring systems;
    [sbull] 40 CFR 63.864(e)(1) through (9), related to monitoring 
specifications for continuous parameter monitoring systems;
    [sbull] 40 CFR 63.864(f), related to flow monitoring provisions;
    [sbull] 40 CFR 63.864(h) and (i), related to data availability 
restrictions;
    [sbull] 40 CFR 63.864(j)(5), related to requirements for 
establishing the operating range for monitoring parameters; and
    [sbull] 40 CFR 63.864(j)(6), related to an operation and 
maintenance log for the period between the compliance date and 
performance test date.
    We prepared an action withdrawing these amendments, but the Office 
of the Federal Register was unable to publish it before May 19, 2003 
(the direct final rule's effective date). The final rule amends the 
subpart MM rule by deleting the provisions which were the subject of 
adverse comment, consistent with our originally stated intention. If we 
again address these issues related to monitoring, we will do so by 
acting on the proposed rule (68 FR 7735) after considering the comments 
received. We will not institute a second comment period.
    We are also amending portions of the subpart MM rule added by the 
direct final rule to make two technical corrections to inadvertent 
errors in rule language. The first is a correction to a typographical 
error affecting one term in Equation 1 of 40 CFR 63.865(a)(1). The 
second is a correction to a cross-referencing error in 40 CFR 
63.687(a)(3).
    The Administrative Procedure Act, in 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), provides 
that, when an agency for good cause finds that notice and public 
procedure are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public 
interest, the agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an 
opportunity for public comment. We have determined that there is good 
cause for making today's rule final without prior proposal and 
opportunity for comment. With respect to the amendment deleting the 
provisions related to monitoring, we are amending the rule to carry out 
our stated intention of not allowing provisions of the direct final 
rule to take effect if they were the subject of adverse comment. There 
has already been notice and opportunity for comment on this action, 
and, under these circumstances, opportunity for further comment is 
unnecessary. Moreover, failure to amend the rule by deleting the 
provisions on which EPA received adverse comment would be contrary to 
public expectation based on EPA's express promise. There may in fact be 
detrimental reliance on EPA's promise, further supporting EPA's finding 
that there is good cause for immediate revision of the rule. The other 
changes to the rule are minor, noncontroversial technical corrections, 
which do not substantively change the rule's requirements. Thus, notice 
and opportunity for public comment on these technical corrections is 
also unnecessary. We find that this constitutes good cause under 5 
U.S.C. 553(b)(B).
    Section 553(d) allows an agency, upon a finding of good cause, to 
make a rule effective immediately. Because today's amendments delete 
regulatory language that was the subject of adverse comment, do not add 
any requirements necessitating additional time for compliance, and 
otherwise do not substantively change the requirements of the rule, we 
find good cause to make these amendments effective immediately.

Statutory and Executive Order Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51736, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and is, therefore, 
not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. Because 
EPA has made a ``good cause'' finding that this action is not subject 
to notice and comment requirements under the Administrative Procedure 
Act or any other statute, it is not subject to the regulatory 
flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 
et seq.), or to sections 202 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act of 1995 (UMRA) (Public Law 104-4). In addition, this action does 
not significantly or uniquely affect small governments or impose a 
significant intergovernmental mandate, as described in sections 203 and 
204 of the UMRA. This action also does not significantly or uniquely 
affect the communities of tribal governments, as specified by Executive 
Order 13084 (63 FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This action 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 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This 
action also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 
23, 1997) because it is not economically significant.
    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Public Law 104-113; 15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs 
EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory and 
procurement activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. The EPA is not proposing/
adopting any voluntary consensus standards in this action.
    This action does not involve special consideration of environmental 
justice related issues as required by Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 
7629, February 16, 1994). In issuing these amendments, EPA has taken 
the necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, 
minimize potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for 
affected conduct, as required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 
FR 4729, February 7, 1996). The EPA has complied with Executive Order 
12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the takings 
implications of these amendments in accordance with the ``Attorney 
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and 
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order. 
These amendments do not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 
et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), as added by 
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 
generally provides that, before a rule may take effect, the agency 
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy 
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller 
General of the United States. Section 808 allows the issuing agency to 
make a rule

[[Page 42605]]

effective sooner than otherwise provided by the Congressional Review 
Act if the agency makes a good cause finding that notice and public 
procedure is impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public 
interest. This determination must be supported by a brief statement (5 
U.S.C. 808(2)). As stated previously, EPA has made such a good cause 
finding, including the reasons therefor, and established an effective 
date of July 18, 2003. The EPA will submit a report containing the rule 
and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not 
a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: July 7, 2003.
Jeffrey R. Holmstead,
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation.


0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 
of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 63--[Amended]

0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart MM--[AMENDED]

0
2. Section 63.864 is amended by removing and reserving paragraphs (a) 
through (c), (d)(1) and (2), (e)(1) through (9), (f), (h), (i), and 
(j)(5) and (6).

0
3. Section 63.865 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.865  Performance test requirements and test methods.

* * * * *
    (a) * * *
    (1) Determine the overall PM emission limit for the chemical 
recovery system at the mill using Equation 1 of this section as 
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18JY03.032


Where:

ELPM = Overall PM emission limit for all existing process 
units in the chemical recovery system at the kraft or soda pulp mill, 
kg/Mg (lb/ton) of black liquor solids fired;
Cref, RF = Reference concentration of 0.10 g/dscm (0.044 gr/
dscf) corrected to 8 percent oxygen for existing kraft or soda recovery 
furnaces;
QRFtot = Sum of the average volumetric gas flow rates 
measured during the performance test and corrected to 8 percent oxygen 
for all existing recovery furnaces in the chemical recovery system at 
the kraft or soda pulp mill, dry standard cubic meters per minute 
(dscm/min) (dry standard cubic feet per minute (dscf/min));
Cref, LK = Reference concentration of 0.15 g/dscm (0.064 gr/
dscf) corrected to 10 percent oxygen for existing kraft or soda lime 
kilns;
QLKtot = Sum of the average volumetric gas flow rates 
measured during the performance test and corrected to 10 percent oxygen 
for all existing lime kilns in the chemical recovery system at the 
kraft or soda pulp mill, dscm/min (dscf/min);
F1 = Conversion factor, 1.44 minutes[middot] kilogram/day[middot]gram 
(min[middot]kg/d[middot]g) (0.206 minutes[middot]pound/day[middot]grain 
(min[middot]lb/d[middot]gr));
BLStot = Sum of the average black liquor solids firing rates 
of all existing recovery furnaces in the chemical recovery system at 
the kraft or soda pulp mill measured during the performance test, 
megagrams per day (Mg/d) (tons per day (ton/d)) of black liquor solids 
fired; and
ER1 ref, SDT = Reference emission rate of 0.10 kg/Mg (0.20 
lb/ton) of black liquor solids fired for existing kraft or soda smelt 
dissolving tanks.
* * * * *

0
4. Section 63.867 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(3) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.867  Reporting requirements.

    (a) * * *
    (3) In addition to the requirements in subpart A of this part, the 
owner or operator of the hog fuel dryer at Weyerhaeuser Paper Company's 
Cosmopolis, Washington, facility (Emission Unit no. HD-14) must include 
analysis and supporting documentation demonstrating conformance with 
EPA guidance and specifications for bag leak detection systems in Sec.  
63.864(e)(12) in the Notification of Compliance Status.
* * * * *

[FR Doc. 03-18001 Filed 7-17-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P