Risk and Technology Review, Phase II, Group 2, 14734-14750 [E7-5805]
Download as PDF
14734
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
submission that otherwise satisfies the
provisions of the Clean Air Act.
Therefore, the requirements of section
12(d) of the NTTA do not apply.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: March 22, 2007.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. E7–5809 Filed 3–28–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0859; FRL–8293–4]
RIN 2060–AN85
Risk and Technology Review, Phase II,
Group 2
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking (ANPRM).
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This ANPRM asks for public
comment on hazardous air pollutant
emissions and other model input data
that EPA intends to use to assess
residual risk from selected industrial
major source categories, as required by
the Clean Air Act. Specifically, the data
are comprised of hazardous air pollutant
emission estimates and emission release
parameters for 22 industrial source
categories subject to 12 national
emission standards for hazardous air
pollutants for hazardous air pollutants
with compliance dates of 2002 and
earlier. The source of this information is
the February 2006 version of the 2002
National Emissions Inventory, updated
with some facility-specific data
collected by EPA. We are seeking
comment on the emissions and source
data found at the Risk and Technology
Review Web site and we are providing
the opportunity for the public to submit
technical corrections and updates.
Following review of comments received,
we will update the data, as appropriate,
and assess risk for these source
categories. We will use these risk
estimates and our evaluation of the
availability, cost, and feasibility of
emissions reduction options to
determine the ample margin of safety for
residual risk and to fulfill our
obligations to conduct a technology
review. We currently anticipate using
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
the results of these risk estimates along
with review of control technology as the
basis for our decisions on whether to
propose additional standards to address
residual risk for each source category.
There will be opportunity for oral and
written comment on any additional
standards when we publish our Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). We
anticipate proposing the results of this
risk and technology review for these 22
source categories by fall 2007.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before May 29, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2006–0859 by one of the following
methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the online instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: a-and-rdocket@epamail.epa.gov.
• Fax: (202) 566–1741.
• Mail: U.S. Postal Service, send
comments to: Air and Radiation Docket
(6102T), Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2006–0859, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Please include a total of two copies.
• Hand Delivery: In person or by
Courier, deliver comments to: Air and
Radiation Docket (6102T), EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC 20004. Such
deliveries are accepted only during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–
0859. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be confidential business
information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The https://
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air and Radiation Docket, EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The
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, and
the telephone number for the Air and
Radiation Docket is (202) 566–1742.
Note: The EPA Docket Center suffered
damage due to flooding during the last week
of June 2006. The Docket Center is
continuing to operate. However, during the
cleanup, there will be temporary changes to
Docket Center telephone numbers, addresses,
and hours of operation for people who wish
to make hand deliveries or visit the Public
Reading Room to view documents. Consult
EPA’s Federal Register notice at 71 FR 38147
(July 5, 2006) or the EPA Web site at
https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
for current information on docket operations,
locations, and telephone numbers. The
Docket Center’s mailing address for U.S. mail
and the procedure for submitting comments
to https://www.regulations.gov are not affected
by the flooding and will remain the same.
For
general information about this ANPRM,
contact Ms. Paula Hirtz, Office and Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Sector
Policies and Programs Division,
Coatings and Chemicals Group (E143–
01), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711; telephone number:
(919) 541–2618; fax number: (919) 541–
0246; and e-mail address:
hirtz.paula@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
For information specific to the
National Emissions Inventory (NEI),
contact Ms. Anne Pope, Air Quality and
Assessment Division (Office and Air
Quality Planning and Standards), Mail
Code C339–02, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone
number: (919) 541–5373; fax number:
(919) 541–0684; and e-mail address:
pope.anne@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated Entities. Entities potentially
affected by this action include facilities
containing any one or more of the 22
major source categories subject to the 12
national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) (or
commonly referred to maximum
achievable control technology (MACT)
standards) listed in Table 1. This action
does not affect area sources, as these
NESHAP do not apply to area sources.
14735
Industries regulated by these MACT are
classified by the North American
Industry Classification System (NAICS)
codes shown in Table 1. In addition, a
classification system of MACT codes
has been developed and is used in the
2002 NEI to identify processes included
in each MACT source category. The
MACT codes for the 22 source
categories addressed in this notice are
also displayed in Table 1.
TABLE 1.—MACT STANDARDS, SOURCE CATEGORIES, AND CORRESPONDING NAICS AND MACT CODES ADDRESSED BY
THIS ANPRM
MACT standard/source category name
NAICS codes
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Mineral Wool Production .........................................................................................................................................
Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Facilities ....................................................................................................
Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations ................................................................................................................
Natural Gas Transmission and Storage ..................................................................................................................
Oil and Natural Gas Production ..............................................................................................................................
Petroleum Refineries ...............................................................................................................................................
Pharmaceuticals Production ....................................................................................................................................
Group I Polymers and Resins:
Epichlorohydrin Elastomers Production ...........................................................................................................
Hypalon(TM) Production ....................................................................................................................................
Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production ................................................................................................................
Polybutadiene Rubber Production ....................................................................................................................
Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and Latex Production ...........................................................................................
Group IV Polymers and Resins:
Acrylic-Butadiene-Styrene Production ..............................................................................................................
Methyl Methacrylate-Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene Production ....................................................................
Methyl Methacrylate-Butadiene-Styrene Production ........................................................................................
Nitrile Resins Production ..................................................................................................................................
Polyethylene Terephthalate Production ...........................................................................................................
Polystyrene Production .....................................................................................................................................
Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production .......................................................................................................................
Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants .......................................................................................................................
Printing and Publishing Industry ..............................................................................................................................
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations ...............................................................................................................
Submitting Comments/CBI. When
submitting comments, remember to
identify this ANPRM by docket number
and other identifying information
(subject heading, Federal Register date,
and page number). Also, make sure to
submit your comments by the comment
period deadline identified. As described
further in section VII of this ANPRM,
specific data change suggestions need to
be accompanied by supporting
documentation that includes a
description of any assumptions used
and any technical information and/or
data that you used.
Do not submit CBI to EPA through
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Instead,
send or deliver information identified as
CBI only to the following address: Mr.
Roberto Morales, OAQPS Document
Control Officer (C404–02), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC
27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2006–0859. Clearly mark the
part or all of the information that you
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
claim to be CBI. For CBI information on
a disk or CD–ROM that you mail to Mr.
Morales, mark the outside of the disk or
CD–ROM as CBI and then identify
electronically within the disk or CD–
ROM the specific information that is
claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. If you submit a CD–ROM
or disc that does not contain CBI, mark
the outside of the disk or CD–ROM
clearly that it does not contain CBI.
Information not marked as CBI will be
included in the public docket and EPA’s
electronic public docket without prior
notice.
If you have any questions about CBI
or the procedures for claiming CBI,
please consult the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. Information marked as CBI will
not be disclosed except in accordance
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
MACT code
327993
336411
4883
486210
211
32411
3254
409
0701
0603
0504
0501
0503
1201
325212
325212
325212
325212
325212
1311
1315
1321
1325
1339
325211
325211
325211
325211
325211
325211
325211
331312
32311
336611
1302
1317
1318
1342
1328
1331
1338
0201
0714
0715
with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part
2.
Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition
to being available in the docket, an
electronic copy of today’s notice is also
available on the World Wide Web
through the Technology Transfer
Network (TTN). Following signature by
the EPA Administrator, a copy of
today’s notice will be posted on the
TTN’s policy and guidance page for
newly proposed or promulgated
NESHAP at https://www.epa.gov/ttn/
oarpg. The TTN provides information
and technology exchange in various
areas of air pollution control.
As discussed in more detail in section
VI of this ANPRM, additional
information is available on the Risk and
Technology Review Phase II Web page
at https://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/
rtrpg.html. This information includes
source category descriptions and
detailed emissions and other data that
will be used as model inputs.
Outline. The information presented in
this preamble is organized as follows:
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
14736
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
I. Background
II. What approach is EPA taking for the Risk
and Technology Review?
A. What is the approach we are taking to
address residual risk for the Group 2
source categories?
B. What data were compiled and reviewed?
C. What are the steps planned before
proposing NESHAP to address residual
risk?
D. How will we develop proposed
NESHAP to address residual risk?
E. When will the NESHAP be proposed
and promulgated?
III. What is the purpose of this ANPRM?
IV. What data are in the ANPRM data sets for
each source category?
V. What are we specifically seeking comment
on?
VI. How may I access the data for a specific
source category?
VII. How do I submit suggested data
corrections?
VIII. What additional steps are expected after
EPA reviews the comments received?
I. Background
Section 112 of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) establishes a two-stage regulatory
process to address emissions of
hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from
stationary sources. In the first stage,
after EPA has identified categories of
sources emitting one or more of the HAP
listed in CAA section 112(b), section
112(d) of the CAA calls for
promulgation of technology-based
emission standards for those sources.
For ‘‘major sources’’ that emit or have
the potential to emit 10 tons per year or
more of any single HAP or 25 tons per
year or more of any combination of
HAP, these technology-based standards
must reflect the maximum reductions of
HAP achievable (after considering cost,
energy requirements, and non-air health
and environmental impacts). These
technology based standards are
commonly referred to as MACT
standards. Between 1993 and 2004, EPA
published 96 MACT standards (or
NESHAP) covering 174 source
categories. In this first stage, the focus
was on ensuring reductions through
available technologies. CAA Section
112(d)(6) requires EPA to review these
emission standards and to revise them
‘‘as necessary (taking into account
developments in practices, processes,
and control technologies)’’ no less
frequently than every 8 years.
The second stage in standard-setting
focuses on reducing any remaining
‘‘residual’’ risk according to CAA
section 112(f). This provision requires,
first, that EPA prepare a Report to
Congress discussing (among other
things) methods of calculating risk
posed (or potentially posed) by sources
after implementation of the MACT
standards, the public health significance
of those risks, the means and costs of
controlling them, actual health effects to
persons in proximity of emitting
sources, and recommendations as to
legislation regarding such remaining
risk. EPA prepared and submitted this
report (Residual Risk Report to
Congress, EPA–453/R–99–001) in March
1999. Congress did not act in response
to the report, thereby triggering EPA’s
obligation under CAA section 112(f)(2)
to analyze and address residual risk.
Section 112(f)(2) of the CAA then
directs EPA to assess the risk remaining
(residual risk) after the application of
the MACT standards and promulgate
more stringent standards for a category
or subcategory of sources subject to
MACT standards if promulgation of
such standards is necessary to protect
public health with an ample margin of
safety or to prevent (taking into
consideration various factors) adverse
environmental effects. The standards to
be promulgated under this subsection
must ‘‘provide an ample margin of
safety to protect public health in
accordance with this section (as in effect
before the date of enactment of the CAA
Amendments of 1990), unless the
Administrator determines that a more
stringent standard is necessary to
prevent, taking into consideration costs,
energy, safety, and other relevant
factors, an adverse environmental
impact.’’ Section 112(f)(2) of the CAA
expressly preserves our use of a twostep process for developing standards to
address any residual risk and our
interpretation of ‘‘ample margin of
safety’’ developed in the ‘‘National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Benzene Emissions from
Maleic Anhydride Plants, Ethylbenzene/
Styrene Plants, Benzene Storage Vessels,
Benzene Equipment Leaks, and Coke
By-Product Recovery Plants’’ (Benzene
NESHAP) (54 FR 38044, September 14,
1989).
To date, EPA has conducted CAA
112(d)(6) technology reviews and
promulgated residual risk standards for
eight (Halogenated Solvents will be
promulgated in April 2007) individual
NESHAP and their associated source
categories. In an effort to streamline this
process for the remaining source
categories, EPA plans to address
residual risk and perform a technology
review for several source categories in
one combined effort. While the standard
review and development process will be
streamlined, each source category will
be assessed independently and
decisions on the level of any standards
will be made individually for each
source category. The first set of MACT
source categories for which this
streamlined process will be undertaken
includes the 50 source categories listed
in Table 2, all of which have MACT
compliance dates of 2002 and earlier.
(Except for the Chemical Recovery
Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda,
Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical
Pulp Mills source category, which has a
compliance date of January 2004, these
facilities are believed to be in
compliance with MACT as of 2002, so
the NEI reflects their post-MACT
compliance emissions.) This action is
referred to as Phase II of the Risk and
Technology Review (RTR) process
(where the first eight individual
NESHAP comprise Phase I). Other
MACT standards will be reviewed in the
future. While the initial phases of data
compilation and EPA internal review
processes have been completed for each
of the 50 source categories included in
RTR Phase II, the source categories have
been divided into smaller groups to ease
the burden on public commenters and
EPA’s review of public comments and
the rulemaking processes. Table 2
shows the source categories EPA
anticipates including in each group of
the RTR Phase II.
TABLE 2.—SOURCE CATEGORIES AND CORRESPONDING NAICS AND MACT CODES INCLUDED IN RISK AND TECHNOLOGY
REVIEW PHASE II
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
RTR Phase II group
Source category name
1 ................................
Acetal Resins Production .................................................................................................
Hydrogen Fluoride Production ..........................................................................................
Group I Polymers and Resins:
Butyl Rubber Production ...........................................................................................
Ethylene-Propylene Rubber Production ....................................................................
Polysulfide Rubber Production ..................................................................................
Neoprene Production .................................................................................................
Group II Polymers and Resins:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
NAICS codes
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
MACT code
325211
325120
1301
1409
325212
325212
325212
325212
1307
1313
1332
1320
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
14737
TABLE 2.—SOURCE CATEGORIES AND CORRESPONDING NAICS AND MACT CODES INCLUDED IN RISK AND TECHNOLOGY
REVIEW PHASE II—Continued
RTR Phase II group
2 ................................
2 ................................
Other .........................
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Other .........................
Source category name
Epoxy Resins Production ..........................................................................................
Non-Nylon Polyamides Production ............................................................................
Mineral Wool Production ..................................................................................................
Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework ............................................................................
Marine Tank Vessel Loading ............................................................................................
Natural Gas Transmission & Storage ...............................................................................
Oil and Natural Gas Production .......................................................................................
Petroleum Refineries ........................................................................................................
Pharmaceuticals Production .............................................................................................
Group I Polymers and Resins:
Epichlorohydrin Elastomers Production ....................................................................
Hypalon(TM) Production .............................................................................................
Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production .........................................................................
Polybutadiene Rubber Production .............................................................................
Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and Latex Production ....................................................
Group IV Polymers and Resins:
Acrylic-Butadiene-Styrene Production .......................................................................
Group IV Polymers and Resins:
Methyl Methacrylate-Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene Production .............................
Methyl Methacrylate-Butadiene-Styrene Production .................................................
Nitrile Resins Production ...........................................................................................
Polyethylene Terephthalate Production ....................................................................
Polystyrene Production ..............................................................................................
Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production ................................................................................
Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants ................................................................................
Printing and Publishing Industry .......................................................................................
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair ...........................................................................................
Acrylic/Modacrylic Fibers ..................................................................................................
Chromium Electroplating:
Chromic Acid Anodizing ............................................................................................
Decorative Chromium Electroplating .........................................................................
Hard Chromium Electroplating ..................................................................................
Ferroalloys Production ......................................................................................................
Flexible Polyurethane Foam .............................................................................................
Kraft, Sulfite, Semi-chemical, Soda Pulping Processes and Mechanical, Secondary
Fiber, and Non-wood Pulping Processes and Papermaking Systems:
Pulp and Paper Production .......................................................................................
Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone
Semichemical Pulp Mills:
Pulp and Paper Production .......................................................................................
Off-site Waste and Recovery ...........................................................................................
Phosphate Fertilizer Production .......................................................................................
Phosphoric Acid Manufacturing ........................................................................................
Polycarbonates Production ...............................................................................................
Polyether Polyols Production ............................................................................................
Portland Cement Manufacturing .......................................................................................
Primary Lead Smelting .....................................................................................................
Publicly Owned Treatment Works ....................................................................................
Secondary Aluminum Production .....................................................................................
Secondary Lead Smelting ................................................................................................
Steel Pickling-HCl Process ...............................................................................................
Wood Furniture Manufacturing .........................................................................................
Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing ........................................................................................
This ANPRM addresses only the 22
source categories included in Group 2.
As initial analyses for each source
category included in Group 1 of the RTR
Phase II indicate that estimated health
risks to the individual most exposed to
emissions from a facility in the source
category meet levels the Agency
considers to be without appreciable
health risk and it is improbable that
these source categories emit pollutants
that would cause adverse environmental
effects, we plan to publish a Notice of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
NAICS codes
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the
Federal Register for the 8 source
categories in Group 1 without
previously issuing an ANPRM. The
remaining source categories were split
into two groups. Group 2 is generally
comprised of source categories with
earlier deadlines, fewer multipathway
concerns, and categories that the
Agency believes will require fewer
resources to complete. The source
categories in the other group generally
have later deadlines and more
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
MACT code
325211
325211
327993
336411
4883
486210
211
32411
3254
1312
1322
409
701
603
504
501
503
1201
325212
325212
325212
325212
325212
1311
1315
1321
1325
1339
325211
1302
325211
325211
325211
325211
325211
325211
331312
32311
336611
325222
1317
1318
1342
1328
1331
1338
201
714
715
1001
332813
332813
332813
331112
326150
1607
1610
1615
304
1314
3221
1626–1
3221
562
325312
325312
325199
325199
3273
331419
221320
331314
331492
331111
337122
327993
1626–2
806
1410
1411
1326
1625
410
204
803
202
205
310
716
412
multipathway concerns. Additional
notices will be published addressing the
other source categories in the future.
II. What approach is EPA taking for the
Risk and Technology Review?
A. What is the approach we are taking
to address residual risk for the Group 2
source categories?
We plan to follow the same general
process in revising NESHAP to address
residual risk for each of Group 2 source
categories listed in the table above. This
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
14738
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
general approach includes the following
primary steps:
1. Compile and review (and update
with facility-specific data collected by
EPA in some cases) readily available
source category emissions data from the
2002 NEI.
2. For each group of source categories,
conduct preliminary evaluations to
identify key HAP and data anomalies.
3. Make emissions and other
modeling input data, along with a list of
the identified key HAP and data
anomalies, available for public comment
through an ANPRM.
4. Reconcile and update emissions
and other modeling input data, based on
comments received, and conduct a risk
assessment for each category.
5. Develop and propose CAA section
112(f)(2) residual risk and CAA section
112(d)(6) technology review standard(s)
as appropriate.
6. Address comments from the
proposal(s) and promulgate CAA section
112(f)(2) residual risk and CAA
112(d)(6) technology standard(s), where
necessary.
An independent scientific peer
consultation is currently underway to
review the approach for assessing
residual risk for the source categories
included in the RTR Phase II. This peer
consultation will be conducted by a
panel of EPA’s Science Advisory Board,
and will focus on: (1) The source of
emissions and other modeling data and
the approach for refining this data, (2)
the analytical approach for quantifying
and characterizing human and
environmental exposures and risks, and
(3) the types of results that will be
generated and the format for the
characterization of assessment results.
The process outlined above for the 22
source categories included in Group 2 of
the RTR Phase II is described in more
detail in the following discussion.
B. What data were compiled and
reviewed?
In the first step of this process, we
used the 2002 NEI Final Version 1
(made publicly available on February
26, 2006) as a starting point and
compiled emissions information for
each source category and performed an
internal engineering review of these
data (referred to hereafter as ‘‘initial NEI
data’’). The primary data attributes
evaluated in this review included: (1)
Facility representation in each source
category (i.e., we ensured that source
categories accurately included facilities
making the products characteristic of
the source categories), and (2)
appropriateness of facility emissions, in
both the inclusion of the appropriate
HAP, and in the magnitude of those
HAP emissions. In cases where better
data were known to exist for a particular
source category, that information was
integrated into the data set for that
source category. These reviewed and
integrated data sets for each source
category are referred to hereafter as the
‘‘ANPRM data sets.’’
C. What are the steps planned before
proposing NESHAP to address residual
risk?
In this ANPRM, we are seeking public
review and comment on the emissions
and other model input data included in
the ANPRM data sets for the source
categories included in Group 2 of the
RTR Phase II. These source categories
are listed in Table 1. We will evaluate
the comments and data corrections
received in response to this ANPRM and
update the data for the source categories
in Group 2, as appropriate. In
accordance with the methodologies
described in the Residual Risk Report to
Congress, we will then use the revised
model input data sets for these source
categories (referred to as the notice of
proposed rulemaking, or NPRM, data
sets) in an analysis of the inhalation
risks. The Human Exposure Model
(Community and Sector HEM–3 version
1.1.0) will be used to perform this
modeling. The HEM–3 model performs
three main operations: dispersion
modeling, estimation of population
exposure, and estimation of human
health risks. The dispersion model used
by HEM–3 is AERMOD, which is one of
EPA’s preferred models for assessing
pollutant concentrations from industrial
facilities.1 We will also perform a
screening assessment of potential
adverse environmental effects using
these updated data.
We will also evaluate the NPRM data
sets for each of the 22 source categories
for potential non-inhalation human
health risks, specifically through the
presence of emissions of any persistent
and bioaccumulative (PB) HAP, all of
which are listed in Table 3 below.2 For
source categories that also carry a
potential for non-inhalation human
health risks, in addition to analyses to
estimate risks from inhalation of
emissions, we will also estimate risks
using refined models capable of
addressing multi-pathway exposures
(i.e., exposures due to ingestion or
dermal exposures). The models selected
for this exercise (primarily, we will use
the EPA’s Total Risk Integrated
Modeling system, or TRIM, a refined
multi-pathway pollutant fate and
transport model) will also be used to
produce estimates of pollutant
concentrations in the surrounding
environment, which will be used in the
quantitative assessment of
environmental risks from these
chemicals. The 22 source categories are
not expected to have multi-pathway
issues.
TABLE 3.—PERSISTENT AND BIOACCUMULATIVE HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS (PB HAP)
Cadmium compounds ..............................
DDE ..........................................................
Hexachlorobenzene .................................
Methoxychlor ............................................
Toxaphene ...............................................
Chlordane ..............
Heptachlor .............
Lead compounds ...
Polychlorinated
biphenyls.
Trifluralin ................
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
D. How will we develop proposed
NESHAP to address residual risk?
Therefore, after the risk assessments for
Group 2 are complete, the results will be
examined to determine whether any
source category meets certain criteria
where the Agency considers the risk to
We will provide a more detailed
discussion of the residual risk
methodology in the Group 2 NPRM.
1 Environmental Protection Agency. Revision to
the Guideline on Air Quality Models: Adoption of
a Preferred General Purpose (Flat and Complex
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
Chlorinated dibenzodioxins and furans
Hexachlorocyclohexane (all isomers)
Mercury compounds
Polycyclic Organic Matter (POM)
not be a problem (‘‘low risk’’). The ‘‘low
risk’’ criteria we intend to consider
include: Lifetime cancer risk to the
individual most exposed is less than 1in-1 million, chronic non-cancer risk to
Terrain) Dispersion Model and Other Revisions (70
FR 68218, November 9, 2005).
2 Environmental Protection Agency. Air Toxics
Risk Assessment Reference Library, Volume I. EPA–
453K–04–001A. https://www.epa.gov/ttn/fera/
risk_atra_vol1.html.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
the individual most exposed is less than
a target-organ-specific hazard index of 1,
air concentrations estimated for acute
exposures scenarios are less than healthprotective reference levels, and there is
no potential for significant and
widespread adverse environmental
effect.
For Group 2 source categories in
which all facilities meet these ‘‘low
risk’’ criteria, EPA will not propose
further regulation under CAA section
112(f). For source categories that are not
determined to be low risk, a two-step
standard development process will be
applied, consistent with CAA section
112(f) and with our previously
articulated approach for developing
NESHAP pursuant to CAA section
112(f). This approach was described in
the final NESHAP addressing residual
risk for coke ovens (58 FR 57898,
October 27, 1993).
In the first step of this approach,
modeled source category risks will be
evaluated to determine if they are
‘‘acceptable.’’ The term ‘‘acceptable,’’ in
reference to residual risks is not
specifically defined in the CAA, but
CAA section 112(f)(2) refers positively
to the interpretation of this term in the
Benzene NESHAP (54 FR 38044,
September 14, 1989).
The preamble to the Benzene
NESHAP (54 FR 38044, September 14,
1989) stated that a lifetime maximum
individual excess cancer risk of
approximately 100-in-1 million ‘‘should
ordinarily be the upper-end of the range
of acceptability.’’ However, this is not a
rigid line of acceptability, and other
factors will be considered, such as the
number of people exposed at various
risk levels, the overall incidence of
cancer and other serious health effects,
assumptions and uncertainties
associated with the risk analysis
(including the 70 year exposure
assumption), and the weight of evidence
for human health effects.
In the second step of this standard
development process, we will develop
risk-reduction regulatory alternatives
and decide upon the level of the
standard for each source category,
considering the requirements necessary
to provide an ample margin of safety to
protect human health, as required by
CAA section 112(f)(2). To develop the
regulatory alternatives, we will conduct
various analyses, including an
assessment of the impacts of each
regulatory alternative. The impacts will
include HAP emission reductions, other
environmental impacts, costs,
economics, small business impacts,
reduction in maximum risks to
individuals most exposed, reductions in
chronic and acute risks to populations
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
at various risk levels, and reductions in
cancer incidence. We will assess these
alternatives, decide upon the level of
the standard, and publish a NPRM in
the Federal Register to propose any
regulatory changes for the individual
standards codified in 40 CFR part 63 for
each source category.
As we undertake these rulemaking
proposals, we will also consider
developments in pollution control in
each source category and the costs of
potentially stricter standards reflecting
those developments, to fulfill the
requirements of CAA section 112(d)(6).
Where there have been developments in
practices, processes, and control
technologies, we will consider relevant
factors, such as costs, potential
emissions reductions, and health and
environmental risk in a determination of
what, if any, further controls are
necessary. Where appropriate, we will
develop regulatory alternatives, assess
the impacts of those alternatives, and
decide upon the level of the standard(s).
We plan to propose any CAA section
112(d)(6) regulatory changes for the
individual standards codified in 40 CFR
part 63 for each source category in the
same Federal Register notice proposing
action addressing residual risk.
E. When will the NESHAP be proposed
and promulgated?
Our current goal is to propose the
decisions resulting from both CAA
section 112(f) (residual risk) and CAA
section 112(d)(6) (technology review)
efforts, including the proposal of any
standards for each of the 21 source
categories in Group 2, in the Fall of
2007. Proposal of any standards for the
petroleum refineries source category
will occur by the court-ordered deadline
of August 22, 2007. In addition to
proposing any new residual risk or
technology-based standards, we will
announce any decisions not to
promulgate residual risk standards for
‘‘low risk’’ source categories or source
categories for which the current
standards protect public health with an
ample margin of safety and any
decisions not to promulgate additional
technology-based standards.
After the close of the comment period
on the proposed standard(s), we will
review and perform any analyses and
data gathering necessary to address the
comments, prepare responses, and make
changes to the proposed standards, as
necessary. We anticipate the final
standards will be published in the
Federal Register in the summer of 2008.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14739
III. What is the purpose of this
ANPRM?
The primary purpose of today’s
ANPRM is to request public comments
on the emissions and other model input
data included in the ANPRM data sets
for the 22 source categories included in
Group 2 of the RTR Phase II. These data
are provided in an updatable form on
the RTR Web page at https://
www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html.
We provide detail in section VII below
on how to submit updates and
corrections to this information.
Following review of comments received,
we will update the data as appropriate,
and model to generate estimates of
residual risk that we will use as the
basis for our proposed decisions on
whether to develop standards to address
residual risk for each source category.
Section V lists the general items for
which we are seeking comment for all
source categories. In addition, we note
information unique to each source
category for which we are requesting
technical corrections or updates in the
source category specific sections within
section IV of this ANPRM. We note that
emissions data cannot be withheld from
disclosure as CBI pursuant to section
1905 of title 18 of the United States
Code. EPA’s policy regarding the
categories of information that it
considers to be ‘‘emissions data’’ is set
forth in a Federal Register notice dated
February 14, 1991 (56 FR 7042). A copy
of that notice has been placed in the
docket.
IV. What data are in the ANPRM data
sets for each source category?
As mentioned in Section II of this
ANPRM, the 2002 NEI is the primary
data source used in creating the ANPRM
data sets for each source category. The
data extracted from the NEI for
inclusion in the ANPRM data sets
included general facility information,
such as company name, plant name, and
facility identification codes; emissions
data, including speciated HAP
emissions data; emissions release
characteristics, including stack height,
stack diameter, and the emissions
stream exit temperature and velocity;
and location information, including the
latitude/longitude coordinates of
emissions release locations. For more
information on the 2002 NEI, please
visit our 2002 NEI Web page at https://
www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/
2002inventory.html.
For the most part, the emissions
values in the ANPRM data set represent
actual emission levels. Where actual
emissions data is not already included,
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
14740
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
we request that commenters provide
such data.
Due to the high uncertainty of the
dioxin/furan emissions information
submitted during the inventory
development process, dioxin/furan
emissions were not included in the 2002
NEI, and no emissions of these
compounds are included in the ANPRM
data sets. As we update the ANPRM
data set, we will include dioxin/furan
emissions, based on the best
information available to EPA at that
time. These data may include
information EPA has gathered on dioxin
and dioxin-like compounds. The EPA
National Center for Environmental
Assessment Web site, https://
cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/
recordisplay.cfm?deid=159286, contains
links to these data.
In creating the ANPRM data sets for
each source category, we started with
the February 2006 version of the 2002
NEI. We first conducted a detailed
review of the facilities that were
included in the NEI and added or
removed facilities to make the data as
representative of the overall source
category as possible. We then reviewed
emissions, release characteristics, and
other model input data.
We began by retrieving all records in
the 2002 NEI based solely on MACT
source category designations, which are
fields in the NEI that identify the MACT
source category that applies to each
emission point. This MACT source
category is assigned by a variety of
methods. In some cases, the State or
local agency that provided the data to
EPA identified the MACT category.
Since State and local agencies are aware
of the regulations that apply to facilities,
we have high confidence in MACT
category designations provided by a
State or local agency. In other cases,
EPA staff responsible for developing the
MACT standards provided input to
populate the MACT source category
code fields. As these individuals have
knowledge of the source category for
which they are accessing and using the
NEI data, the confidence in these
designations is also high. Most of the
MACT source category code
designations, however, are assigned
based on Standard Industrial
Classification (SIC), NAICS, or Source
Classification Code (SCC) defaults.
There is often considerable uncertainty
associated with these designations.
One of the first things we reviewed in
the NEI data was the list of facilities
included for each source category. For
some source categories, we are
reasonably confident that we know the
names of the facilities and their exact
locations. In these cases, we compared
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
the ‘‘known’’ lists of facilities to the
facilities in the NEI. We removed the
MACT source category designation for
facilities not on the known list. If
facilities on the known lists were not in
the data for the source categories, we
searched the NEI for these facilities.
Quite often, they were in the 2002 NEI,
but had different, and presumably
incorrect, MACT source category
designations. These facilities were
added to the data set for the category
and the MACT source category codes
were re-designated accordingly.
For large facilities with multiple
processes that represent multiple MACT
source categories, it was not always
straightforward to separate the processes
by source category. In these cases, we
used a variety of approaches to separate
the processes and emission points into
source categories. Examples of the
criteria used to separate processes and
emissions into source categories include
SCC, SIC codes, and pollutants emitted.
Situations where such source category
separation decisions were made are
highlighted in the source-category
discussions later in this section and
detailed in the files available for
download on the RTR Web page at
https://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/
rtrpg.html. We are asking specifically
for comment on how we separated
processes and emission points by source
category at these large integrated
facilities.
For categories with large numbers of
facilities for which we do not have
complete lists of known facilities, we
conducted more general evaluations of
the facilities in the data sets. These
evaluations included examining the
company names, SIC, NAICS, and SCC,
and adding or removing facilities based
on these criteria.
We will be evaluating residual risk for
all facilities and emission sources that
are in the 22 source categories included
in Group 2 of the RTR Phase II. In some
instances, the ANPRM data sets may
include emission points that are part of
the source category but are not subject
to the MACT standard for that source
category. Emissions from these sources
will be considered in our future
regulatory decisions. In addition, the
ANPRM data sets, for most source
categories, include all major and area
sources (facilities) in the 2002 NEI that
have processes related to the specific
source category.
After finalizing the facility lists for
each source category, we conducted a
general review of the emissions and
other data included in the ANPRM data
sets to identify data anomalies that
could affect the risk estimates. With a
few exceptions, we did not change the
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
data or include additional data. For the
following source categories, the 2002
NEI was supplemented with additional
data provided by industry to create the
ANPRM data sets:
• Petroleum Refineries
• Shipbuilding and Ship Repair
• Source categories regulated by the
Group I Polymers and Resins MACT:
Æ Epichlorohydrin Elastomers
Production
Æ HypalonTM Production
Æ Nitrile Butadiene Rubber
Production
Æ Polybutadiene Rubber Production
Æ Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and
Latex Production
The addition of these data, as well as
other data changes made, are described
in the source-category specific sections
below. We note that because these
changes are included in the ANPRM
data sets, these data sets do not exactly
match the February 2006 version of the
2002 NEI data available on our NEI Web
site—https://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/
2002inventory.html. When comments
are received via this ANPRM and
incorporated into the source categoryspecific ANPRM data sets, these
revisions will then also be incorporated
into the 2002 NEI and made publicly
available through the NEI Web site in
Final Version 2.1.
Following are sections discussing the
data for individual source categories.
These discussions provide an overview
of the source category, a brief summary
of the ANPRM data sets, and a mention
of the types of major anomalies
associated with the data. Summary
reports for each of the source categories,
which contain considerable detail on
the information summarized below,
including the carcinogenic HAP and
HAP with adverse health effects other
than cancer, are available on the RTR
Web page at https://www.epa.gov/ttn/
atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. We especially
encourage you to review the specific
anomalies raised in these reports and to
provide data to help reduce these
anomalies.
1. Mineral Wool Production
The mineral wool production source
category includes facilities that produce
mineral wool, which is a fibrous, glassy
substance made from natural rock (such
as basalt), blast furnace slag, or other
similar materials and consisting of
silicate fibers. In the mineral wool
manufacturing process, rock and/or
blast furnace slag and other raw
materials (e.g., gravel) are melted in a
furnace (cupola) using coke as fuel. The
molten material is then formed into
fiber. Mineral wool is manufactured as
either a ‘‘bonded’’ product that
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
incorporates a binder to increase
structural rigidity or a less rigid
‘‘nonbonded’’ product. Emission
sources from mineral wool
manufacturing facilities include the
cupola furnace where the mineral
charge is melted; a blow chamber, in
which air or a binder is drawn over the
fibers, forming them into a screen; a
curing oven that bonds the fibers (for
bonded products); and a cooling oven.
The primary HAP expected to be
emitted during the mineral wool
manufacturing process are metals,
including antimony, arsenic, beryllium,
cadmium, chromium, manganese,
nickel, lead, and selenium that are
emitted from the cupola, and gaseous
HAP, including formaldehyde, carbonyl
sulfide, and phenol, that result from the
vaporization of the binder.
The ANPRM data set for this source
category includes information for 12
facilities, 11 of which are classified as
major sources in the NEI. Based on our
previous estimates of the number of
facilities in the mineral wool source
category, this data set represents
between 75 and 90 percent of the
industry. The HAP emitted in largest
quantities from these facilities is
carbonyl sulfide, which accounts for
over 84 percent of the total HAP
emissions by mass from the data set.
Formaldehyde, triethylamine, and
phenol are also emitted in large
quantities. Several PB HAP are reported
in the data set for the mineral wool
manufacturing source category,
including lead, cadmium, and mercury
compounds.
The major anomalies associated with
the data set for this source category
include the HAP emitted and the
speciation of chromium and mercury
emissions. Some HAP expected (e.g.,
lead, manganese, cadmium, chromium,
nickel, etc.) are not included for all the
facilities in the data set, and some that
are not expected (e.g., benzene and
triethylamine) are reported from a few
facilities.
2. Aerospace Manufacturing and
Rework Facilities
The aerospace manufacturing and
rework source category includes all
facilities that manufacture aerospace
vehicles and/or vehicle components and
all facilities that rework or repair these
items. An aerospace vehicle or
component is any fabricated, processed,
or assembled set of parts or complete
unit of any aircraft including, but not
limited to, airplanes, helicopters,
missiles, rockets, and space vehicles.
Organic and inorganic HAP emissions
in aerospace facilities originate from
cleaning, primer application, topcoat
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
application, paint stripping, chemical
milling maskant application, and waste
handling and storage. The HAP
expected to be emitted by aerospace
facilities include chromium, cadmium,
methylene chloride, toluene, xylene,
ethylene glycol, and glycol ethers. For
emissions reported generically as
‘‘chromium’’ or ‘‘chromium and
compounds,’’ emissions are speciated
for this source category as 75 percent
‘‘chromium (III) compounds’’ and 25
percent ‘‘chromium (VI) compounds.’’
This speciation is based on source
category-specific information provided
by the aerospace industry. (Typically, a
66 percent ‘‘chromium (III) compounds’’
and 34 percent ‘‘chromium (VI)
compounds’’ is used as a default
speciation profile based on the approach
adopted by the 1996 National-Scale Air
Toxics Assessment, or NATA.) We
encourage commenters to review this
assumption and provide site-specific
chromium (VI) and chromium (III) data
where possible.
The ANPRM data set for the
Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework
source category includes information for
301 facilities, 169 of which are
classified as major sources in the NEI.
Based on our previous estimates of the
number of facilities in the aerospace
source category, the ANPRM data set
includes data for about 10 percent of the
industry. Methyl chloroform,
tetrachloroethylene, toluene,
trichloroethylene, and methylene
chloride account for approximately 80
percent of the mass of HAP emitted
across the 301 facilities in the ANPRM
dataset.
The major anomalies associated with
the data set for this source category
include the number of facilities in the
source category, the HAP emitted, and
the speciation of chromium. Some HAP
expected to be reported (chromium,
nickel, and hexamethylene
diisocyanate) are not included for all the
facilities in the data set.
3. Marine Tank Vessel Loading
Operations
Marine tank vessel loading operations
are facilities that load and unload liquid
commodities in bulk, such as crude oil,
gasoline and other fuels, and some
chemicals and solvent mixtures. The
cargo is pumped from the terminal’s
large, above-ground storage tanks
through a network of pipes and into a
storage compartment (tank) on the
vessel. Most marine tank vessel loading
operations are associated with
petroleum refineries, synthetic organic
chemical manufacturers, or are
independent terminals. The major HAP
emission points for marine vessel
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14741
loading operations include open tank
hatches and overhead vent systems.
Other possible emission points are
hatch covers or domes, pressurevacuum relief valves, seals, and vents.
Emissions may also occur during
ballasting (i.e., the process of drawing
ballast as water into a cargo hold). The
primary HAP expected to be emitted
from marine vessel loading operations
depend on the material being loaded,
but are generally expected to be
benzene, hexane, toluene, xylene
compounds, ethyl benzene, and
cumene.
The ANPRM data set for the marine
tank vessel loading operations source
category includes information for 126
facilities, all of which are classified as
major sources in the NEI. Based on our
previous estimates of the number of
facilities in this source category, the
ANPRM data set includes data for more
than were expected to be subject to the
MACT (which was estimated to be 40 at
time of the MACT promulgation) and
less than the estimated number of
existing facilities based on Army Corps
of Engineers estimates (700). In the
ANPRM data set, the HAP emitted in
largest quantities from these 126 sources
are hexane, methanol, toluene, xylene
compounds, and benzene, which
collectively accounts for nearly 75
percent of the total HAP emitted.
The major anomalies associated with
the data set for this source category
include the number of facilities in the
source category and the emission release
parameters (of which nearly all are NEI
default values).
4. Natural Gas Transmission and Storage
The natural gas transmission and
storage source category comprises the
pipelines, facilities, and equipment
used to transport and store natural gas
products (hydrocarbon liquids and
gases). Pipeline transport of natural gas
products is covered by this category to
either the point of custody transfer for
the oil and natural gas production
source category or the point of delivery
to the local distribution company or
final end user of the natural gas if no
local distribution company is present.
Emissions of HAP from the natural gas
transmission and storage category come
from glycol dehydration unit reboiler
vents, other process vents, storage
vessels with flash emissions, pipeline
pigging and storage of pipeline pigging
wastes, combustion sources, and
equipment leaks. The major HAP
expected to be emitted by the natural
gas transmission and storage source
category are hexane, toluene, benzene,
mixed xylenes, formaldehyde, and
glycol ethers.
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
14742
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Our previous estimates identified
seven natural gas transmission and
storage facilities that were major
sources. The ANPRM data set for the
natural gas transmission and storage
source category includes information for
123 facilities, 78 of which are classified
as major sources in the NEI. In the
ANPRM data set, the HAP emitted in
largest quantities from natural gas
transmission and storage facilities are
hexane, toluene, benzene, and mixed
xylenes and these emissions collectively
account for over 75 percent of the total
HAP emissions from this source
category.
One major anomaly associated with
the data set for this source category is
the number of facilities identified in the
ANPRM data set compared to the
number of facilities previously
identified for this source category (i.e.,
there appear to be more facilities
identified as natural gas transmission
and storage facilities in the ANPRM data
set than previously identified).
5. Oil and Natural Gas Production
The Oil and Natural Gas Production
source category includes facilities
involved in the recovery and treatment
of hydrocarbon liquids and gases from
oil and natural gas production wells.
Components of these facilities include
glycol dehydration units, condensate
tank batteries, and other tanks and
equipment present at natural gas
processing plants. The primary HAP
emissions from oil and natural gas
production facilities occur via the glycol
dehydration reboiler vents, other
process vents, storage vessels, and
equipment leaks. The major HAP
expected to be emitted by the oil and
natural gas production source category
are xylenes, toluene, hexane, and ethyl
benzene.
The ANPRM data set for the oil and
natural gas production source category
includes information for 2,824 facilities,
of which 909 facilities are classified as
major sources in the NEI. Our previous
estimates identified 440 major sources
and 2,200 area sources. In the ANPRM
data set, the HAP emitted in the greatest
amounts are carbonyl sulfide, hexane,
toluene, benzene, and xylenes
formaldehyde, ethyl benzene, ethylene
glycol, and methanol. These HAP
collectively account for over 99 percent
of the total HAP emissions for this
source category. There are twelve PB
HAP reported in the data set for the Oil
and Natural Gas Production source
category, including polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAH), lead,
dibenzofuran, and cadmium.
For reported emissions of POM
chemicals, emissions are grouped into
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
one of seven POM categories—POM
71002 (16–PAH, PAH total, POM); POM
72002 (2–Chloronaphthalene, 2–
Methylnaphthalene, Acenaphthene,
Acenaphthylene, Anthracene,
Benzo(c)phenanthrene, Benzo[e]Pyrene,
Benzo[g,h,i,]Perylene, Fluoranthene,
Fluorene, Perylene, Phenanthrene,
Pyrene); POM 73002 (7,12–
Dimethylbenz[a]Anthracene); POM
74002 (3–Methylcholanthrene); POM
75002 (5–Methylchrysene,
Benzo[a]Pyrene,
Dibenzo[a,h]Anthracene); POM 76002
(B[j]Fluoranthen, Benz[a]Anthracene,
Benzo[b]Fluoranthene,
Benzo[k]Fluoranthene, Indeno[1,2,3c,d]Pyrene); and POM 77002 (Chrysene).
We encourage commenters to provide
data on the individual chemical(s) that
make up the POM.
The major anomalies associated with
the data set for this source category
include the number of facilities in the
source category, the specific HAP
emitted by individual facilities, and
default plant coordinates. The ANPRM
data set contains over 2,800 facilities
and this number is more than expected.
The ANPRM data set also contains
emissions of some HAP that are
expected to be emitted from all facilities
in the category (e.g., xylenes, hexane,
toluene, and ethyl benzene), but are
only emitted from a small percentage of
facilities. Conversely, the HAP with the
largest quantity of emissions in the
ANPRM data set, carbonyl sulfide, is not
expected to be emitted from facilities in
this source category. In addition, a
significant percentage (40 percent) of
the coordinates in the ANPRM data set
are default coordinates.
6. Petroleum Refineries
Petroleum refineries are facilities
engaged in refining and producing
products made from crude oil or
unfinished petroleum derivatives. EPA
listed two separate Petroleum Refinery
source categories, both of which include
any facility engaged in producing
gasoline, naphtha, kerosene, jet fuels,
distillate fuel oils, residual fuel oils,
lubricants, or other products from crude
oil or unfinished petroleum derivatives.
The Petroleum Refineries—Catalytic
Cracking (Fluid and Other) Units,
Catalytic Reforming Units, and Sulfur
Plant Units source category includes the
following process units: catalytic
cracking (fluid and other) units,
catalytic reforming units, and sulfur
plant units (MACT II). The second
source category, Petroleum Refineries—
Other Sources Not Distinctly Listed,
includes the process units not listed in
the first category including, but not
limited to, thermal cracking, vacuum
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
distillation, crude distillation,
hydrotreating, hydrorefining,
isomerization, polymerization, lube oil
processing, and hydrogen production
(MACT I).
Because the MACT standard for the
‘‘Other Sources Not Distinctly Listed’’
source category (40 CFR part 63, subpart
UU) was promulgated first (60 FR
43244, August 18, 1995), it is commonly
referred to as Petroleum Refineries
MACT I. Only the units in the ‘‘Other
Sources Not Distinctly Listed’’ category,
and regulated by the MACT 1 standards,
are being addressed in RTR Phase II.
These units include emissions sources
classified under SIC 2911 located at
petroleum refineries, including:
petroleum refinery process units,
storage vessels, transfer racks,
wastewater streams, and equipment
leaks. The units and emissions
associated with catalytic cracking,
catalytic reforming, and sulfur plants,
which are all regulated by MACT 2
standards, will be investigated in future
RTR efforts.
The specific HAP emitted by
petroleum refineries varies by facility
and process operations but can include
a variety of organic and inorganic
compounds and metals. Emissions
originate from various process vents,
storage vessels, wastewater streams,
loading racks, marine tank vessel
loading operations, and equipment leaks
associated with refining facilities.
Process vents, wastewater streams, and
storage vessels generally emit organic
HAP. The primary HAP expected to be
emitted from the MACT 1 petroleum
refining sources include benzene,
toluene, and ethyl benzene, but can also
include acetaldehyde, formaldehyde,
hexane, phenol, xylene, carbonyl
sulfide, carbon disulfide, hydrogen
chloride, chlorine and other HAP.
The ANPRM dataset for this source
category contains 175 refineries, of
which 124 are classified as major
sources. In conjunction with previous
efforts for this source category, the
industry had collected and submitted
up-to-date benzene emissions data for
23 refineries. The industry and EPA
consider these data to be the most
accurate benzene emissions data
available for petroleum refineries. For
these 23 refineries, EPA replaced all
benzene emissions data in the NEI with
these updated industry data. The
emissions of other HAP that were in the
NEI for these 23 refineries were not
removed. For the purpose of these
analyses, the ANPRM data set for these
23 facilities was kept separate from the
ANPRM data set for the remaining 152
refineries.
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Organic chemicals account for the
majority of the total mass of HAP
emitted by petroleum refinery sources,
with toluene, hexane, mixed and
individual isomers of xylenes, benzene,
methanol, methyl tert-butyl ether, and
ethyl benzene accounting for about 90
percent of the HAP mass emitted across
the both data sets. Of the 152 refineries
for which industry did not supply
benzene emissions data, benzene
emissions were reported for 137
refineries. A range of PB HAP emissions
are reported in the ANPRM datasets,
including various PAH and several
metals (including lead and lead
compounds, cadmium and cadmium
compounds, mercury and mercury
compounds).
For reported emissions of POM
chemicals, emissions are grouped into
one of seven POM categories. We
encourage commenters to provide the
individual chemical(s) that make up the
POM.
The major anomalies associated with
the data sets for this source category
include specific HAP emitted by
individual facilities, along with release
characteristics and coordinates for those
refineries for which industry did not
provide updated data. The data sets
contain emissions of several metal HAP,
which are expected to be more likely to
be emitted from MACT 2 sources, not
MACT 1. Also, it appears that the
benzene emissions for the 23 facilities
for which the industry supplied new
data are significantly higher than the
benzene emissions in the NEI for the
other refineries.
Nearly all of the emissions release
parameters (71 percent of stack height,
96 percent of stack diameter, 97 percent
of emissions exit temperature, and 97
percent of emissions exit velocity
values) for the refineries for which no
new data were provided are default
values in the NEI and the ANPRM data
set. Finally, a significant percentage (40
percent) of the coordinates in the data
set for which new data were not
provided are defaulted, some based on
county or zip code centroids.
7. Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
The pharmaceutical manufacturing
process consists of chemical production
operations that produce drugs and
medication. These operations include
chemical synthesis (deriving a drug’s
active ingredient) and chemical
formulation (producing a drug in its
final form). During pharmaceutical
manufacturing operations, HAP
emissions can occur from breathing and
withdrawal losses from chemical storage
tanks, venting of process vessels, leaks
from piping and equipment used to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
transfer HAP compounds (equipment
leaks), and volatilization of HAP from
wastewater streams. While a wide
variety of HAP can be emitted from
pharmaceutical manufacturing
processes, expected HAP include
methylene chloride, methanol, N,Ndimethylformamide, toluene and
hydrochloric acid. When the NESHAP
for this category was finalized in 1998,
EPA estimated that there were
approximately 101 pharmaceutical
manufacturing operations subject to the
MACT regulations.
The ANPRM data set for
pharmaceutical manufacturing includes
222 facilities, 107 of which are
classified as major sources in the NEI.
The HAP emitted in largest quantities
from these sources are methanol,
methylene chloride, and toluene.
Emissions of these three HAP account
for over 80 percent of the mass of all
HAP emitted across all 222 facilities. PB
HAP emissions in the ANPRM data set
for the Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
source category include lead, mercury,
and cadmium compounds as well as a
range of PAH.
For reported emissions of POM
chemicals, emissions are grouped into
of one of seven POM categories. We
encourage commenters to provide the
individual chemical(s) that make up the
POM.
For emissions reported generically as
‘‘chromium’’ or ‘‘chromium and
compounds,’’ emissions are speciated
for this source category as 66 percent
‘‘chromium (III) compounds’’ and 34
percent ‘‘chromium (VI) compounds.’’
We encourage commenters to review
this assumption and provide specific
chromium (VI) and chromium (III) data
where possible.
The major anomalies associated with
the data set for this source category are
related to the HAP emitted. While
methylene chloride, NNdimethylformamide, toluene, and
hydrochloric acid are expected to be
emitted by facilities in this source
category, these emissions were not
reported for many of the facilities. Also,
HAP not expected to be emitted from
this source category (e.g., ethylene
oxide, p-dioxane, naphthalene, ethylene
dichloride, arsenic, hydrazine, POM,
and chromium (IV) compounds) are
reported for eight or fewer facilities.
8. Epichlorohydrin Elastomers
Production
Epichlorohydrin elastomers are
widely used in the automotive industry.
The main epichlorohydrin elastomers
are polyepichlorohydrin, epi-ethylene
oxide (EO) copolymer, epi-allyl glycidyl
ether (AGE) copolymer, and epi-EO–
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14743
AGE terpolymer. Sources of HAP
emissions for the Epichlorohydrin
Elastomer source category include raw
material storage vessels, front-end
process vents, back-end process
operations, wastewater operations, and
equipment leaks. The majority of the
emissions come from equipment leaks.
The process ‘‘front-end’’ includes prepolymerization, reaction, stripping, and
material recovery operations; and the
process ‘‘back-end’’ includes all
operations after stripping
(predominately drying and finishing).
The primary HAP emitted during
production are epichlorohydrin and
toluene.
The ANPRM data set for the
Epichlorohydrin source category
includes information for one facility,
which is classified as a major source in
the NEI. Our previous estimate of the
number of facilities in the
Epichlorohydrin source category was
also one, therefore we believe the
ANPRM data set includes data for the
entire industry. In conjunction with
previous efforts for this source category,
the industry had collected and
submitted up-to-date emissions and
emissions release characteristic data for
this facility. The industry and EPA
consider these data to be the most
accurate emissions and emissions
release characteristic data available for
the epichlorohydrin elastomers
production processes at this facility.
EPA replaced all epichlorohydrin
elastomers production emissions and
emissions release characteristic data in
the NEI with the updated industry data
for this facility. In the ANPRM data set,
toluene is emitted in the greatest
quantity and accounts for about 99
percent of the total emissions.
9. HypalonTM Production
HypalonTM, or chlorosulfonated
polyethylene, is a synthetic rubber
produced by reacting polyethylene with
chloric and sulfur dioxide, transforming
the thermoplastic polyethylene into a
vulcanized elastomer. The reaction is
conducted in a solvent reaction medium
containing carbon tetrachloride. Sources
of HAP emissions include raw material
storage vessels, front-end process vents,
back-end process operations, and
equipment leaks. The majority of the
emissions come from front-end process
vents. The process ‘‘front-end’’ includes
pre-polymerization, reaction, stripping,
and material recovery operations; and
the process ‘‘back-end’’ includes all
operations after stripping
(predominately drying and finishing).
The primary HAP emitted during
production are carbon tetrachloride and
chloroform.
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
14744
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
The ANPRM data set for the
HypalonTM resins source category
includes information for one facility,
which is classified as a major source in
the NEI. Our previous estimate of the
number of facilities in the HypalonTM
source category was also one, therefore
we believe the ANPRM data set includes
data for the entire industry. In
conjunction with previous efforts for
this source category, the industry had
collected and submitted up-to-date
emissions and emissions release
characteristic data for this facility. The
industry and EPA consider these data to
be the most accurate emissions and
emissions release characteristic data
available for the HypalonTM production
processes at this facility. EPA replaced
all HypalonTM production emissions
and emissions release characteristic data
in the NEI with the updated industry
data for this facility.
In the ANPRM data set, carbon
tetrachloride and chloroform are
emitted in the greatest amounts and
account for nearly all of the emissions.
10. Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production
Nitrile butadiene rubber is a
copolymer of 1,3-butadiene and
acrylonitrile, and the Nitrile Butadiene
Rubber Production source category
includes any facility that polymerizes
1,3-butadiene and acrylonitrile.
Depending on its specific composition,
nitrile butadiene rubber can be resistant
to oil and chemicals, a property that
facilitates its use in disposable gloves,
hoses, seals, and a variety of automotive
applications. The drying and finishing
steps that make up the back-end
processes are significant sources of HAP
emissions. Other sources of HAP
emissions include raw material storage
vessels, front-end process vents,
wastewater operations, and equipment
leaks. The primary HAP emitted during
production are acrylonitrile, 1,3butadiene, and styrene.
The ANPRM data set for the Nitrile
Butadiene Rubber Production source
category includes five facilities, two of
which are classified as major sources.
Based on our previous estimates of the
number of facilities in the source
category, the ANPRM data set includes
data for the entire industry. In
conjunction with previous efforts for
this source category, the industry had
collected and submitted up-to-date
emissions and emissions release
characteristic data for three of these five
facilities. The industry and EPA
consider these data to be the most
accurate emissions and emissions
release characteristic data available for
the nitrile butadiene rubber production
processes at these facilities. For these
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
three facilities, EPA replaced all nitrile
butadiene rubber production emissions
and emissions release characteristic data
in the NEI with these updated industry
data.
In the ANPRM data set, styrene, 1,3butadiene, and acrylonitrile are emitted
in the largest quantities, accounting for
42 percent, 21 percent, and 33 percent
of the total source category emissions,
respectively.
A major anomaly associated with the
data set for this source category is that
one HAP expected to be reported by
each facility (1,3-butadiene) is not
included in the data for all the facilities.
11. Polybutadiene Rubber Production
Polybutadiene rubber is a
homopolymer of 1,3-butadiene, and the
Polybutadiene Rubber Production
source category includes any facility
that polymerizes 1,3-butadiene. Most of
the polybutadiene rubber manufactured
in the United States is used in the
production of tires in the construction
of the tread and sidewalls. Sources of
HAP emissions include raw material
storage vessels, front-end process vents,
back-end process operations,
wastewater operations, and equipment
leaks. The majority of the emissions
come from back-end process operations,
which are predominately drying and
finishing. The primary HAP emitted
during production include hexane, 1,3butadiene, styrene, and toluene.
The ANPRM data set for the
Polybutadiene Rubber Production
source category includes information for
five facilities, each of which are
classified as major sources in the NEI.
Based on our previous estimates of the
number of facilities in the
Polybutadiene Rubber Production
source category, the ANPRM data set
includes data for the entire industry. In
conjunction with previous efforts for
this source category, the industry had
collected and submitted up-to-date
emissions and emissions release
characteristic data for each of these five
facilities. The industry and EPA
consider these data to be the most
accurate emissions and emissions
release characteristic data available for
the polybutadiene rubber production
processes at these facilities. For these
five facilities, EPA replaced all
polybutadiene rubber production
emissions and emissions release
characteristic data in the NEI with these
updated industry data.
In the ANPRM data set, hexane and
toluene are emitted in the greatest
amounts and account for about 74 and
19 percent of the total emissions,
respectively.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12. Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and Latex
Production
The Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and
Latex Production source category
includes any facility that manufactures
copolymers consisting of styrene and
butadiene monomer units. This source
category is divided into three
subcategories due to technical process
and HAP emission differences: (1) The
production of styrene-butadiene rubber
by emulsion, (2) the production of
styrene-butadiene rubber by solution,
and (3) the production of latex. Styrenebutadiene rubber is coagulated and
dried, while latex is not. For both
styrene-butadiene rubber processes, the
monomers used are styrene and
butadiene; either process can be
conducted as a batch or a continuous
process. Sources of HAP emissions for
the emulsion subcategory include raw
material storage vessels, front-end
process vents, back-end process
operations, wastewater operations, and
equipment leaks. Most of the emissions
come from back-end process operations,
which are predominately drying and
finishing. The primary HAP emitted by
emulsion styrene-butadiene rubber
production are styrene and 1–
3,butadiene. Sources of HAP emissions
for the solution subcategory include raw
material storage vessels, front-end
process vents, back-end process
operations, wastewater operations, and
equipment leaks. Most of the emissions
come from back-end process operations.
The primary HAP emitted by
production of solution styrene
butadiene rubber are hexane, butadiene,
styrene, and toluene. Sources of HAP
emissions from the latex production
subcategory include raw material
storage vessels, front-end process vents,
wastewater operations, and equipment
leaks. The primary HAP emitted are
styrene and butadiene.
The ANPRM data set for the StyreneButadiene Rubber and Latex Production
source category includes information for
15 facilities, seven of which are
classified as major sources in the NEI.
Based on our previous estimates of the
number of facilities in the StyreneButadiene Rubber and Latex Production
source category, the ANPRM data set
includes data for the entire industry. In
conjunction with previous efforts for
this source category, the industry had
collected and submitted up-to-date
emissions and emissions release
characteristic data for eight of these 15
facilities. The industry and EPA
consider these data to be the most
accurate emissions and emissions
release characteristic data available for
the styrene butadiene rubber and latex
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
production processes at these facilities.
For these eight facilities, EPA replaced
all styrene butadiene rubber and latex
production emissions and emissions
release characteristic data in the NEI
with these updated industry data.
In the ANPRM data set, styrene and
1,3-butadiene are emitted in the greatest
amounts and account for about 88 and
8 percent of the total emissions,
respectively.
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
13. Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene
Production
Acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene resins
consist of a terpolymer of acrylonitrile,
butadiene, and styrene and can be
synthesized by emulsion, suspension,
and continuous mass polymerization.
The majority of acrylonitrile-butadienestyrene resin production is by batch
emulsion. The primary HAP emissions
during the acrylonitrile-butadienestyrene production process occur via
equipment leaks and process vents.
Other emission points include storage
vessels, wastewater operations, and heat
exchange systems. Typical products
made from acrylonitrile-butadienestyrene resins are piping, refrigerator
door liners and food compartments,
automotive components, telephones,
luggage and cases, toys, mobile homes,
and margarine tubs. The major HAP
expected to be emitted by the
Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene
Production source category are
acrylonitrile, butadiene, and styrene.
The ANPRM data set for the
Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene
Production source category includes
information for seven facilities, six of
which are classified as major sources in
the NEI. Based on our previous
estimates of the number of facilities in
the Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene
Production source category, the ANPRM
data set includes data for about half of
the industry. In the ANPRM data set,
styrene and acrylonitrile are emitted in
the greatest amounts and account for
about 65 percent of the total emissions.
The major anomalies associated with
the data set for this source category
include the number of facilities in the
source category (i.e., only about half of
the facilities in the category appear to be
included in the inventory) and the
specific HAP emitted by individual
facilities. Some HAP expected to be
reported (styrene and 1,3-butadiene) are
not included for all the plants in the
data set and other unexpected HAP (e.g.,
ethylene dichloride and ethylene oxide)
are reported to be emitted by at least one
facility.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
14. Methyl Methacrylate-AcrylonitrileButadiene-Styrene Resin Production
Methyl methacrylate-acrylonitrilebutadiene-styrene is an acrylic graft
copolymer. Chemically, graft
copolymers are prepared by attaching a
polymer as a branch to the chain of
another polymer of a different
composition. Typical products made
from methyl methacrylate-acrylonitrilebutadiene-styrene resins are piping,
refrigerator door liners and food
compartments, automotive components,
telephones, luggage and cases, toys,
mobile homes, and margarine tubs.
Major HAP expected to be emitted by
the Methyl Methacrylate-AcrylonitrileButadiene-Styrene source category are
acrylonitrile, butadiene, and styrene.
The ANPRM data set for the Methyl
Methacrylate-Acrylonitrile-ButadieneStyrene source category includes
information for one facility, which is
classified as a major source in the NEI.
Based on our previous estimates of the
number of facilities in the Methyl
Methacrylate-Acrylonitrile-ButadieneStyrene source category, the ANPRM
data set includes data for the whole
industry. In the ANPRM data set, the six
HAP reported to be emitted include
styrene, acrylonitrile, 1,3-butadiene,
methyl methacrylate, cumene, and ethyl
benzene. Styrene accounts for almost 83
percent of the mass emitted.
One major anomaly associated with
the data set for this source category is
that nearly all of the emissions points
are reported to be fugitive sources, but
the data includes only NEI default
‘‘virtual stack’’ emissions parameters for
these sources.
15. Methyl Methacrylate-ButadieneStyrene Production
Methyl methacrylate-butadienestyrene polymers are prepared by
grafting methyl methacrylate and
styrene onto a styrene-butadiene rubber
in an emulsion process. The product is
a two-phase polymer used as an impact
modifier for rigid polyvinyl chloride
products. These products are used for
applications in packaging, building, and
construction. Emission points for
methyl methacrylate-butadiene-styrene
resin production include process vents,
equipment leaks, storage vessels, and
wastewater operations. Major HAP
expected to be emitted by the Methyl
Methacrylate-Butadiene-Styrene
Production source category include
butadiene, styrene, acrylonitrile, and
methyl methacrylate.
The ANPRM data set for the Methyl
Methacrylate-Butadiene-Styrene Resin
Production source category includes
information for three facilities, each of
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14745
which are classified as major sources in
the NEI. Based on our previous
estimates of the number of facilities in
the Methyl Methacrylate-ButadieneStyrene Production source category, the
ANPRM data set includes data for each
facility in the industry. In the ANPRM
data set, toluene, methyl methacrylate,
styrene, and 1,3-butadiene account for
nearly all of the emissions.
The major anomalies associated with
the data set for this source category
include the HAP emitted. Some HAP are
emitted by one facility and possibly
should be emitted by the other facilities
in the source category. In addition,
nearly all of the emission release
parameters are NEI default values.
16. Nitrile Resins Production
Nitrile resins are synthesized through
the polymerization of acrylonitrile,
methyl acrylate, and butadiene latex
using an emulsion process. Nitrile resin
products are commonly used in
packaging applications (e.g., food
packaging). Emissions points for nitrile
resin manufacturing processes are
process vents and equipment leaks.
Emissions from storage tanks, such as
those used to store acrylonitrile, are also
possible. The major HAP expected to be
emitted by the nitrile resins production
source category is acrylonitrile.
The ANPRM data set for the Nitrile
Resins source category includes
information for one facility, which is
classified as a major source in the NEI.
Based on our previous estimates of the
number of facilities in the Nitrile Resins
source category, the ANPRM data set
includes data for the whole industry.
Acrylonitrile is the HAP emitted in the
largest quantity, accounting for over 55
percent of the total HAP mass emitted.
One major anomaly associated with
the data set for this source category is
that 100 percent of the emission release
parameters are NEI default values.
17. Polyethylene Terephthalate
Production
Three different types of resins are
made by sources covered by the
Polyethylene Terephthalate Production
source category: Solid-state resins
(polyethylene terephthalate bottle grade
resins); polyester film; and engineering
resins. They are all thermoplastic linear
condensation polymers based on
dimethyl terephthalate or terephthalic
acid. Polyethylene terephthalate meltphase polymer is used in the production
of all three of these resins. Polyethylene
terephthalate production can occur via
either a batch or continuous process.
The most common use of polyethylene
terephthalate solid-state resins is in soft
drink bottles, and some industrial fiber-
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
14746
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
graded polyester (e.g., for tire cord) is
also produced from polyethylene
terephthalate solid-state resins. The
most common uses of polyethylene
terephthalate film are photographic film
and magnetic media. Polyethylene
terephthalate is used extensively in the
manufacture of synthetic fibers (i.e.,
polyester fibers), which compose the
largest segment of the synthetic fiber
industry. The most common uses of
polyester fibers are apparel, home
furnishings, carpets, fiberfill, and other
industrial processes. Emissions sources
present at polyethylene terephthalate
production processes include raw
material storage tanks, mix tanks,
prepolymerization and polymerization
reaction vents and process tanks,
cooling towers, and methanol recovery
systems. Major HAP emissions expected
from the Polyethylene Terephthalate
Production source category are ethylene
glycol, methanol, acetaldehyde, and
dioxane.
The ANPRM data set for the
Polyethylene Terephthalate source
category includes information for 22
facilities, 21 of which are classified as
major sources in the NEI. Based on our
previous estimates of the number of
facilities in the Polyethylene
Terephthalate Production source
category, the ANPRM data set includes
data for about two-thirds of the facilities
in the industry. In the ANPRM data set,
volatile organic HAP dominate the total
mass emissions, with methanol,
ethylene glycol, acetaldehyde,
methylene chloride, and mixed xylenes
accounting for over three-fourths of the
total emissions.
The major anomalies associated with
the data set for this source category
include the number of facilities in the
source category and the HAP emitted.
Some HAP expected to be reported
(methanol, acetaldehyde, and dioxane)
are not included for all the plants in the
data set.
18. Polystyrene Production
Polystyrene resins are those produced
by the polymerization of styrene
monomer. This type of resin can be
produced by three methods: (1)
Suspension polymerization (operated in
batch mode); (2) mass (operated in a
continuous mode); and (3) emulsion
process (operated in a continuous
mode). The mass and suspension
methods are the most commercially
significant, whereas use of the emulsion
process has decreased significantly
since the mid-1940s. The uses for
polystyrene resin include packaging and
one-time use, expandable polystyrene
beads, electronics, resellers and
compounding, consumer and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
institutional products, and furniture,
building, or construction uses. A wide
variety of consumer and construction
products are made from polystyrene
resins, including disposable
dinnerware, shower doors, light
diffusers, soap dishes, insulation board,
food containers, drain pipes, audio and
video tape, picnic coolers, loose fill
packaging, and tubing. The major HAP
expected to be emitted by the
polystyrene source category is styrene.
The ANPRM data set for the
polystyrene resins source category
includes information for 23 facilities, 14
of which are classified as major sources
in the NEI. Based on our previous
estimates of the number of facilities in
the Polystyrene Production source
category, the ANPRM data set is missing
data for 5 facilities in the industry. In
the ANPRM data set, styrene is emitted
in the greatest amounts and accounts for
about 65 percent of the total emissions.
The major anomalies associated with
the data set for this source category
include facility representation of the
source category and the HAP emitted.
Some unexpected HAP, including
tetrachloroethylene, naphthalene, ethyl
chloride, and several metals, are
reported to be emitted by some
facilities.
19. Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production
Styrene-acrylonitrile resins are
copolymers of styrene and acrylonitrile.
Styrene-acrylonitrile resins may be
synthesized by emulsion, suspension,
and continuous mass polymerization;
however, the majority of production is
by batch emulsion. Typical uses include
automobile instrument panels and
interior trim and housewares. Emission
points along the styrene-acrylonitrile
resin production process include
equipment leaks, process vents, storage
vessels, and wastewater operations.
Major HAP expected to be emitted by
the Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production
source category are acrylonitrile and
styrene.
The ANPRM data set for the StyreneAcrylonitrile Production source
category includes information for three
facilities, all of which are classified as
major sources in the NEI. Based on our
previous estimates of the number of
facilities in the Styrene-Acrylonitrile
Production source category, the ANPRM
data set is missing data for 3 facilities
in the industry. Many facilities that
produce acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene
resins also produce styreneacrylonitrile, because much of the
styrene-acrylonitrile resins that are
produced are used as feedstock in the
production of acrylonitrile-butadienestyrene. Therefore, for two of these plant
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
sites, we could not distinguish whether
certain emissions units belonged to the
Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene or the
Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production source
categories. For these two plant sites, the
emissions units in question were
assigned to the Acrylonitrile-ButadieneStyrene Production source category and
no emissions units were assigned to the
Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production source
category. For the third plant site, EPA
assigned the Styrene-Acrylonitrile
Production MACT code to all the
processes that emitted styrene or
acrylonitrile and included these units in
the ANPRM data set for the StyreneAcrylonitrile Production source
category. For this facility, styrene is the
HAP emitted in the largest quantity
accounting for over 55 percent of total
HAP mass emitted. Ethyl benzene, 1,3butadiene, and toluene are also reported
in relatively large quantities and
collectively account for about 35
percent of the total emissions.
The major anomalies associated with
the data set for this source category
include the number of facilities in the
source category, the use of county
centroid locations as default emissions
release locations, and the use of NEI
default values for 100 percent of the
emissions release parameters. In
addition, one HAP (acrylonitrile) is
expected to be emitted in larger
quantities than reported in the NEI.
20. Primary Aluminum Reduction
Plants
Primary aluminum plants produce
aluminum metal from alumina ore
through the electrolytic reduction of
aluminum oxide (alumina) by direct
current voltage in an electrolyte (called
‘‘cryolite’’) of sodium aluminum
fluoride. All primary aluminum
facilities have potlines that produce
aluminum metal, and also have a paste
production operation. In addition, some
facilities have anode bake furnaces that
are used in the production of aluminum
anodes. Potlines are categorized based
primarily on differences in the process
operation, equipment, and the
applicability of control devices. HAP
expected to be emitted by primary
aluminum production sources include
hydrogen fluoride and POM, including
PAH (e.g., anthracene, benzo(a) pyrene,
and naphthalene) that are part of the
POM HAP category.
The ANPRM data set for the primary
aluminum reduction source category
includes information for 20 primary
aluminum facilities. Of these 20
facilities, 19 are classified as major
sources in the NEI. Based on our
previous estimates of the number of
primary aluminum reduction facilities,
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
this includes over 85 percent of the
industry. Although a wide range of
compounds are reported as emissions
from these facilities in the ANPRM data
set, carbonyl sulfide, hydrogen fluoride,
and hydrochloric acid make up over 96
percent of the total emissions by mass.
Hydrogen fluoride is the most common
HAP reported as an emission (reported
for 18 facilities); carbonyl sulfide and
hydrochloric acid are reported as
emissions by 11 and 7 facilities,
respectively. A wide variety of PB HAP
are reported, including numerous PAH
and the metals lead, cadmium, and
mercury and their associated
compounds. For reported emissions of
POM chemicals, emissions are grouped
into one of seven POM categories. We
encourage commenters to provide the
individual chemical(s) that make up the
POM.
The major anomalies associated with
the data set for this source category
include the specific HAP emitted by
individual facilities and the speciation
of POM. Certain HAP (e.g., chlorine,
hydrogen chloride, POM) are not
included for all the facilities in the data
set.
21. Printing and Publishing
The printing and publishing source
category includes facilities that use
lithography, rotogravure, and other
methods to print a variety of substrates,
including paper, plastic, metal foil,
wood, vinyl, metal, and glass. The
MACT standards focused on those
facilities that perform publication
rotogravure printing, product and
package rotogravure printing, and wideweb flexographic printing. Publication
rotogravure printing refers to printing
using a rotogravure press of various
paper products, including catalogs,
magazines, direct mail advertisements,
display advertisements, miscellaneous
brochures and other advertisements,
newspaper sections and inserts,
periodicals, and telephone directories.
Product and packaging rotogravure
printing entails the production, on a
rotogravure press, of any printed
substrate not otherwise defined as
publication rotogravure printing. This
includes (but is not limited to) folding
cartons, flexible packaging, labels and
wrappers, gift wraps, wall and floor
coverings, upholstery, decorative
laminates, and tissue products. Wideweb flexographic printing is a technique
for printing substrates of 18 inches or
wider in which the applied pattern is
raised above the printing plate and the
image carrier is made of rubber or other
elastomeric materials. The wide-web
flexographic presses are used to print
flexible and rigid packaging;
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
newspapers, magazines, and directories;
paper towels, tissues, and similar
products; and printed vinyl shower
curtains and wallpaper. Research and
laboratory facilities are not subject to
the provisions of the MACT standards
unless they are collocated with
production lines. The NESHAP applies
to HAP present in the inks, ink
extenders, solvents, coatings, varnishes,
primers, adhesives, and other materials
applied with rotogravure and
flexographic plates.
The primary HAP expected to be
emitted from printing and publishing
operations are toluene, xylene,
ethylbenzene, methanol, methyl
isobutyl ketone, ethylene glycol, and
certain glycol ethers.
At the time of MACT promulgation in
1995, EPA estimated that there were
approximately 200 publication
rotogravure, product and packaging
rotogravure, and wide-web flexographic
printing facilities nationwide that
would be subject to these MACT
regulations.
The ANPRM dataset for the printing
and publishing source category contains
463 facilities, of which 216 are
classified as major sources in the NEI.
The HAP emitted in largest quantities
from these sources are toluene, glycol
ethers, methyl isobutyl ketone, and
xylene (mixture of o-, m-, and pisomers). Emissions from these HAP
account for nearly 94 percent of the
mass emitted across all 463 facilities.
POM is the only PB HAP reported in the
ANPRM data set for this source
category.
For reported emissions of POM
chemicals, emissions are grouped into
one of seven POM categories. We
encourage commenters to provide the
individual chemical(s) that make up the
POM.
The major anomalies associated with
the data set for this source category are
related to the HAP emitted. Emissions of
several HAP, including
trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene,
p-dioxane, benzene, and naphthalene,
are reported to be emitted by a small
percentage of sources in this category.
These HAP may be emitted from other
on-site processes. We are requesting
data on these HAP emissions.
22. Shipbuilding and Ship Repair
The shipbuilding and ship repair
industry consists of establishments that
build, repair, repaint, convert, and alter
ships. In general, activities and
processes involved in ship repair and
new ship construction are relatively
similar. Operations include fabrication
of basic components from raw materials,
welding components and parts together,
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14747
painting and repainting, overhauls, ship
conversions, and other alterations.
Nearly all shipyards that construct new
ships also perform major ship repairs.
Marine coatings used on offshore oil
and gas well drilling and production
platforms are not included in this
source category.
Emissions of HAP from shipbuilding
and ship repair facilities result from
painting, cleaning solvents, welding,
metal forming and cutting, and abrasive
blasting performed during ship repair
and shipbuilding operations. HAP
expected to be emitted include a range
of organic compounds used as solvents,
including toluene, xylene,
ethylbenzene, methanol, methyl
isobutyl ketone, ethylene glycol, and
glycol ethers. In addition to the organic
HAP, relatively small amounts of
inorganic HAP such as chromium,
hexavalent chromium, manganese,
nickel, and lead are expected to be
emitted from painting, welding, metal
forming and cutting, and abrasive
blasting performed during ship repair
and shipbuilding operations.
At the time of NESHAP promulgation
in 1995, EPA estimated that there were
approximately 437 facilities of varying
capabilities involved in the construction
and repair of ships in the United States;
approximately 35 of these facilities
qualified as major sources of HAP
emissions.
The ANPRM data set for the
shipbuilding and ship repair source
category contains 88 facilities, of which
71 facilities are classified as major
sources. In conjunction with previous
efforts for this source category, the
industry had collected and submitted
up-to-date welding and blasting
emissions data for 13 facilities. The
industry and EPA consider these data to
be the accurate welding and blasting
emissions data for these facilities. For
12 of these 13 facilities, the 2002 NEI
did not include any emissions from
these welding and blasting processes.
The newly collected data was added to
the ANPRM data set for these facilities.
The data was not added for the 13th
facility, which did have detailed statesubmitted welding and blasting
emissions data already included in the
NEI. As no welding and blasting
emissions data were available for the
other facilities in the source category, no
data was added to the ANPRM data set
for these facilities. The HAP emitted in
largest quantities in total from these
sources are xylenes and ethylbenzene.
Total emissions from these two HAP
account for 63 percent of the mass
emitted across all 88 facilities. PB HAP
emissions reported in the ANPRM data
set for the shipbuilding and ship repair
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
14748
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
source category include cadmium, lead
compounds, POM, and mercury.
For emissions reported generically as
‘‘chromium’’ or ‘‘chromium and
compounds,’’ emissions are speciated
for this source category as 66 percent
‘‘chromium (III) compounds’’ and 34
percent ‘‘chromium (VI) compounds.’’
We encourage commenters to review
this assumption and provide specific
chromium (VI) and chromium (III) data
where possible.
For reported emissions of POM
chemicals, emissions are grouped into
one of seven POM categories. We
encourage commenters to provide the
individual chemical(s) that make up the
POM.
The major anomalies associated with
the data set for this source category are
related to the HAP emitted. Some metal
HAP expected to be reported from
welding, blasting, and other
metalworking processes are not
included for all the facilities in the data
set. We have been working with the
industry to improve these anomalies,
and will continue these efforts.
However, we also welcome additional
data on these emissions.
V. What are we specifically seeking
comment on?
The primary purpose of this ANPRM
is to solicit comments on the sourcecategory specific data included in the
ANPRM data sets. Therefore, we are
asking you to carefully review the
facility-specific data available for
download on the RTR Web page at
https://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/
rtrpg.html and provide corrections to
these data. These data include
information for each emissions release
point at each facility in each of the 22
source categories included in Group 2 of
the RTR Phase II. For large integrated
facilities with multiple processes
representing multiple source categories,
it is often difficult to clearly distinguish
the source category to which each
emission point belongs. For this reason,
the data available for download include
not only the data for each facility in the
specific source category, but also the
data for each entire facility.
In addition to the ANPRM data sets
for each source category, we are
providing a downloadable file which
describes each source category and
summarizes the major data anomalies.
These files are being made available to
focus the review of emissions data on
the emission points and pollutants
which are expected to contribute the
most to significant inhalation exposures
and health risks. More information on
how to download the data and how to
submit data corrections is provided in
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
Sections VI and VII of this ANPRM,
respectively.
In reviewing the data, we are
requesting both general comments about
how well the data represent the source
categories and more specific comments
regarding the emission-point specific
information included in the ANPRM
data set for each facility in the 22 source
categories. We also ask that you
examine situations in which we made
changes or additions to the NEI data and
provide comments and data that will
help us improve or clarify the
information in order to minimize any
anomalies. We are particularly
interested in the following information
regarding source category representation
in the data:
• Names and addresses for any
facilities with processes which should
be, but are not included in the data set
for a specific source category.
Æ If known, whether data for these
facilities are included in the NEI.
• Facilities whose data should not be
included in the data set for a specific
source category—please provide a brief
description of the facilities and an
explanation of why they do not belong
in the data set for that source category.
• Facilities in the data set for a source
category that are not major sources for
HAP—please provide documentation
verifying the area source status.
We would also like comment on the
facility-specific and emission-point
specific data, as well as our assumptions
about certain data characteristics. As
discussed further below, the areas in
which further information and/or
correction or clarification is requested,
include the following:
• Facility location and identification.
Æ Facility name.
Æ Facility address.
Æ Facility category code (i.e., major or
area source).
• Emission point data
Æ SCC and MACT codes
Æ Emissions (tons per year (TPY)) of
each HAP.
Æ Emission release point type (i.e.,
fugitive, vertical, horizontal, gooseneck,
vertical with raincap, or downward
facing vent).
Æ Emissions release characteristics:
stack height and diameter, exit gas
temperature, velocity, and flow rate.
Æ Emission point latitude and
longitude coordinates.
• Data characteristics.
Æ Acute emissions factors.
Æ Speciation of metal HAP and POM.
Æ HAP emissions performance level
(e.g., actual, allowable, maximum).
At the facility level, we are asking for
input on the name and address of the
facility, whether the facility is a major
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
or area source for HAP, and facility
identification codes. The facility name
should include at least the company
name and may also include facility
identification information, such as
‘‘Plant A’’ or ‘‘Ohio River Works.’’ The
address should include the street
address of the plant location, as well as
the city, county, State, and zip code for
that location. We are also requesting
verification of the area/major source
status of each facility.
For each individual emission point,
we are asking for comments on the SCC
and MACT code to which each emission
point is assigned, the HAP emitted, the
mass of emissions reported for each
HAP, and the release characteristics. For
large facilities with multiple processes
representing more than one source
category, we ask that you pay particular
attention to the MACT and SCC codes,
so that emission points and emissions
are assigned to the appropriate source
category. We also ask that you provide
comments on all HAP emitted from a
process, even if you know the emission
levels are very low. The high toxicity of
some HAP means that even emission
levels one might otherwise consider
insignificant (in terms of mass) can have
a significant risk impact. This is
particularly true for PB HAP. These
compounds have high toxicities and
may be emitted by some of the source
categories being reviewed. It is critical
that we obtain the most accurate,
speciated emission estimates possible to
be used in the multi-pathway
assessments that will be conducted
prior to proposal of regulatory actions.
If you consider the data in the
ANPRM data sets unrepresentative of
the emissions from a facility, explain
why these data are not representative
and submit better data where available.
When submitting emissions data, we ask
that you provide documentation of the
basis for the revised values. We will
need appropriate documentation to
support any suggested changes. Data
corrections are discussed more in
section VII.
In addition to the emissions data, we
also request comments and revisions on
the release characteristics for individual
emission points. First, you should check
the emission release point type
description. Most of the emission points
in the NEI are either classified as
vertical or fugitive, although the options
also include horizontal, goose neck,
vertical with rain cap, and downward
facing vent. Then you should check the
release parameters, which include stack
height, exit gas temperature, stack
diameter, exit gas velocity, and exit gas
flow rate. Quite often the NEI contains
default release parameters, so providing
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
actual parameters will improve the
quality of the data and the modeling
results.
Emission point location is a parameter
that can have a significant effect on the
modeling results. Ideally, we would like
a specific set of coordinates for every
emission point. In many instances, a
single set of coordinates is used for all
emission points at a facility. In these
situations, we request information on
emission-point specific coordinates. If
such detailed coordinates are already in
the ANPRM data sets, we would like
you to review them carefully and
provide any updates or corrections
needed.
To model fugitive sources, the release
parameters used include the height,
length, width, and angle of the area
where the fugitive emissions sources are
located, along with the temperature. The
NEI contains fields for these parameters,
but they are rarely populated. Instead,
the NEI contains a set of default vertical
stack parameters for fugitive sources,
which have been designed to provide
the same dispersion as a low-lying point
source with minimal plume rise. These
are a temperature of 72° Fahrenheit, a
diameter of 0.003 feet, a velocity of
0.0003 feet per second, and a flow rate
of 0 cubic feet per second. We request
comment on the use of these release
characteristics to effectively model
fugitive emission sources as pseudopoint sources.
We are also requesting comments
concerning certain data characteristics.
This includes the speciation of several
metal HAP, including mercury and
chromium, and polycyclic organic
material. These HAP were separated
into their various forms, such as
hexavalent and trivalent chromium,
within NEI using the procedures
established by the National Air Toxics
Assessment. We are requesting
comment on whether the speciation
factors used are appropriate and ask that
any suggested alternative approaches be
accompanied by documentation
supporting that alternative.
Also, to screen for potentiallysignificant short-term exposures,
maximum short-term (one-hour)
emission rates will be developed by
multiplying the average annual hourly
emission rates by ten. We would like
comments on whether this factor
represents a reasonable approximation
for each emission point in order to
estimate acute exposures and risks. If
you believe that any particular emission
point does not represent a reasonable
approximation, please provide your
rationale and a suggestion for a more
appropriate ratio. This will assist us in
our assessment of short-term impacts
and risks.
As noted in section IV, the emissions
values in the ANPRM data set generally
represent actual emission levels. Where
actual emissions data is not already
included, we request that commenters
provide such data.
In addition to comments on the data
included in the data sets for each source
category, we will accept other
comments related to this ANPRM. As
described in section VII of this ANPRM,
all comments and supporting data must
be submitted to the docket for this
action.
VI. How may I access the data for a
specific source category?
Source category descriptions and the
ANPRM data sets are available on the
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Facility data
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
RTR Web page at https://www.epa.gov/
ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. Information is
available to be downloaded from this
Web page for each source category in
two separate files. One file contains a
description of the source category, and
a separate file includes the detailed
ANPRM data set for the source category.
These files must be downloaded from
the Web site to be viewed.
The file containing the source
category description is available in an
Adobe PDF format (this file format is
viewable with Adobe Reader, which
may be downloaded at https://
www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/
readermain.html) and contains the
following information:
• A description of the processes and
major products
• The estimated number of facilities
in the source category.
• A summary of emission points
types and HAP emissions from the
source category.
• A summary of the anomalies
associated with the data for that source
category.
The ANPRM data set for each source
category is included in a separate file,
which must be downloaded from the
RTR Web page—https://www.epa.gov/
ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. These are
Microsoft Access files, which require
Microsoft Access to be viewed (if you
do not have Microsoft Access, contact
Anne Pope by telephone ((919) 541–
5373) or by e-mail (pope.anne@epa.gov)
for other data viewing options). Each
file contains the following information
from the NEI for each facility in the
source category:
Emissions data
EPA Region
Tribal Code
Tribe Name
State Abbreviation
County Name
State County FIPS
NEI Site ID
Facility Name
Location Address
City Name
State Name
Zip Code
Facility Registry
Facility Registry Identifier
State Facility Identifier
SIC Code
SIC Code Description
NAICS Code
Facility Category Code
Facility Category
Pollutant Code
Pollutant Code Description
Emissions (TPY)
MACT Code
MACT Flag
SCC Code
SCC Code Description
Emission Unit ID
Process ID
Emission Release Point ID
Emission Release Point Type
Stack Default Flag
Stack Height
Exit Gas Temperature
Stack Diameter
Exit Gas Velocity
Exit Gas Flow Rate
Longitude
Latitude
Location Default Flag
Data Source Code
Data Source Description
HAP Emissions Performance Level
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14749
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
14750
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Facility data
Emissions data
Start Date
End Date
More information on these NEI data
fields can be found in the NEI
documentation at https://www.epa.gov/
ttn/chief/net/
2002inventory.html#documentation.
VII. How do I submit suggested data
corrections?
The source category-specific ANPRM
data sets are available for download on
the RTR Web page at https://
www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html.
To suggest revisions to this information,
we request that you complete the
following steps:
Facility data
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
Emissions data
Tribal Code
County Name
Facility Name
Location Address
City Name
State Name
Zip Code
Facility Registry
State Facility
Facility Category
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
REVISED
3. Fill in the following commenter
information fields for each suggested
revision:
• Commenter Name.
• Commenter E-Mail Address.
• Commenter Phone Number.
• Revision Comments.
4. Gather documentation for any
suggested emissions revisions (e.g.,
performance test reports, material
balance calculations, etc.).
5. Send the entire downloaded file
with suggested revisions in Microsoft
Access format and all accompanying
documentation to the docket for this
ANPRM (through one of the methods
described in the ADDRESSES section of
this ANPRM). To help speed review of
the revisions, it would also be helpful
to submit the suggestions to EPA
directly at RTR@epa.gov.
6. If you are providing comments on
a facility with multiple source
categories, you need only submit one
file for that facility, which should
contain all suggested changes for all
source categories at that facility.
We strongly urge that all data revision
comments be submitted in the form of
updated Microsoft Access files, which
are provided on the https://www.epa.gov/
ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html Web page. Data
in the form of written descriptions or
other electronic file formats will be
difficult for EPA to translate into the
necessary format in a timely manner.
Additionally, placing the burden on
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:15 Mar 28, 2007
Jkt 211001
1. Download the Microsoft Access
file containing the ANPRM data set for
a source category.
2. Within this downloaded file, enter
suggested revisions in the data fields
appropriate for that information. The
data fields that may be revised include
the following:
Emissions (TPY)
MACT Code
SCC Code
Emission Release Point
Stack Height
Exit Gas Temperature
Stack Diameter
Exit Gas Velocity
Exit Gas Flow Rate
Longitude
Latitude
HAP Emissions
EPA to interpret data submitted in other
formats increases the possibility of
misinterpretation or errors.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
VIII. What additional steps are
expected after EPA reviews the
comments received?
50 CFR Part 17
Once EPA receives comments on the
Group 2 emissions and emissions
release data, we plan to revise the
ANPRM data sets based upon public
comment and supporting
documentation, model with the new
data, and proceed with proposing and
promulgating residual risk and
technology review standards as
appropriate. More detail of this process
is provided in sections C, D, and E of
section II of this ANPRM.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Hazardous
substances.
Dated: March 23, 2007.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E7–5805 Filed 3–28–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Fish and Wildlife Service
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a
Petition To List the Siskiyou Mountains
Salamander and Scott Bar Salamander
as Threatened or Endangered
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition
finding.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce a
90-day finding on a petition to list the
Siskiyou Mountains salamander
(Plethodon stormi) and Scott Bar
salamander (Plethodon asupak) as
threatened or endangered, under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). We find that the petition
presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
listing these species may be warranted.
Therefore, with the publication of this
notice, we are initiating status reviews
of these species, and we will issue a 12month finding to determine if the
petitioned action is warranted. To
ensure that the status review of the
Siskiyou Mountains and Scott Bar
salamanders is comprehensive, we are
soliciting scientific and commercial data
E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM
29MRP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 60 (Thursday, March 29, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14734-14750]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5805]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0859; FRL-8293-4]
RIN 2060-AN85
Risk and Technology Review, Phase II, Group 2
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This ANPRM asks for public comment on hazardous air pollutant
emissions and other model input data that EPA intends to use to assess
residual risk from selected industrial major source categories, as
required by the Clean Air Act. Specifically, the data are comprised of
hazardous air pollutant emission estimates and emission release
parameters for 22 industrial source categories subject to 12 national
emission standards for hazardous air pollutants for hazardous air
pollutants with compliance dates of 2002 and earlier. The source of
this information is the February 2006 version of the 2002 National
Emissions Inventory, updated with some facility-specific data collected
by EPA. We are seeking comment on the emissions and source data found
at the Risk and Technology Review Web site and we are providing the
opportunity for the public to submit technical corrections and updates.
Following review of comments received, we will update the data, as
appropriate, and assess risk for these source categories. We will use
these risk estimates and our evaluation of the availability, cost, and
feasibility of emissions reduction options to determine the ample
margin of safety for residual risk and to fulfill our obligations to
conduct a technology review. We currently anticipate using the results
of these risk estimates along with review of control technology as the
basis for our decisions on whether to propose additional standards to
address residual risk for each source category. There will be
opportunity for oral and written comment on any additional standards
when we publish our Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). We anticipate
proposing the results of this risk and technology review for these 22
source categories by fall 2007.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 29, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2006-0859 by one of the following methods:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments.
E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epamail.epa.gov.
Fax: (202) 566-1741.
Mail: U.S. Postal Service, send comments to: Air and
Radiation Docket (6102T), Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0859, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of two copies.
Hand Delivery: In person or by Courier, deliver comments
to: Air and Radiation Docket (6102T), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004. Such deliveries are
accepted only during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2006-0859. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous
access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the
EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation
Docket, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC. The 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, and the telephone number for the
Air and Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742.
Note: The EPA Docket Center suffered damage due to flooding
during the last week of June 2006. The Docket Center is continuing
to operate. However, during the cleanup, there will be temporary
changes to Docket Center telephone numbers, addresses, and hours of
operation for people who wish to make hand deliveries or visit the
Public Reading Room to view documents. Consult EPA's Federal
Register notice at 71 FR 38147 (July 5, 2006) or the EPA Web site at
https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm for current information on
docket operations, locations, and telephone numbers. The Docket
Center's mailing address for U.S. mail and the procedure for
submitting comments to https://www.regulations.gov are not affected
by the flooding and will remain the same.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information about this
ANPRM, contact Ms. Paula Hirtz, Office and Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division, Coatings and
Chemicals Group (E143-01), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919)
541-2618; fax number: (919) 541-0246; and e-mail address:
hirtz.paula@epa.gov.
[[Page 14735]]
For information specific to the National Emissions Inventory (NEI),
contact Ms. Anne Pope, Air Quality and Assessment Division (Office and
Air Quality Planning and Standards), Mail Code C339-02, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711; telephone number: (919) 541-5373; fax number: (919) 541-0684;
and e-mail address: pope.anne@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated Entities. Entities potentially affected by this action
include facilities containing any one or more of the 22 major source
categories subject to the 12 national emission standards for hazardous
air pollutants (NESHAP) (or commonly referred to maximum achievable
control technology (MACT) standards) listed in Table 1. This action
does not affect area sources, as these NESHAP do not apply to area
sources. Industries regulated by these MACT are classified by the North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes shown in Table 1.
In addition, a classification system of MACT codes has been developed
and is used in the 2002 NEI to identify processes included in each MACT
source category. The MACT codes for the 22 source categories addressed
in this notice are also displayed in Table 1.
Table 1.--MACT Standards, Source Categories, and Corresponding NAICS and
MACT Codes Addressed by This ANPRM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MACT standard/source category name NAICS codes MACT code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mineral Wool Production................. 327993 409
Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework 336411 0701
Facilities.............................
Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations... 4883 0603
Natural Gas Transmission and Storage.... 486210 0504
Oil and Natural Gas Production.......... 211 0501
Petroleum Refineries.................... 32411 0503
Pharmaceuticals Production.............. 3254 1201
Group I Polymers and Resins:
Epichlorohydrin Elastomers 325212 1311
Production.........................
Hypalon(TM) Production.............. 325212 1315
Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production. 325212 1321
Polybutadiene Rubber Production..... 325212 1325
Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and Latex 325212 1339
Production.........................
Group IV Polymers and Resins:
Acrylic-Butadiene-Styrene Production 325211 1302
Methyl Methacrylate-Acrylonitrile- 325211 1317
Butadiene-Styrene Production.......
Methyl Methacrylate-Butadiene- 325211 1318
Styrene Production.................
Nitrile Resins Production........... 325211 1342
Polyethylene Terephthalate 325211 1328
Production.........................
Polystyrene Production.............. 325211 1331
Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production.... 325211 1338
Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants....... 331312 0201
Printing and Publishing Industry........ 32311 0714
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations. 336611 0715
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitting Comments/CBI. When submitting comments, remember to
identify this ANPRM by docket number and other identifying information
(subject heading, Federal Register date, and page number). Also, make
sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified.
As described further in section VII of this ANPRM, specific data change
suggestions need to be accompanied by supporting documentation that
includes a description of any assumptions used and any technical
information and/or data that you used.
Do not submit CBI to EPA through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
Instead, send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the
following address: Mr. Roberto Morales, OAQPS Document Control Officer
(C404-02), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Attention
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0859. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to Mr. Morales, mark the outside of the disk or
CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-
ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. If
you submit a CD-ROM or disc that does not contain CBI, mark the outside
of the disk or CD-ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information
not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and EPA's
electronic public docket without prior notice.
If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming
CBI, please consult the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. Information marked as CBI will not be
disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part
2.
Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of today's notice is also available on the World
Wide Web through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following
signature by the EPA Administrator, a copy of today's notice will be
posted on the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or
promulgated NESHAP at https://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides
information and technology exchange in various areas of air pollution
control.
As discussed in more detail in section VI of this ANPRM, additional
information is available on the Risk and Technology Review Phase II Web
page at https://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. This information
includes source category descriptions and detailed emissions and other
data that will be used as model inputs.
Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as
follows:
[[Page 14736]]
I. Background
II. What approach is EPA taking for the Risk and Technology Review?
A. What is the approach we are taking to address residual risk
for the Group 2 source categories?
B. What data were compiled and reviewed?
C. What are the steps planned before proposing NESHAP to address
residual risk?
D. How will we develop proposed NESHAP to address residual risk?
E. When will the NESHAP be proposed and promulgated?
III. What is the purpose of this ANPRM?
IV. What data are in the ANPRM data sets for each source category?
V. What are we specifically seeking comment on?
VI. How may I access the data for a specific source category?
VII. How do I submit suggested data corrections?
VIII. What additional steps are expected after EPA reviews the
comments received?
I. Background
Section 112 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) establishes a two-stage
regulatory process to address emissions of hazardous air pollutants
(HAP) from stationary sources. In the first stage, after EPA has
identified categories of sources emitting one or more of the HAP listed
in CAA section 112(b), section 112(d) of the CAA calls for promulgation
of technology-based emission standards for those sources. For ``major
sources'' that emit or have the potential to emit 10 tons per year or
more of any single HAP or 25 tons per year or more of any combination
of HAP, these technology-based standards must reflect the maximum
reductions of HAP achievable (after considering cost, energy
requirements, and non-air health and environmental impacts). These
technology based standards are commonly referred to as MACT standards.
Between 1993 and 2004, EPA published 96 MACT standards (or NESHAP)
covering 174 source categories. In this first stage, the focus was on
ensuring reductions through available technologies. CAA Section
112(d)(6) requires EPA to review these emission standards and to revise
them ``as necessary (taking into account developments in practices,
processes, and control technologies)'' no less frequently than every 8
years.
The second stage in standard-setting focuses on reducing any
remaining ``residual'' risk according to CAA section 112(f). This
provision requires, first, that EPA prepare a Report to Congress
discussing (among other things) methods of calculating risk posed (or
potentially posed) by sources after implementation of the MACT
standards, the public health significance of those risks, the means and
costs of controlling them, actual health effects to persons in
proximity of emitting sources, and recommendations as to legislation
regarding such remaining risk. EPA prepared and submitted this report
(Residual Risk Report to Congress, EPA-453/R-99-001) in March 1999.
Congress did not act in response to the report, thereby triggering
EPA's obligation under CAA section 112(f)(2) to analyze and address
residual risk.
Section 112(f)(2) of the CAA then directs EPA to assess the risk
remaining (residual risk) after the application of the MACT standards
and promulgate more stringent standards for a category or subcategory
of sources subject to MACT standards if promulgation of such standards
is necessary to protect public health with an ample margin of safety or
to prevent (taking into consideration various factors) adverse
environmental effects. The standards to be promulgated under this
subsection must ``provide an ample margin of safety to protect public
health in accordance with this section (as in effect before the date of
enactment of the CAA Amendments of 1990), unless the Administrator
determines that a more stringent standard is necessary to prevent,
taking into consideration costs, energy, safety, and other relevant
factors, an adverse environmental impact.'' Section 112(f)(2) of the
CAA expressly preserves our use of a two-step process for developing
standards to address any residual risk and our interpretation of
``ample margin of safety'' developed in the ``National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Benzene Emissions from Maleic
Anhydride Plants, Ethylbenzene/Styrene Plants, Benzene Storage Vessels,
Benzene Equipment Leaks, and Coke By-Product Recovery Plants'' (Benzene
NESHAP) (54 FR 38044, September 14, 1989).
To date, EPA has conducted CAA 112(d)(6) technology reviews and
promulgated residual risk standards for eight (Halogenated Solvents
will be promulgated in April 2007) individual NESHAP and their
associated source categories. In an effort to streamline this process
for the remaining source categories, EPA plans to address residual risk
and perform a technology review for several source categories in one
combined effort. While the standard review and development process will
be streamlined, each source category will be assessed independently and
decisions on the level of any standards will be made individually for
each source category. The first set of MACT source categories for which
this streamlined process will be undertaken includes the 50 source
categories listed in Table 2, all of which have MACT compliance dates
of 2002 and earlier. (Except for the Chemical Recovery Combustion
Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp
Mills source category, which has a compliance date of January 2004,
these facilities are believed to be in compliance with MACT as of 2002,
so the NEI reflects their post-MACT compliance emissions.) This action
is referred to as Phase II of the Risk and Technology Review (RTR)
process (where the first eight individual NESHAP comprise Phase I).
Other MACT standards will be reviewed in the future. While the initial
phases of data compilation and EPA internal review processes have been
completed for each of the 50 source categories included in RTR Phase
II, the source categories have been divided into smaller groups to ease
the burden on public commenters and EPA's review of public comments and
the rulemaking processes. Table 2 shows the source categories EPA
anticipates including in each group of the RTR Phase II.
Table 2.--Source Categories and Corresponding NAICS and MACT Codes Included in Risk and Technology Review Phase
II
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RTR Phase II group Source category name NAICS codes MACT code
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.......................................... Acetal Resins Production........... 325211 1301
Hydrogen Fluoride Production....... 325120 1409
Group I Polymers and Resins:
Butyl Rubber Production......... 325212 1307
Ethylene-Propylene Rubber 325212 1313
Production.
Polysulfide Rubber Production... 325212 1332
Neoprene Production............. 325212 1320
Group II Polymers and Resins:
[[Page 14737]]
Epoxy Resins Production......... 325211 1312
Non-Nylon Polyamides Production. 325211 1322
2.......................................... Mineral Wool Production............ 327993 409
Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework. 336411 701
Marine Tank Vessel Loading......... 4883 603
Natural Gas Transmission & Storage. 486210 504
Oil and Natural Gas Production..... 211 501
Petroleum Refineries............... 32411 503
Pharmaceuticals Production......... 3254 1201
Group I Polymers and Resins:
Epichlorohydrin Elastomers 325212 1311
Production.
Hypalon(TM) Production.......... 325212 1315
Nitrile Butadiene Rubber 325212 1321
Production.
Polybutadiene Rubber Production. 325212 1325
Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and 325212 1339
Latex Production.
Group IV Polymers and Resins:
Acrylic-Butadiene-Styrene 325211 1302
Production.
2.......................................... Group IV Polymers and Resins:
Methyl Methacrylate- 325211 1317
Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene
Production.
Methyl Methacrylate-Butadiene- 325211 1318
Styrene Production.
Nitrile Resins Production....... 325211 1342
Polyethylene Terephthalate 325211 1328
Production.
Polystyrene Production.......... 325211 1331
Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production 325211 1338
Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants.. 331312 201
Printing and Publishing Industry... 32311 714
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair....... 336611 715
Other...................................... Acrylic/Modacrylic Fibers.......... 325222 1001
Chromium Electroplating:
Chromic Acid Anodizing.......... 332813 1607
Decorative Chromium 332813 1610
Electroplating.
Hard Chromium Electroplating.... 332813 1615
Ferroalloys Production............. 331112 304
Flexible Polyurethane Foam......... 326150 1314
Other...................................... Kraft, Sulfite, Semi-chemical, Soda
Pulping Processes and Mechanical,
Secondary Fiber, and Non-wood
Pulping Processes and Papermaking
Systems:
Pulp and Paper Production....... 3221 1626-1
Chemical Recovery Combustion
Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite,
and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp
Mills:
Pulp and Paper Production....... 3221 1626-2
Off-site Waste and Recovery........ 562 806
Phosphate Fertilizer Production.... 325312 1410
Phosphoric Acid Manufacturing...... 325312 1411
Polycarbonates Production.......... 325199 1326
Polyether Polyols Production....... 325199 1625
Portland Cement Manufacturing...... 3273 410
Primary Lead Smelting.............. 331419 204
Publicly Owned Treatment Works..... 221320 803
Secondary Aluminum Production...... 331314 202
Secondary Lead Smelting............ 331492 205
Steel Pickling-HCl Process......... 331111 310
Wood Furniture Manufacturing....... 337122 716
Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing...... 327993 412
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This ANPRM addresses only the 22 source categories included in
Group 2. As initial analyses for each source category included in Group
1 of the RTR Phase II indicate that estimated health risks to the
individual most exposed to emissions from a facility in the source
category meet levels the Agency considers to be without appreciable
health risk and it is improbable that these source categories emit
pollutants that would cause adverse environmental effects, we plan to
publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register
for the 8 source categories in Group 1 without previously issuing an
ANPRM. The remaining source categories were split into two groups.
Group 2 is generally comprised of source categories with earlier
deadlines, fewer multipathway concerns, and categories that the Agency
believes will require fewer resources to complete. The source
categories in the other group generally have later deadlines and more
multipathway concerns. Additional notices will be published addressing
the other source categories in the future.
II. What approach is EPA taking for the Risk and Technology Review?
A. What is the approach we are taking to address residual risk for the
Group 2 source categories?
We plan to follow the same general process in revising NESHAP to
address residual risk for each of Group 2 source categories listed in
the table above. This
[[Page 14738]]
general approach includes the following primary steps:
1. Compile and review (and update with facility-specific data
collected by EPA in some cases) readily available source category
emissions data from the 2002 NEI.
2. For each group of source categories, conduct preliminary
evaluations to identify key HAP and data anomalies.
3. Make emissions and other modeling input data, along with a list
of the identified key HAP and data anomalies, available for public
comment through an ANPRM.
4. Reconcile and update emissions and other modeling input data,
based on comments received, and conduct a risk assessment for each
category.
5. Develop and propose CAA section 112(f)(2) residual risk and CAA
section 112(d)(6) technology review standard(s) as appropriate.
6. Address comments from the proposal(s) and promulgate CAA section
112(f)(2) residual risk and CAA 112(d)(6) technology standard(s), where
necessary.
An independent scientific peer consultation is currently underway
to review the approach for assessing residual risk for the source
categories included in the RTR Phase II. This peer consultation will be
conducted by a panel of EPA's Science Advisory Board, and will focus
on: (1) The source of emissions and other modeling data and the
approach for refining this data, (2) the analytical approach for
quantifying and characterizing human and environmental exposures and
risks, and (3) the types of results that will be generated and the
format for the characterization of assessment results.
The process outlined above for the 22 source categories included in
Group 2 of the RTR Phase II is described in more detail in the
following discussion.
B. What data were compiled and reviewed?
In the first step of this process, we used the 2002 NEI Final
Version 1 (made publicly available on February 26, 2006) as a starting
point and compiled emissions information for each source category and
performed an internal engineering review of these data (referred to
hereafter as ``initial NEI data''). The primary data attributes
evaluated in this review included: (1) Facility representation in each
source category (i.e., we ensured that source categories accurately
included facilities making the products characteristic of the source
categories), and (2) appropriateness of facility emissions, in both the
inclusion of the appropriate HAP, and in the magnitude of those HAP
emissions. In cases where better data were known to exist for a
particular source category, that information was integrated into the
data set for that source category. These reviewed and integrated data
sets for each source category are referred to hereafter as the ``ANPRM
data sets.''
C. What are the steps planned before proposing NESHAP to address
residual risk?
In this ANPRM, we are seeking public review and comment on the
emissions and other model input data included in the ANPRM data sets
for the source categories included in Group 2 of the RTR Phase II.
These source categories are listed in Table 1. We will evaluate the
comments and data corrections received in response to this ANPRM and
update the data for the source categories in Group 2, as appropriate.
In accordance with the methodologies described in the Residual Risk
Report to Congress, we will then use the revised model input data sets
for these source categories (referred to as the notice of proposed
rulemaking, or NPRM, data sets) in an analysis of the inhalation risks.
The Human Exposure Model (Community and Sector HEM-3 version 1.1.0)
will be used to perform this modeling. The HEM-3 model performs three
main operations: dispersion modeling, estimation of population
exposure, and estimation of human health risks. The dispersion model
used by HEM-3 is AERMOD, which is one of EPA's preferred models for
assessing pollutant concentrations from industrial facilities.\1\ We
will also perform a screening assessment of potential adverse
environmental effects using these updated data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Environmental Protection Agency. Revision to the Guideline
on Air Quality Models: Adoption of a Preferred General Purpose (Flat
and Complex Terrain) Dispersion Model and Other Revisions (70 FR
68218, November 9, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We will also evaluate the NPRM data sets for each of the 22 source
categories for potential non-inhalation human health risks,
specifically through the presence of emissions of any persistent and
bioaccumulative (PB) HAP, all of which are listed in Table 3 below.\2\
For source categories that also carry a potential for non-inhalation
human health risks, in addition to analyses to estimate risks from
inhalation of emissions, we will also estimate risks using refined
models capable of addressing multi-pathway exposures (i.e., exposures
due to ingestion or dermal exposures). The models selected for this
exercise (primarily, we will use the EPA's Total Risk Integrated
Modeling system, or TRIM, a refined multi-pathway pollutant fate and
transport model) will also be used to produce estimates of pollutant
concentrations in the surrounding environment, which will be used in
the quantitative assessment of environmental risks from these
chemicals. The 22 source categories are not expected to have multi-
pathway issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Environmental Protection Agency. Air Toxics Risk Assessment
Reference Library, Volume I. EPA-453K-04-001A. https://www.epa.gov/
ttn/fera/risk_atra_vol1.html.
Table 3.--Persistent and Bioaccumulative Hazardous Air Pollutants (PB HAP)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cadmium compounds.................... Chlordane.............. Chlorinated dibenzodioxins and furans
DDE.................................. Heptachlor............. Hexachlorocyclohexane (all isomers)
Hexachlorobenzene.................... Lead compounds......... Mercury compounds
Methoxychlor......................... Polychlorinated Polycyclic Organic Matter (POM)
biphenyls.
Toxaphene............................ Trifluralin............ ................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. How will we develop proposed NESHAP to address residual risk?
We will provide a more detailed discussion of the residual risk
methodology in the Group 2 NPRM. Therefore, after the risk assessments
for Group 2 are complete, the results will be examined to determine
whether any source category meets certain criteria where the Agency
considers the risk to not be a problem (``low risk''). The ``low risk''
criteria we intend to consider include: Lifetime cancer risk to the
individual most exposed is less than 1-in-1 million, chronic non-cancer
risk to
[[Page 14739]]
the individual most exposed is less than a target-organ-specific hazard
index of 1, air concentrations estimated for acute exposures scenarios
are less than health-protective reference levels, and there is no
potential for significant and widespread adverse environmental effect.
For Group 2 source categories in which all facilities meet these
``low risk'' criteria, EPA will not propose further regulation under
CAA section 112(f). For source categories that are not determined to be
low risk, a two-step standard development process will be applied,
consistent with CAA section 112(f) and with our previously articulated
approach for developing NESHAP pursuant to CAA section 112(f). This
approach was described in the final NESHAP addressing residual risk for
coke ovens (58 FR 57898, October 27, 1993).
In the first step of this approach, modeled source category risks
will be evaluated to determine if they are ``acceptable.'' The term
``acceptable,'' in reference to residual risks is not specifically
defined in the CAA, but CAA section 112(f)(2) refers positively to the
interpretation of this term in the Benzene NESHAP (54 FR 38044,
September 14, 1989).
The preamble to the Benzene NESHAP (54 FR 38044, September 14,
1989) stated that a lifetime maximum individual excess cancer risk of
approximately 100-in-1 million ``should ordinarily be the upper-end of
the range of acceptability.'' However, this is not a rigid line of
acceptability, and other factors will be considered, such as the number
of people exposed at various risk levels, the overall incidence of
cancer and other serious health effects, assumptions and uncertainties
associated with the risk analysis (including the 70 year exposure
assumption), and the weight of evidence for human health effects.
In the second step of this standard development process, we will
develop risk-reduction regulatory alternatives and decide upon the
level of the standard for each source category, considering the
requirements necessary to provide an ample margin of safety to protect
human health, as required by CAA section 112(f)(2). To develop the
regulatory alternatives, we will conduct various analyses, including an
assessment of the impacts of each regulatory alternative. The impacts
will include HAP emission reductions, other environmental impacts,
costs, economics, small business impacts, reduction in maximum risks to
individuals most exposed, reductions in chronic and acute risks to
populations at various risk levels, and reductions in cancer incidence.
We will assess these alternatives, decide upon the level of the
standard, and publish a NPRM in the Federal Register to propose any
regulatory changes for the individual standards codified in 40 CFR part
63 for each source category.
As we undertake these rulemaking proposals, we will also consider
developments in pollution control in each source category and the costs
of potentially stricter standards reflecting those developments, to
fulfill the requirements of CAA section 112(d)(6). Where there have
been developments in practices, processes, and control technologies, we
will consider relevant factors, such as costs, potential emissions
reductions, and health and environmental risk in a determination of
what, if any, further controls are necessary. Where appropriate, we
will develop regulatory alternatives, assess the impacts of those
alternatives, and decide upon the level of the standard(s). We plan to
propose any CAA section 112(d)(6) regulatory changes for the individual
standards codified in 40 CFR part 63 for each source category in the
same Federal Register notice proposing action addressing residual risk.
E. When will the NESHAP be proposed and promulgated?
Our current goal is to propose the decisions resulting from both
CAA section 112(f) (residual risk) and CAA section 112(d)(6)
(technology review) efforts, including the proposal of any standards
for each of the 21 source categories in Group 2, in the Fall of 2007.
Proposal of any standards for the petroleum refineries source category
will occur by the court-ordered deadline of August 22, 2007. In
addition to proposing any new residual risk or technology-based
standards, we will announce any decisions not to promulgate residual
risk standards for ``low risk'' source categories or source categories
for which the current standards protect public health with an ample
margin of safety and any decisions not to promulgate additional
technology-based standards.
After the close of the comment period on the proposed standard(s),
we will review and perform any analyses and data gathering necessary to
address the comments, prepare responses, and make changes to the
proposed standards, as necessary. We anticipate the final standards
will be published in the Federal Register in the summer of 2008.
III. What is the purpose of this ANPRM?
The primary purpose of today's ANPRM is to request public comments
on the emissions and other model input data included in the ANPRM data
sets for the 22 source categories included in Group 2 of the RTR Phase
II. These data are provided in an updatable form on the RTR Web page at
https://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. We provide detail in
section VII below on how to submit updates and corrections to this
information. Following review of comments received, we will update the
data as appropriate, and model to generate estimates of residual risk
that we will use as the basis for our proposed decisions on whether to
develop standards to address residual risk for each source category.
Section V lists the general items for which we are seeking comment
for all source categories. In addition, we note information unique to
each source category for which we are requesting technical corrections
or updates in the source category specific sections within section IV
of this ANPRM. We note that emissions data cannot be withheld from
disclosure as CBI pursuant to section 1905 of title 18 of the United
States Code. EPA's policy regarding the categories of information that
it considers to be ``emissions data'' is set forth in a Federal
Register notice dated February 14, 1991 (56 FR 7042). A copy of that
notice has been placed in the docket.
IV. What data are in the ANPRM data sets for each source category?
As mentioned in Section II of this ANPRM, the 2002 NEI is the
primary data source used in creating the ANPRM data sets for each
source category. The data extracted from the NEI for inclusion in the
ANPRM data sets included general facility information, such as company
name, plant name, and facility identification codes; emissions data,
including speciated HAP emissions data; emissions release
characteristics, including stack height, stack diameter, and the
emissions stream exit temperature and velocity; and location
information, including the latitude/longitude coordinates of emissions
release locations. For more information on the 2002 NEI, please visit
our 2002 NEI Web page at https://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/
2002inventory.html.
For the most part, the emissions values in the ANPRM data set
represent actual emission levels. Where actual emissions data is not
already included,
[[Page 14740]]
we request that commenters provide such data.
Due to the high uncertainty of the dioxin/furan emissions
information submitted during the inventory development process, dioxin/
furan emissions were not included in the 2002 NEI, and no emissions of
these compounds are included in the ANPRM data sets. As we update the
ANPRM data set, we will include dioxin/furan emissions, based on the
best information available to EPA at that time. These data may include
information EPA has gathered on dioxin and dioxin-like compounds. The
EPA National Center for Environmental Assessment Web site, https://
cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=159286, contains links to
these data.
In creating the ANPRM data sets for each source category, we
started with the February 2006 version of the 2002 NEI. We first
conducted a detailed review of the facilities that were included in the
NEI and added or removed facilities to make the data as representative
of the overall source category as possible. We then reviewed emissions,
release characteristics, and other model input data.
We began by retrieving all records in the 2002 NEI based solely on
MACT source category designations, which are fields in the NEI that
identify the MACT source category that applies to each emission point.
This MACT source category is assigned by a variety of methods. In some
cases, the State or local agency that provided the data to EPA
identified the MACT category. Since State and local agencies are aware
of the regulations that apply to facilities, we have high confidence in
MACT category designations provided by a State or local agency. In
other cases, EPA staff responsible for developing the MACT standards
provided input to populate the MACT source category code fields. As
these individuals have knowledge of the source category for which they
are accessing and using the NEI data, the confidence in these
designations is also high. Most of the MACT source category code
designations, however, are assigned based on Standard Industrial
Classification (SIC), NAICS, or Source Classification Code (SCC)
defaults. There is often considerable uncertainty associated with these
designations.
One of the first things we reviewed in the NEI data was the list of
facilities included for each source category. For some source
categories, we are reasonably confident that we know the names of the
facilities and their exact locations. In these cases, we compared the
``known'' lists of facilities to the facilities in the NEI. We removed
the MACT source category designation for facilities not on the known
list. If facilities on the known lists were not in the data for the
source categories, we searched the NEI for these facilities. Quite
often, they were in the 2002 NEI, but had different, and presumably
incorrect, MACT source category designations. These facilities were
added to the data set for the category and the MACT source category
codes were re-designated accordingly.
For large facilities with multiple processes that represent
multiple MACT source categories, it was not always straightforward to
separate the processes by source category. In these cases, we used a
variety of approaches to separate the processes and emission points
into source categories. Examples of the criteria used to separate
processes and emissions into source categories include SCC, SIC codes,
and pollutants emitted. Situations where such source category
separation decisions were made are highlighted in the source-category
discussions later in this section and detailed in the files available
for download on the RTR Web page at https://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/
rtrpg.html. We are asking specifically for comment on how we separated
processes and emission points by source category at these large
integrated facilities.
For categories with large numbers of facilities for which we do not
have complete lists of known facilities, we conducted more general
evaluations of the facilities in the data sets. These evaluations
included examining the company names, SIC, NAICS, and SCC, and adding
or removing facilities based on these criteria.
We will be evaluating residual risk for all facilities and emission
sources that are in the 22 source categories included in Group 2 of the
RTR Phase II. In some instances, the ANPRM data sets may include
emission points that are part of the source category but are not
subject to the MACT standard for that source category. Emissions from
these sources will be considered in our future regulatory decisions. In
addition, the ANPRM data sets, for most source categories, include all
major and area sources (facilities) in the 2002 NEI that have processes
related to the specific source category.
After finalizing the facility lists for each source category, we
conducted a general review of the emissions and other data included in
the ANPRM data sets to identify data anomalies that could affect the
risk estimates. With a few exceptions, we did not change the data or
include additional data. For the following source categories, the 2002
NEI was supplemented with additional data provided by industry to
create the ANPRM data sets:
Petroleum Refineries
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair
Source categories regulated by the Group I Polymers and
Resins MACT:
[cir] Epichlorohydrin Elastomers Production
[cir] HypalonTM Production
[cir] Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production
[cir] Polybutadiene Rubber Production
[cir] Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and Latex Production
The addition of these data, as well as other data changes made, are
described in the source-category specific sections below. We note that
because these changes are included in the ANPRM data sets, these data
sets do not exactly match the February 2006 version of the 2002 NEI
data available on our NEI Web site--https://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/
2002inventory.html. When comments are received via this ANPRM and
incorporated into the source category-specific ANPRM data sets, these
revisions will then also be incorporated into the 2002 NEI and made
publicly available through the NEI Web site in Final Version 2.1.
Following are sections discussing the data for individual source
categories. These discussions provide an overview of the source
category, a brief summary of the ANPRM data sets, and a mention of the
types of major anomalies associated with the data. Summary reports for
each of the source categories, which contain considerable detail on the
information summarized below, including the carcinogenic HAP and HAP
with adverse health effects other than cancer, are available on the RTR
Web page at https://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. We especially
encourage you to review the specific anomalies raised in these reports
and to provide data to help reduce these anomalies.
1. Mineral Wool Production
The mineral wool production source category includes facilities
that produce mineral wool, which is a fibrous, glassy substance made
from natural rock (such as basalt), blast furnace slag, or other
similar materials and consisting of silicate fibers. In the mineral
wool manufacturing process, rock and/or blast furnace slag and other
raw materials (e.g., gravel) are melted in a furnace (cupola) using
coke as fuel. The molten material is then formed into fiber. Mineral
wool is manufactured as either a ``bonded'' product that
[[Page 14741]]
incorporates a binder to increase structural rigidity or a less rigid
``nonbonded'' product. Emission sources from mineral wool manufacturing
facilities include the cupola furnace where the mineral charge is
melted; a blow chamber, in which air or a binder is drawn over the
fibers, forming them into a screen; a curing oven that bonds the fibers
(for bonded products); and a cooling oven. The primary HAP expected to
be emitted during the mineral wool manufacturing process are metals,
including antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, manganese,
nickel, lead, and selenium that are emitted from the cupola, and
gaseous HAP, including formaldehyde, carbonyl sulfide, and phenol, that
result from the vaporization of the binder.
The ANPRM data set for this source category includes information
for 12 facilities, 11 of which are classified as major sources in the
NEI. Based on our previous estimates of the number of facilities in the
mineral wool source category, this data set represents between 75 and
90 percent of the industry. The HAP emitted in largest quantities from
these facilities is carbonyl sulfide, which accounts for over 84
percent of the total HAP emissions by mass from the data set.
Formaldehyde, triethylamine, and phenol are also emitted in large
quantities. Several PB HAP are reported in the data set for the mineral
wool manufacturing source category, including lead, cadmium, and
mercury compounds.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category include the HAP emitted and the speciation of chromium and
mercury emissions. Some HAP expected (e.g., lead, manganese, cadmium,
chromium, nickel, etc.) are not included for all the facilities in the
data set, and some that are not expected (e.g., benzene and
triethylamine) are reported from a few facilities.
2. Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Facilities
The aerospace manufacturing and rework source category includes all
facilities that manufacture aerospace vehicles and/or vehicle
components and all facilities that rework or repair these items. An
aerospace vehicle or component is any fabricated, processed, or
assembled set of parts or complete unit of any aircraft including, but
not limited to, airplanes, helicopters, missiles, rockets, and space
vehicles. Organic and inorganic HAP emissions in aerospace facilities
originate from cleaning, primer application, topcoat application, paint
stripping, chemical milling maskant application, and waste handling and
storage. The HAP expected to be emitted by aerospace facilities include
chromium, cadmium, methylene chloride, toluene, xylene, ethylene
glycol, and glycol ethers. For emissions reported generically as
``chromium'' or ``chromium and compounds,'' emissions are speciated for
this source category as 75 percent ``chromium (III) compounds'' and 25
percent ``chromium (VI) compounds.'' This speciation is based on source
category-specific information provided by the aerospace industry.
(Typically, a 66 percent ``chromium (III) compounds'' and 34 percent
``chromium (VI) compounds'' is used as a default speciation profile
based on the approach adopted by the 1996 National-Scale Air Toxics
Assessment, or NATA.) We encourage commenters to review this assumption
and provide site-specific chromium (VI) and chromium (III) data where
possible.
The ANPRM data set for the Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework
source category includes information for 301 facilities, 169 of which
are classified as major sources in the NEI. Based on our previous
estimates of the number of facilities in the aerospace source category,
the ANPRM data set includes data for about 10 percent of the industry.
Methyl chloroform, tetrachloroethylene, toluene, trichloroethylene, and
methylene chloride account for approximately 80 percent of the mass of
HAP emitted across the 301 facilities in the ANPRM dataset.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category include the number of facilities in the source category, the
HAP emitted, and the speciation of chromium. Some HAP expected to be
reported (chromium, nickel, and hexamethylene diisocyanate) are not
included for all the facilities in the data set.
3. Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations
Marine tank vessel loading operations are facilities that load and
unload liquid commodities in bulk, such as crude oil, gasoline and
other fuels, and some chemicals and solvent mixtures. The cargo is
pumped from the terminal's large, above-ground storage tanks through a
network of pipes and into a storage compartment (tank) on the vessel.
Most marine tank vessel loading operations are associated with
petroleum refineries, synthetic organic chemical manufacturers, or are
independent terminals. The major HAP emission points for marine vessel
loading operations include open tank hatches and overhead vent systems.
Other possible emission points are hatch covers or domes, pressure-
vacuum relief valves, seals, and vents. Emissions may also occur during
ballasting (i.e., the process of drawing ballast as water into a cargo
hold). The primary HAP expected to be emitted from marine vessel
loading operations depend on the material being loaded, but are
generally expected to be benzene, hexane, toluene, xylene compounds,
ethyl benzene, and cumene.
The ANPRM data set for the marine tank vessel loading operations
source category includes information for 126 facilities, all of which
are classified as major sources in the NEI. Based on our previous
estimates of the number of facilities in this source category, the
ANPRM data set includes data for more than were expected to be subject
to the MACT (which was estimated to be 40 at time of the MACT
promulgation) and less than the estimated number of existing facilities
based on Army Corps of Engineers estimates (700). In the ANPRM data
set, the HAP emitted in largest quantities from these 126 sources are
hexane, methanol, toluene, xylene compounds, and benzene, which
collectively accounts for nearly 75 percent of the total HAP emitted.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category include the number of facilities in the source category and
the emission release parameters (of which nearly all are NEI default
values).
4. Natural Gas Transmission and Storage
The natural gas transmission and storage source category comprises
the pipelines, facilities, and equipment used to transport and store
natural gas products (hydrocarbon liquids and gases). Pipeline
transport of natural gas products is covered by this category to either
the point of custody transfer for the oil and natural gas production
source category or the point of delivery to the local distribution
company or final end user of the natural gas if no local distribution
company is present. Emissions of HAP from the natural gas transmission
and storage category come from glycol dehydration unit reboiler vents,
other process vents, storage vessels with flash emissions, pipeline
pigging and storage of pipeline pigging wastes, combustion sources, and
equipment leaks. The major HAP expected to be emitted by the natural
gas transmission and storage source category are hexane, toluene,
benzene, mixed xylenes, formaldehyde, and glycol ethers.
[[Page 14742]]
Our previous estimates identified seven natural gas transmission
and storage facilities that were major sources. The ANPRM data set for
the natural gas transmission and storage source category includes
information for 123 facilities, 78 of which are classified as major
sources in the NEI. In the ANPRM data set, the HAP emitted in largest
quantities from natural gas transmission and storage facilities are
hexane, toluene, benzene, and mixed xylenes and these emissions
collectively account for over 75 percent of the total HAP emissions
from this source category.
One major anomaly associated with the data set for this source
category is the number of facilities identified in the ANPRM data set
compared to the number of facilities previously identified for this
source category (i.e., there appear to be more facilities identified as
natural gas transmission and storage facilities in the ANPRM data set
than previously identified).
5. Oil and Natural Gas Production
The Oil and Natural Gas Production source category includes
facilities involved in the recovery and treatment of hydrocarbon
liquids and gases from oil and natural gas production wells. Components
of these facilities include glycol dehydration units, condensate tank
batteries, and other tanks and equipment present at natural gas
processing plants. The primary HAP emissions from oil and natural gas
production facilities occur via the glycol dehydration reboiler vents,
other process vents, storage vessels, and equipment leaks. The major
HAP expected to be emitted by the oil and natural gas production source
category are xylenes, toluene, hexane, and ethyl benzene.
The ANPRM data set for the oil and natural gas production source
category includes information for 2,824 facilities, of which 909
facilities are classified as major sources in the NEI. Our previous
estimates identified 440 major sources and 2,200 area sources. In the
ANPRM data set, the HAP emitted in the greatest amounts are carbonyl
sulfide, hexane, toluene, benzene, and xylenes formaldehyde, ethyl
benzene, ethylene glycol, and methanol. These HAP collectively account
for over 99 percent of the total HAP emissions for this source
category. There are twelve PB HAP reported in the data set for the Oil
and Natural Gas Production source category, including polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), lead, dibenzofuran, and cadmium.
For reported emissions of POM chemicals, emissions are grouped into
one of seven POM categories--POM 71002 (16-PAH, PAH total, POM); POM
72002 (2-Chloronaphthalene, 2-Methylnaphthalene, Acenaphthene,
Acenaphthylene, Anthracene, Benzo(c)phenanthrene, Benzo[e]Pyrene,
Benzo[g,h,i,]Perylene, Fluoranthene, Fluorene, Perylene, Phenanthrene,
Pyrene); POM 73002 (7,12-Dimethylbenz[a]Anthracene); POM 74002 (3-
Methylcholanthrene); POM 75002 (5-Methylchrysene, Benzo[a]Pyrene,
Dibenzo[a,h]Anthracene); POM 76002 (B[j]Fluoranthen, Benz[a]Anthracene,
Benzo[b]Fluoranthene, Benzo[k]Fluoranthene, Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]Pyrene);
and POM 77002 (Chrysene). We encourage commenters to provide data on
the individual chemical(s) that make up the POM.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category include the number of facilities in the source category, the
specific HAP emitted by individual facilities, and default plant
coordinates. The ANPRM data set contains over 2,800 facilities and this
number is more than expected. The ANPRM data set also contains
emissions of some HAP that are expected to be emitted from all
facilities in the category (e.g., xylenes, hexane, toluene, and ethyl
benzene), but are only emitted from a small percentage of facilities.
Conversely, the HAP with the largest quantity of emissions in the ANPRM
data set, carbonyl sulfide, is not expected to be emitted from
facilities in this source category. In addition, a significant
percentage (40 percent) of the coordinates in the ANPRM data set are
default coordinates.
6. Petroleum Refineries
Petroleum refineries are facilities engaged in refining and
producing products made from crude oil or unfinished petroleum
derivatives. EPA listed two separate Petroleum Refinery source
categories, both of which include any facility engaged in producing
gasoline, naphtha, kerosene, jet fuels, distillate fuel oils, residual
fuel oils, lubricants, or other products from crude oil or unfinished
petroleum derivatives. The Petroleum Refineries--Catalytic Cracking
(Fluid and Other) Units, Catalytic Reforming Units, and Sulfur Plant
Units source category includes the following process units: catalytic
cracking (fluid and other) units, catalytic reforming units, and sulfur
plant units (MACT II). The second source category, Petroleum
Refineries--Other Sources Not Distinctly Listed, includes the process
units not listed in the first category including, but not limited to,
thermal cracking, vacuum distillation, crude distillation,
hydrotreating, hydrorefining, isomerization, polymerization, lube oil
processing, and hydrogen production (MACT I).
Because the MACT standard for the ``Other Sources Not Distinctly
Listed'' source category (40 CFR part 63, subpart UU) was promulgated
first (60 FR 43244, August 18, 1995), it is commonly referred to as
Petroleum Refineries MACT I. Only the units in the ``Other Sources Not
Distinctly Listed'' category, and regulated by the MACT 1 standards,
are being addressed in RTR Phase II. These units include emissions
sources classified