Completion of Requirement To Promulgate Emissions Standards, 74656-74681 [2014-29482]
Download as PDF
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
74656
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
OAR–2014–0703, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
2. Email: steckel.andrew@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel
(Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through
www.regulations.gov or email.
www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous
access’’ system, and EPA will not know
your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send email
directly to EPA, your email address will
be automatically captured and included
as part of the public comment. 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.
Docket: Generally, documents in the
docket for this action are available
electronically at www.regulations.gov
and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California 94105–3901. While all
documents in the docket are listed at
www.regulations.gov, some information
may be publicly available only at the
hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material, large maps), and some may not
be publicly available in either location
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Christine Vineyard, EPA Region IX,
(415) 947–4125, vineyard.christine@
epa.gov.
This
proposal addresses the following local
rules: (1) FRAQMD Rule 2.0, Open
Burning and (2) FRAQMD Rule 3.17,
Wood Heating Devices. In the Rules and
Regulations section of this Federal
Register, we are approving these local
rules in a direct final action without
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
prior proposal because we believe these
SIP revisions are not controversial. If we
receive adverse comments, however, we
will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule and address the
comments in subsequent action based
on this proposed rule. Please note that
if we receive adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
we may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
We do not plan to open a second
comment period, so anyone interested
in commenting should do so at this
time. If we do not receive adverse
comments, no further activity is
planned. For further information, please
see the direct final action.
Dated: October 16, 2014.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2014–29283 Filed 12–15–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 60 and 63
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–0505; FRL–9920–49–
OAR]
RIN 2060–AS42
Completion of Requirement To
Promulgate Emissions Standards
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
In this action, the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
proposes that it has completed its
statutory obligation of the Clean Air Act
to promulgate emissions standards for
source categories accounting for not less
than ninety percent of the aggregated
emissions of each of the seven
hazardous air pollutants enumerated in
section 112(c)(6). This document
explains the basis for the agency’s
conclusion that it completed this
obligation in February of 2011,
identifies the promulgated standards
that collectively satisfy the obligation,
and provides the public an opportunity
to comment.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before February 17, 2015.
Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the
EPA requesting to speak at a public
hearing by December 22, 2014, a public
hearing will be held on December 31,
2014 at the U.S. EPA building at 109
T.W. Alexander Drive, Research
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Triangle Park, NC 27711. If you are
interested in requesting a public hearing
or attending the public hearing, contact
Ms. Virginia Hunt at (919) 541–0832 or
at hunt.virginia@epa.gov. If the EPA
holds a public hearing, the EPA will
keep the record of the hearing open for
30 days after completion of the hearing
to provide an opportunity for
submission of rebuttal and
supplementary information. Under the
Paperwork Reduction Act, comments on
the information collection provisions
are best assured of having full effect if
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) receives a copy of your
comments on or before January 15,
2015.
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
HQ–OAR–2004–0505, by one of the
following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
• Agency Web site: https://www.epa.
gov/oar/docket.html. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments
on the EPA Air and Radiation Docket
Web site.
• Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
Include EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–0505 in
the subject line of the message.
• Fax: Fax your comments to: (202)
566–9744, Attention Docket ID Number
EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–0505.
• Mail: Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
Mail Code 28221T, Attention Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–0505, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20460. Please mail a copy of your
comments on the information collection
provisions to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), Attn:
Desk Officer for the EPA, 725 17th
Street NW., Washington, DC 20503.
• Hand Delivery or Courier: EPA
Docket Center, Room 3334, EPA WJC
West Building, 1301 Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004,
Attention Docket ID Number EPA–HQ–
OAR–2004–0505. Such deliveries are
only accepted 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 Number EPA–HQ–OAR–
2004–0505. The EPA 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
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
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 https://
www.regulations.gov or email. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means the EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an email
comment directly to the EPA without
going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your email
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, the 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 the EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, the 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 the EPA public docket, visit the
EPA Docket Center homepage at
https://www.epa.gov/epahome/
dockets.htm.
Docket. The EPA has established a
docket for this rulemaking under Docket
ID Number EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–0505.
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
(e.g., 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 EPA Docket Center, EPA WJC West
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave. 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 EPA Docket Center is
(202) 566–1742.
Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the
EPA requesting a public hearing by
December 22, 2014, the public hearing
will be held on December 31, 2014 at
the EPA’s campus at 109 T.W.
Alexander Drive, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina. The hearing will
begin at 10:00 a.m. (Eastern Standard
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
Time) and conclude at 5:00 p.m.
(Eastern Standard Time). There will be
a lunch break from 12:00 p.m. to 1:00
p.m. Please contact Ms. Virginia Hunt at
(919) 541–0832 or at hunt.virginia@
epa.gov to register to speak at the
hearing or to inquire as to whether or
not a hearing will be held. The last day
to pre-register in advance to speak at the
hearing will be December 29, 2014.
Additionally, requests to speak will be
taken the day of the hearing at the
hearing registration desk, although
preferences on speaking times may not
be able to be accommodated. If you
require the service of a translator or
special accommodations such as audio
description, please let us know at the
time of registration. If you require an
accommodation, we ask that you preregister for the hearing, as we may not
be able to arrange such accommodations
without advance notice. The hearing
will provide interested parties the
opportunity to present data, views or
arguments concerning the proposed
action. The EPA will make every effort
to accommodate all speakers who arrive
and register. Because these hearing are
being held at U.S. government facilities,
individuals planning to attend the
hearing should be prepared to show
valid picture identification to the
security staff in order to gain access to
the meeting room. Please note that the
REAL ID Act, passed by Congress in
2005, established new requirements for
entering federal facilities. If your
driver’s license is issued by Alaska,
American Samoa, Arizona, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts,
Minnesota, Montana, New York,
Oklahoma or the state of Washington,
you must present an additional form of
identification to enter the federal
building. Acceptable alternative forms
of identification include: Federal
employee badges, passports, enhanced
driver’s licenses and military
identification cards. In addition, you
will need to obtain a property pass for
any personal belongings you bring with
you. Upon leaving the building, you
will be required to return this property
pass to the security desk. No large signs
will be allowed in the building, cameras
may only be used outside of the
building and demonstrations will not be
allowed on federal property for security
reasons. The EPA may ask clarifying
questions during the oral presentations,
but will not respond to the
presentations at that time. Written
statements and supporting information
submitted during the comment period
will be considered with the same weight
as oral comments and supporting
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
74657
information presented at the public
hearing.
For
questions about this proposed rule,
contact Mr. Nathan Topham, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards;
Sector Policies and Programs Division,
Metals and Inorganic Chemicals Group
(D243–02); Environmental Protection
Agency; Research Triangle Park, NC
27111; telephone number: (919) 541–
0483; fax number: (919) 541–3207;
email address: topham.nathan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The information presented in this
preamble is organized as follows:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
I. General Information
A. What should I consider as I prepare my
comments to the EPA?
B. Where can I get a copy of this
document?
II. Background Information
A. What is the statutory background for
this action?
B. What is the litigation history regarding
this action?
III. How has the EPA satisfied its obligation
under Clean Air Act section 112(c)(6)?
A. How did the EPA determine what
regulations would collectively satisfy the
90 percent requirement under section
112(c)(6)?
B. What is the total updated 1990 baseline
inventory of source categories that emit
section 112(c)(6) HAP and which source
categories are determined by the EPA to
be necessary to meet the 90 percent
requirement under section 112(c)(6)?
C. What changes have been made to the
1990 baseline inventory since the 1998
notice?
D. What are the emissions standards that
the EPA has promulgated to meet the 90
percent requirement under section
112(c)(6)?
IV. Surrogate Pollutants Used by the EPA To
Ensure That the Section 112(c)(6)
Requirements Are Fulfilled
A. Surrogates for POM
B. Surrogates for Hexachlorobenzene (HCB)
V. Conclusion
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
74658
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
To Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
I. General Information
A. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments to the EPA?
Submitting CBI. Do not submit
information containing CBI to the EPA
through https://www.regulations.gov or
email. 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 the EPA, 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 disk 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 the EPA’s electronic public
docket without prior notice. Information
marked as CBI will not be disclosed
except in accordance with procedures
set forth in 40 CFR part 2. Send or
deliver information identified as CBI
only to the following address: OAQPS
Document Control Officer (C404–02),
Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle
Park, North Carolina 27711, Attention
Docket ID Number EPA–HQ–OAR–
2004–0505.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
B. Where can I get a copy of this
document?
In addition to being available in the
docket, an electronic copy of this
proposal will also be available on the
Internet through the EPA’s Technology
Transfer Network (TTN). Following
signature by the EPA Administrator, a
copy of this proposed action will be
posted on the TTN’s policy and
guidance page for newly proposed or
promulgated rules at the following
address: https://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/
eparules.html. The TTN provides
information and technology exchange in
various areas of air pollution control.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
II. Background Information
A. What is the statutory background for
this action?
Section 112(c)(6) of the Clean Air Act
requires EPA to take action 1 with
respect to seven specific persistent,
bioaccumulative hazardous air
pollutants (HAP). The section states,
‘‘With respect to alkylated lead
compounds, polycyclic organic matter,
hexachlorobenzene,2 mercury,
polychlorinated biphenyls,3 2,3,7,8tetrachlorodibenzofurans 4 and 2,3,7,8tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin,5 the
Administrator shall, not later than 5
years after November 15, 1990, list
categories and subcategories of sources
assuring that sources accounting for not
less than 90 per centum of the aggregate
emissions of each such pollutant are
subject to standards under subsection
(d)(2) or (d)(4) of this section.’’
Section 112(c)(6) requires the EPA to
ensure that sources responsible for 90
percent of the aggregate emissions of
each of the seven specified pollutants
are subject to standards under sections
(d)(2) or (d)(4) of this section. 42 U.S.C.
7412(c)(6). It requires the EPA to list, by
November 15, 1995, source categories
assuring that sources responsible for 90
percent of the aggregate emissions are
subject to emission standards pursuant
to section 112(d)(2) or (4), and to
promulgate such standards by
November 15, 2000. Under section
112(d)(2), the EPA imposes emission
standards that require ‘‘the maximum
degree of reduction in emissions of the
[HAPs]’’ that the EPA concludes are
achievable based on a consideration of
factors identified in the statute. 42
U.S.C. 7412(d)(2). These are referred to
as ‘‘maximum achievable control
technology’’ or ‘‘MACT.’’ Section
112(d)(4) authorizes the EPA to set a
health-based standard for a limited set
of hazardous air pollutants for which a
health threshold has been established,
and that standard must provide for ‘‘an
ample margin of safety.’’ 42 U.S.C.
7412(d)(4).
1 Section 112(c)(6) also states that ‘‘This
paragraph shall not be construed to require the
Administrator to promulgate standards for such
pollutants emitted by electric utility steam
generating units.’’
2 Referred to elsewhere in this document as
‘‘HCB.’’
3 Referred to elsewhere in this document as
‘‘PCBs.’’
4 Referred to elsewhere in this document as
‘‘furan.’’
5 Referred to elsewhere in this document as
‘‘dioxin.’’ Note that dioxin and furan emissions are
grouped together for the purpose of the 1990
baseline inventory in Table 1 of this preamble.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
B. What is the litigation history
regarding this action?
In 2001, Sierra Club filed suit in the
U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia asserting, among other
allegations, that the EPA had failed to
promulgate emission standards
sufficient to satisfy the 90 percent
requirement in CAA section 112(c)(6).
See Sierra Club v. Jackson, No. 01–1537
(D.D.C.). In an order issued March 31,
2006 (‘‘2006 order’’), the district court
set a deadline (later extended) for the
EPA to complete that task. Sierra Club
v. Johnson, 444 F. Supp. 2d 46, 59
(D.D.C. 2006). In the course of that suit,
the EPA explained that ‘‘once [it]
completes emission standards for the
remaining source categories under
section 112(c)(6), it intends to issue a
notice that explains how it has satisfied
the requirements of section 112(c)(6) in
terms of issuing emission standards for
the source categories that account for
the statutory thresholds identified in
section 112(c)(6).’ ’’ Id.
On March 21, 2011, having
promulgated standards sufficient to
meet the 90 percent requirement under
section 112(c)(6), the EPA published a
notice in the Federal Register (FR)
announcing it had met its statutory
obligation. Completion of Requirement
to Promulgate Emission Standards, 76
FR 15308 (March 21, 2011) (‘‘90 Percent
Notice’’ or ‘‘Notice’’). The March 21,
2011, notice contained the EPA
Administrator’s conclusion that ‘‘EPA
has completed sufficient standards to
meet the 90-percent requirement under
. . . section 112(c)(6).’’ 76 FR 15308.
The Administrator based that
determination on a technical
memorandum ‘‘document[ing] the
actions the Agency has taken to meet
these requirements.’’ Id. The technical
memorandum titled Emission Standards
for Meeting the Ninety Percent
Requirement under Section 112(c)(6) of
the Clean Air Act, which is available in
the docket for this action (Docket ID:
EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–0505), included
an updated 1990 baseline inventory, an
updated list of the source categories
necessary to meet the 90 percent
requirement, and a list of emission
standards the EPA has promulgated for
these source categories.
In 2011, Sierra Club filed suit in U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia (D.C. Circuit) challenging the
March 21, 2011, notice. The D.C. Circuit
vacated the notice, holding that the
notice was a legislative rulemaking that
must be issued through a notice and
comment rulemaking. Sierra Club v.
EPA, 699 F.3d 530, 535 (D.C. Cir. 2012).
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
In 2013, Sierra Club filed a motion
with the district court, seeking
enforcement of the 2006 order. In an
opinion dated July 25, 2014, the district
court held that the EPA failed to comply
with the 2006 order and directed the
EPA to initiate a process of notice and
comment rulemaking before the agency
reissues, reconsiders or modifies its
determination regarding section
112(c)(6). Therefore, the EPA is issuing
this proposed rule as ordered by the
district court and providing an
opportunity for comment on the EPA’s
proposed determination that it has
fulfilled the requirements of section
112(c)(6).
III. How has the EPA satisfied its
obligation under clean air act section
112(c)(6)?
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
A. How did the EPA determine what
regulations would collectively satisfy the
90 percent requirement under section
112(c)(6)?
In 1998, the EPA published an initial
list of source categories and
subcategories in the Federal Register
that the agency at that time believed it
needed to regulate under section
112(c)(6) to satisfy that provision’s 90
percent requirement. 63 FR 17838, April
10, 1998. The EPA first developed a
1990 baseline inventory 6 which
identified all known sources of the
section 112(c)(6) HAPs at the time and
included estimated national annual
emissions for each source category as of
1990. 63 FR 17847, Table 1. The EPA
then identified source categories
considered subject to standards under
112(d)(2) and (d)(4), as well as those
subject to section 129 standards.7 63 FR
17842. See also Table 2 of the 1998
Notice, 63 FR 17849. The EPA found
that a majority of the source categories
needed to achieve the 90 percent
requirement were already subject to
either section 112(d)(2) or (d)(4)
standards or section 129 standards or
listed for such regulation. 63 FR 17839.
Based on the 1990 baseline emissions
inventory, the EPA concluded that the
6 The EPA chose 1990 as the baseline year
because that was when the section 112(c)(6)
requirements came into force as part of the CAA
Amendments of 1990. See 62 FR 33627.
7 The EPA considers standards promulgated
under section 129 as substantively equivalent to
those promulgated under section 112(c)(6). 63 FR
17846.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
90 percent requirement had been met
for five of seven 112(c)(6) HAP but that
additional regulations were needed for
polycyclic organic matter (POM) and
alkylated lead to attain the 90 percent
level for those two HAP. 63 FR 17846.
Therefore, the EPA added two more
categories to the initial section 112(c)(6)
source category list. See Table 2, 63 FR
17850. However, the EPA also noted in
that notice that ‘‘many uncertainties
remain concerning the accuracy of its
identification of source categories and
estimates of emissions.’’ 63 FR 17845.
The EPA forewarned that ‘‘Given the
uncertainties, the EPA recognizes that
the list may be subject to change.’’ 63 FR
17846. For example, in that notice, the
EPA explained:
As the Agency proceeds to develop
appropriate emission standards, it will
necessarily develop improved source
category-specific information, which may
affect the estimates of total emissions, the
percentage of emissions subject to standards,
allocation of emissions within a source
category to major and area sources, and
source categories for which standards need to
be developed. As it proceeds to develop these
standards and associated information, EPA
intends to further evaluate this information
against its obligation to assure that sources
accounting for not less than 90 percent of
emissions are subject to standards.
63 FR 17845
In particular, the agency explained
that, for regulations not yet developed,
it would subject area source categories
with significant emissions to the
regulations required by section
7412(c)(6), but that ‘‘[s]ome area
categories may be negligible
contributors to the 90 percent goal, and
as such pose unwarranted burdens for
subjecting to [MACT] standards.’’ Id.
Subsequent to the publication of the
initial section 112(c)(6) list, as the EPA
continued evaluating source categories
and developing standards, the EPA has
updated the listing several times. The
EPA issued the updates either as a
separate notice or in conjunction with
development of specific standards. The
updates are as follows:
• Section 112(c)(6) Source Category
List: Tire Production, 65 FR 47725,
August 3, 2000. This action removed
tire production manufacturing from the
list.
• National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants; Revision of
Source Category List for Standards
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
74659
Under Section 112(c)(6) and 112(k) of
the Clean Air Act, 67 FR 68124,
November 8, 2002. This action added
gasoline distribution Stage I to the list
and removed area sources in the
following categories: Asphalt hot mix
production, fabricated metal products,
paint and allied products, paper coated
and laminated, packaging and
transportation equipment
manufacturing.
• Revision of Source Category Lists
for Standards Under Sections 112(c)
and 112(k) of the Clean Air Act; and
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area
Sources: Electric Arc Furnace; Proposed
Rule, 72 FR 53814, September 20, 2007.
This action added the electric arc
furnace (EAF) steelmaking facility area
source category to the list.
• National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source
Categories: Gasoline Distribution Bulk
Terminals, Bulk Plants, and Pipeline
Facilities; and Gasoline Dispensing
Facilities; Final Rule, 73 FR 1916,
January 10, 2008. This action finalized
the decision not to regulate gasoline
distribution area sources under section
112(c)(6).
• National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Gold Mine
Ore Processing and Production Area
Source Category; and Addition to
Source Category List for Standards;
Final Rule, 76 FR 9450, February 17,
2011. This action added the Gold Mine
Ore Processing and Production source
category to the list.
• National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area
Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and
Institutional Boilers; Final Rule, 76 FR
15554, March 21, 2011. This action
explained that area source wood and
oil-fired boilers were not needed to meet
the 90 percent requirement for POM and
mercury under section 112(c)(6).
• Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources and Emission
Guidelines for Existing Sources: Sewage
Sludge Incineration Units; Final Rule,
76 FR 15372, March 21, 2011. This
action explained that sewage sludge
incineration units were needed to meet
the 90 percent requirement for mercury
under section 112(c)(6). See 76 FR
15375.
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
74660
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
• Emission Standards for Meeting the
Ninety Percent Requirement under
Section 112(c)(6) of the Clean Air Act,
Docket ID: EPA–HQ–OAR–2004–0505–
0006 (February 18, 2011). This technical
memorandum documented the actions
the EPA had taken to meet the 90
percent requirement under section
112(c)(6) and included an updated 1990
baseline inventory, an updated list of
the source categories necessary to meet
the 90 percent requirement, and a list of
emission standards the EPA
promulgated for these source
categories.8
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
8 As explained earlier in this document, this
technical memorandum was the basis of the EPA’s
conclusion in a March 21, 2011, FR notice that it
has completed its obligation under section
112(c)(6). See Completion of Requirement to
Promulgate Emission Standards, 76 FR 15308,
March 21, 2011. The 2011 notice was later vacated
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
B. What is the total updated 1990
baseline inventory of source categories
that emit 112(c)(6) HAP and which
source categories are determined by the
EPA to be necessary to meet the 90
percent requirement under section
112(c)(6)?
1. Updated 1990 Baseline Emissions
Inventory for Section 112(c)(6) HAPs
Table 1 presents the updated 1990
baseline emission inventory for the
section 112(c)(6) pollutants based on the
history, actions, updates and
documentation explained elsewhere in
this document. Table 1 includes the
by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia, which held that the notice must be
issued through a notice and comment rulemaking.
Sierra Club v. EPA, 699 F.3d 530, 535 (D.C. Cir.
2012).
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
updated estimated emissions (in tons
per year or pounds per year) for year
1990 for each of the section 112(c)(6)
pollutants for each source category and
the percent of the total emissions for
1990. Table 1 also identifies the
categories that the EPA is counting
towards meeting the EPA’s 90 percent
requirement for each section 112(c)(6)
HAP. Table 1 also identifies remaining
source categories (which added together
account for 10 percent or less of the
total inventory) that emit section
112(c)(6) HAP. By February 21, 2011,
the EPA had promulgated either MACT
or equivalent standards under section
129 for each of the source categories
identified in the top portion of Table 1
(i.e., the portion labeled ‘‘Categories
Subject to Regulation’’).
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
74661
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Table 1. Updated 1990 Baseline Emission Inventory for the
112(c) (6) Pollutants
-
[J]
.Q
[J]
r-l
~
[J]
·rl
"
·rl
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
·rl -
.,..;
iLl
E
fil
::r:
8
IH
0
o\O
~
[J]
~
!'::
·rl
8 H
iLl
!'::
-.
-.
[J]
[J]
~
0
-p.
>-.
-
[J]
~
0
>-.
-
.w
-
.,..;
[J]
~
·rl
E
p.
[J]
!'::
0
.w
·rl
[J]
[J]
[J]
~
·rl
>-.
4-<
E
·rl
·rl
iLl
H
0
iLl
;::i
[J]
[J]
4-<
[J]
[J]
4-<
0
H
o\o
.w
~
~
·rl
8
iLl
0
0
[J]
[J]
>-.
p.
.w
~
·rl
[J]
[J]
·rl
8
iLl
'D
4-<
IT)
0
(])
..:I
o\O
'D
'D
-.
fil
-
fil
-
r-l
..:I
;::i
~
:><
I
'"'
[J]
QJ
p,
.-!
.,..;
0
·rl
·rl
0
[J]
0
~
[J]
[J]
-
[J]
·rl
0
-
P1
CJ
p,
P1
CJ
P1
CJ
P1
CJ
>-.
..':
'd
rl
~
.w
~
H
0
.,..;
0
H
0
E
o\O
E
QJ
o\o
(])
.j.J
~
p,
::r:
::r:
-.
0
Source Category
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
..':
0
~
r-l
·rl
Categories Sub"ect to Regulation Counted Towards the 90 Percent Requirement
Aerospace
Industry (Surface
Coating)
1640.0
20.6%
0.10
0.1%
Agricultural
Chemicals (major)
8.31
0.1%
Alkylated Lead
Production
(major)
Asphalt Roofing
Production
(major)
37.20
0.5%
Blast Furnace and
499.00
Steel Mills
6.3%
Commercial/Instit
utional Coal
Combustion (major
sources)
0.4%
34.50
Commercial/Instit
utional Coal
Combustion (area
sources)
138.00
1.7%
Industrial Coal
Combustion (major
sources)
110.00
1.4%
f-Industrial Coal
Combustion (area
sources)
47.10
0.6%
Commercial/Instit
utional Oil
Combustion (major
sources)
10.70
0.1%
Industrial Oil
Combustion (major
sources)
35.60
0.4%
Commercial/Instit
utional Wood/Wood
Residue
Combustion (major
sources)
7.16
0.1%
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
18.
29
99.7
%
EP16DE14.032
>-.
p.
.w
-
~
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
[J]
~
.Q
r-1
[J]
"
0
~
~
~
[J]
~
[J]
>-.
p.,
.w
·rl
·rl
·rl
0
·rl
[J)
[J]
[J)
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J)
[J]
[J]
~
"
0
"
~
·rl
·rl
·rl
!i1
!i1
0
[J)
[J]
·rl
8
l"ii
::r:
""
p,
I
I.J)
rl
8
'H
0
o\'
~
~
p,
I
I.J)
rl
~
8 H
(1j
(1j
>-.
H
;:I
""'
'0
0
>-.
p.,
.w
·rl
>-.
8
!i1
GJ
H
~
"
"
0
GJ
p.,
~
rtl
"
·rl
~
·rl
[J]
[J]
~
~
>-.
p.,
.w
o\'
~
~
-
·rl
l"ii
'H
o\O
>-.
H
;::J
Cl
'""'
'0
0
H
GJ
·rl
0
GJ
l"ii
u
0
(1j
8
0
'H
-
·rl
~
·rl
'0
~
·rl
[J)
GJ
[J]
[J)
[J)
~
·rl
Ul
::;;:
·rl
rn
0
;:I
0
-
>-.
p.,
.w
~
0
l"ii
8
rn
8
[J]
·rl
rn
'H
0
·rl
0
8
-
8
l"ii
p'l
(.)
p,
o\O
p'l
(.)
p,
[J]
[J]
~
[/)
·rl
[J)
~
>-.
p.,
.w
~
-
H
0
~
0
·rl
H
'H
[J]
~
l"ii
p'l
(.)
::r:
GJ
·rl
8
!i1
'H
o\o
'0
(1j
-
.w
(1j
GJ
r-1
p'l
(.)
~
rl
'""'
'0
o\O
::r:
::;;:
>-.
""
GJ
'-'
(1j
r-1
>-.
0
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Source Category
Industrial
Wood/Wood Residue
Combustion (major
sources)
Industrial/Commer
cial/Institutiona
1 Coal Boilers
(major sources)
Industrial/Commer
cial/Institutiona
1 Coal Boilers
(area sources)
Industrial/Commer
cial/Institutiona
1 Oil Boilers
(major sources)
Industrial/Commer
cial/Institutiona
1 Wood/Wood
Residue Boilers
(major sources)
Chemical
Manufacturing:
Cyclic Crude and
Intermediate
Production
(major)
Chlorinated
Solvents
Production
Coke Ovens: Byproduct Recovery
Plants
Coke Ovens:
Charging, Topside
& Door Leaks
Coke Ovens:
Pushing,
Quenching &
Battery Stacks
Commercial
Printing, Gravure
(major)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
~
Cl
""
·rl
55.00
0. 7%
0.08
r-1
0.8%
2.05
l. 06
0.6%
1.13
0.7%
0.48
101.00
1.3%
0.3%
1. 3%
0.58
77.80
1. 0%
539.00
6.8%
517.00
6.5%
28.70
55.9
%
0.4%
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
EP16DE14.033
74662
74663
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
[J]
~
.Q
r-1
[J]
"
0
~
~
~
~
[J]
[J]
>-.
p.,
.w
·rl
·rl
·rl
0
·rl
[J)
[J]
[J)
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J)
[J]
[J]
~
"
0
"
~
·rl
·rl
·rl
!i1
!i1
0
[J)
[J]
·rl
8
l"ii
::r:
""
p,
I
I.J)
rl
8
~
8 H
(1j
(1j
>-.
H
~
0
;:I
o\'
~
""'
~
GJ
p.,
'0
~
p,
rtl
I
I.J)
"
rl
0
>-.
p.,
.w
·rl
>-.
8
!i1
GJ
H
'H
"
"
0
·rl
~
·rl
[J]
[J]
~
~
>-.
p.,
.w
~
>-.
p.,
.w
~
-
·rl
>-.
p.,
.w
~
[J)
[J)
'0
~
[J]
~
0
[/)
0
o\'
~
rn
[J]
~
·rl
~
·rl
(1j
0
l"ii
0
8
GJ
'H
0
'""'
'0
-
[J)
8
rn
8
0
·rl
Ul
·rl
[J]
-
'H
0
rn
'H
·rl
·rl
0
8
-
8
GJ
::;;:
~
·rl
~
o\O
>-.
H
;::J
u
0
H
GJ
·rl
Cl
8
l"ii
[J)
l"ii
;:I
0
·rl
-
·rl
H
0
[J]
[J]
·rl
H
'H
~
l"ii
p'l
(.)
p,
o\O
l"ii
p'l
(.)
p'l
(.)
::r:
p,
::;;:
GJ
!i1
'H
o\o
'0
(1j
-
.w
(1j
GJ
r-1
p'l
(.)
~
rl
'""'
'0
o\O
::r:
>-.
""
GJ
'-'
(1j
r-1
>-.
0
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Medical Waste
Incineration
Mercury Cell
Chlor-Alkali
Plants (major and
area)
Municipal Waste
Combustion
Naphthalene
Production
(major)
Paints and Allied
Products (major)
Paper Coated and
Laminated,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Cl
""
r-1
7.80
4.40
107.00
2.7%
1.3%
0.19
4.8%
0.0%
223.00
2.0%
0.1%
0.31
12.3
%
50.0
0
30.6
%
33.7
%
0.04
25.7
%
0.08
51.1
%
6.0%
55.0
0
17.7
%
0.2%
1.32
0.03
0.0%
28.60
3.20
2.8%
3.51
0.6%
9.80
0.0%
0.07
0.01
0.18
0.4%
0.80
0.0%
0.10
0.0%
45.20
0.3%
54.30
0.
68.2
%
0.6%
23.70
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
7.30
7%
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
EP16DE14.034
Source Category
Electric Arc
Furnaces (EAF)
(area) Secondary Steel
Fabricated Metal
Products (major)
Gasoline
Distribution stage l (major)
Gold Mine Ore
Processing and
Production (area)
Hazardoc:.s Waste
Incineration
Industrial
Organic Chemicals
Manufacturing
(major)
Industrial
Stationary IC
Engines - Diesel
(major)
Industrial
Stationary IC
Engines - Natural
Gas (major)
Lightweight
Aggregate Kilns
~
·rl
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
[J]
~
.Q
r-1
[J]
"
0
~
~
~
[J]
~
[J]
>-.
p.
.w
·rl
·rl
·rl
0
·rl
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
~
"
0
"
~
·rl
·rl
·rl
!"i1
!"i1
0
[J]
[J]
·rl
8
l"ii
::r::
""
ill
I
I.J)
rl
8
'H
0
o\D
~
~
p,
I
I.J)
rl
~
8 H
~
(1j
(1j
0
>-.
p.
.w
·.-l
8
-
!"i1
Q)
>-.
H H
;:J Q)
""'
'0
"
"
0
p.
"
c
(1j
·rl
~
·rl
[J]
[J]
[J]
Ul
Ul
~
·rl
l"ii
0
·rl
l"ii
...:1
'H
'0
8
[/)
~
·rl
·rl
Ul
Ul
·rl
-
H
·rl
Ul
Ul
0
o\"
-
>-.
p.
.w
~
·rl
0
o\O
0
8
~
0
8
(j)
::;;:
~
·rl
~
0
0
8
l"ii
p:j
[_)
p'l
[_)
p:j
[_)
·rl
H
C1
8
'H
-
p,
0
Ul
·rl
l"ii
H
[/)
[J]
>-.
u
~
0
;::J
~
o\O
p,
::r::
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Pesticides
Manufacture
PeLroleum
Refining: All
Processes (major)
Phthalic
Anhydride
Production
(major)
Plastics Material
and Resins
Manufacturing
(major)
Portland Cement
Manufacture:
Hazardoc:s Waste
Kilns
Portland Cement
Manufacture: NonHazardous Waste
Kilns
Primary Aluminum
Production
Pulp and Paper Kraft Recovery
Furnaces
Pulp and Paper
Lime Kilns
Secondary
Aluminum Smelting
Secondary Lead
Smelting
Sewage Sludge
Incineration
(area)
Ship Building and
Repair (Surface
Coating)
Transportation
Equipment
Manufacturing
(SICs Combined)
8
!"i1
'0
'H
(1j
0
Q)
o\O
·~
'0
-
(1j
Q)
rl
...:1
p'l
[_)
~
rl
o\'
::r::
(1j
>-.
'0
~
'-'
(1j
Q)
r-1
>-.
~
·rl
r-1
~
C1
0.46
1, 070.
00
18.30
0.2%
8.29
0.1%
12.60
0.2%
0.95
8.9%
2.75
1.7%
47.90
0.6%
0.09
0. 8 96
5.64
r-·--·--·
3.5%
662.00
8.3%
649.00
8.2%
0.00
0.0%
1. 90
1.2%
183.00
2.3%
0.38
3.5%
0.01
0.1%
1. 80
44.1
%
13.5%
1.1%
70.00
0.9%
13.60
0.2%
38.70
0.5%
Wood Household
VerDate Sep<11>2014
·rl
.w
::;;:
Q)
[J]
[J]
Q)
0
Source Category
Packaging (major)
~
~
-
l"ii
~
>-.
p.
.w
[J]
·.-l
'H
H
;:J
0
~
>-.
p.
.w
>-.
'H
~
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
0.1%
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
EP16DE14.035
74664
74665
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
[J]
~
.Q
r-1
[J]
"
0
~
~
~
[J]
~
[J]
>-.
p.,
.w
·rl
·rl
·rl
0
·rl
[J)
[J]
[J)
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J)
[J]
[J]
~
"
0
"
~
·rl
·rl
·rl
!i1
!i1
8
0
[J)
[J]
'H
·rl
8
l"ii
::r:
""
p,
I
I.J)
rl
0
o\'
~
~
p,
I
I.J)
rl
~
8 H
~
(1j
(1j
0
>-.
p.,
.w
·rl
8
-
!i1
GJ
>-.
H H
;:J GJ
""'
'0
"
"
0
p.,
~
(1j
"
:<:
·rl
·rl
[J]
[J]
·rl
~
0
·rl
'0
~
(1j
0
GJ
o\o
·rl
·rl
Ul
Ul
·rl
l"ii
0
·rl
l"ii
...:1
'H
'0
0
o\O
0
8
>-.
l"ii
;::J
~
[J]
[J)
[J)
0
~
H
u
GJ
::;;:
·rl
>-.
p.,
.w
~
[/)
rn
-
H
~
~
-
~
0
l"ii
8
p'l
[_)
p,
·rl
H
Cl
[J]
[J]
>-.
p.,
.w
~
[J]
·rl
0
o\'
>-.
p.,
.w
~
-
'H
H
;:J
0
~
~
·rl
>-.
'H
~
[J)
rn
8
8
[J]
rn
'H
0
·rl
0
-
8
o\O
l"ii
p'l
[_)
p'l
[_)
::r:
p,
8
!i1
'H
·~
GJ
'0
(1j
-
.w
(1j
r-1
H
p'l
[_)
~
rl
o\O
::r:
::;;:
GJ
·rl
>-.
""
GJ
'0
GJ
'-'
(1j
r-1
>-.
0
Source Category
Furniture
Manufacturing
(major)
Total Emissions
and Percentage
Contributions
From Above
~
Cl
""
·rl
r-1
11.10
7' 157.
90.0%
13
10.2
0
95.3
%
147.
42
90.3
%
0.15
94.5
%
1. 04
100.
0%
18.
29
99.7
%
VerDate Sep<11>2014
24.80
0.3%
4.18
0.1%
0.72
0.0%
6.37
0.1%
0.02
3.10
0.1%
0.1%
0.5%
15.30
0.3%
0.12
42.60
1. 9%
0.49
7.82
0.0%
0.2%
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
EP16DE14.036
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Categories Not Needed to Reach 90 Percent Recuirement
Abrasive Grain
(Media)
Manufacturing
Adhesives and
Sealants (SICs
Combined)
Agricultural
Chemicals (area)
Asphalt Hot-mix
Production (area)
Asphalt Roofing
Production (area)
Battery
Production
Blast Furnace and
Steel Mills
Industrial/Commer
cial/Institutiona
l Oil Boilers
(area sources)
Industrial/Commer
cial/Institutiona
l Wood/Wood
Residue Boilers
(area sources)
Industrial Waste
Oil Combustion
(major and area
sources)
Commercial/Instit
utional Oil
Combustion (area
sources)
Industrial Oil
Combustion (area
sources)
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
[J]
~
.Q
r-1
[J]
"
0
~
~
~
>-.
p.,
.w
[J]
"
[J]
"
"
"
0
·rl
·rl
0
·rl
[J]
[J]
[J)
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
c
·rl
·rl
·rl
!i1
!i1
'H
c >-.
rd
[J)
0
[J)
[J]
·rl
8
l"ii
::r:
8
0
o\'
~
C4
rl
lO
I
l.j)
I
rl
~
(1j
""'
'0
·rl
>-.
8
!i1
OJ
1-i 1-1
;:I
>-.
p.,
.w
[J)
8 1-1
~
""
p.,
0
OJ
p.,
·rl
[J]
[J]
·rl
~
0
~
'H
·rl
8
l"ii
'H
1-i
0
1-i
0
-
;:I
0
o\'
o\O
~
~
>-.
p.,
.w
-
[J)
[J]
G
0
·rl
[J)
[J)
c
·rl
·rl
l"ii
0
[J)
[J)
·rl
8
'H
0
~
~
>-.
p.,
.w
OJ
c
:8
'0
'H
·rl
(1j
0
0
8
OJ
·rl
l"ii
[J]
'H
'""'
'0
-
[J)
.,-j
o\O
l"ii
~
(.)
~
(.)
(.)
1-i
c
·rl
·rl
H
Cl
p.,
[J)
[J)
0
~
OJ
'""'
'0
rd
r-1
~
~
(.)
~
rl
::r:
'0
>-.
o\O
::r:
o\o
rd
OJ
-
OJ
!i1
.w
8
:8
~
0
p.,
8
c
l"ii
u
·rl
[J]
>-.
·rl
~
>-.
p.,
.w
·rl
8
c
rd
G
0
[J]
[J]
-
:J
~
[/)
~
""
OJ
.w
rd
r-1
>-.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
0
Source Category
Commercial/Instit
uti.onaJ Wood/Wood
Residue
Combustion (area
sources)
Industrial
lvood/v!ood Residue
Combustion (area
sources)
Commercial/Instit
utional Natural
Gas Combustion
(major sources)
Industrial
Natural Gas
Combustion (major
sources)
Commercial/Instit
utional Natural
Gas Combustion
Industrial
Natural Gas
Combustion (area
sources)
Carbamate
Insecticides
Production
Carbon Black
Production
Carbon
Reactivation
Furnaces
Chemical
Manufacturing:
Cyclic Crude and
Intermediate
Production (area)
Chemical
Preparations
(SICs Combined)
Mercury Cell
Chlor-Alkali
Plants (major and
area)
~
Cl
""
·rl
28.60
0.4%
13.80
0.2%
0.01
0.0%
0.01
0.0%
0.02
0.0%
0.01
0.0%
4.08
0.1%
4.33
r-1
0.1%
0.02
0.25
0.00
3.20
0.0%
0.1%
4.52
0.1%
Chromium Plating:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
0.2%
0.0%
6.79
0.2%
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
0.0%
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
EP16DE14.037
74666
74667
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
[J]
~
.Q
r-1
[J]
"
0
~
~
~
[J]
~
[J]
>-.
p.
.w
·rl
·rl
·rl
0
·rl
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
~
"
0
"
c
·rl
·rl
·rl
!"i1
!"i1
'H
c >-.
(1j
0
[J]
[J]
8
·rl
0
8
o\D
l"ii
::r::
"'
ill
I
I.J)
rl
~
~
p,
I
I.J)
rl
~
8 H
H
;:I
""'
"
"
0
(1j
0
>-.
p.
.w
·.-l
8
-
!"i1
Q)
H
Q)
p.
'0
c
(1j
c
·rl
~
·rl
[J]
[J]
-
·rl
>-.
p.
.w
~
[J]
Ul
Ul
c
·rl
l"ii
0
·rl
l"ii
...:1
'H
'0
·rl
8
[/)
Ul
Ul
c
·rl
·rl
Ul
Ul
·rl
>-.
'H
0
H
-
0
~
0
8
~
[/)
0
~
(j)
c
::;;:
·rl
~
[J]
Ul
·rl
l"ii
p'l
()
-
8
>-.
l"ii
o\O
p:j
()
p:j
()
H
u
0
·rl
H
0
p,
p,
::r::
'H
0
o\O
Q)
-
rl
p'l
()
~
rl
>-.
'0
"'
::r::
'-'
(1j
VerDate Sep<11>2014
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
10.40
0.1%
0.00
0.0%
>-.
"'
0.00
0.19
r-1
r-1
0
1. 38
Q)
~
·rl
0.50
(1j
Q)
o\'
148.00
0.0%
0.0%
5.06
0.5%
1. 9%
0.56
0.5%
0.88
0.4%
0.1%
0.01
30.50
0.1%
3.54
0.00
0.4%
0.80
0.0%
0.0%
0.60
0.13
0.00
0.00
0.0%
0.0%
0.0
2
1. 73
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
0.0
0.0%
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
0.1%
0.1%
EP16DE14.038
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Clay Refractories
(area)
Cleaning Products
(SICs Combined)
Commercial
Printing, Gravure
(area)
Commercial
Printing,
Letterpress and
Screen
Crematories
(area)
Custom Compound
Purchased Resins
Manufacture
Dental
Preparation and
Use
Drum and Barrel
Reclamation
Electronic and
Other Electric
Equipment
Manufacturing
(SICs Combined)
Fabricated Rubber
Products
Ferroalloy
Manufacture
(area)
Fiber Cans,
Drums, and
Similar Products
Fluorescent Lamp
Recycling
Food Products
(SICs Combined)
Gasoline
Distribution
(Aviation)
Gasoline
Distribution -
'0
...:1
(1j
0
Source Category
Chromic Anodizing
·~
.w
::;;:
Q)
8
!"i1
(1j
0
8
·rl
Q)
'H
0
o\O
[J]
[J]
'0
8
;:I
o\"
~
~
-
l"ii
~
>-.
p.
.w
[J]
·.-l
;:I
0
0
~
>-.
p.
.w
H
'H
~
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
[J]
~
.Q
r-1
[J]
"
0
~
~
~
[J]
~
[J]
>-.
p.,
.w
·rl
·rl
·rl
0
·rl
[J)
[J]
[J)
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J)
[J]
[J]
~
"
0
"
~
·rl
·rl
·rl
!i1
!i1
0
[J)
[J]
·rl
8
l"ii
::r:
""
p.,
I
l.j)
rl
8
'H
0
o\'
~
~
p.,
~
8 H
~
rd
H
;:I
""'
(1j
rl
0
>-.
p.,
.w
·rl
>-.
8
!i1
OJ
>-.
H
OJ
p.,
'0
~
rd
I
l.j)
"
"
0
"
·rl
~
·rl
[J]
[J]
~
~
>-.
p.,
.w
[J]
~
0
~
>-.
p.,
.w
~
-
·rl
>-.
p.,
.w
~
[J)
[J)
~
~
rn
~
·rl
'0
'H
·rl
[J]
~
(1j
0
8
OJ
'H
0
·rl
l"ii
[J]
rn
'H
'""'
'0
-
8
o\O
rd
r-1
~
-
~
(.)
~
rl
rn
8
0
·rl
-
[J]
[J)
'H
·rl
0
8
>-.
l"ii
o\O
l"ii
~
(.)
~
(.)
(.)
OJ
::;;:
~
·rl
~
o\O
H
u
0
·rl
H
Cl
p.,
p.,
.,-j
::r:
0
OJ
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Geothermal Power
Gum and Wood
Chemical
Industrial Gases
Manufacturing
Industrial
Inorganic
Chemicals
Manufacturing
Industrial
Machinery and
Electrical
Equipment (SICs
Combined)
Industrial
Organic Chemicals
Manufacturing
(area)
Industrial
Organic Chemicals
Manufacturing
(major)
Industrial
Stationary IC
Engines - Diesel
(area)
Industrial
Stationary IC
Engines - Natural
Gas (area)
Industrial
Stationary IC
Engines - Natural
Gas (major)
Industrial
Turbines - Diesel
fired
::r:
'""'
'0
""
VerDate Sep<11>2014
0.0
0
0.80
0.02
0.0%
0.00
0.0%
0.00
0.0%
0.09
0.1%
0.0%
4.03
0.6%
0.1%
2.77
0.0%
0.8%
1. 00
""
0.0%
0.2%
>-.
0.5%
1. 30
15.70
rd
r-1
r-1
3
9.43
OJ
.w
~
Cl
0.50
'0
rd
OJ
·rl
Gasoline
Distribution Stage 1 (major)
General
Laboratory
Activities
o\o
>-.
::;;:
OJ
!i1
.w
0
Source Category
Stage 1 (area)
8
0
8
:J
o\'
·rl
l"ii
[J)
l"ii
;:I
0
0
·rl
H
0
[/)
[J]
[J]
-
·rl
H
'H
~
0.1%
1. 51
0.0%
19.00
0.2%
0.02
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
0.0%
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
EP16DE14.039
74668
74669
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
[J]
~
.Q
r-1
[J]
"
0
~
~
~
[J]
~
[J]
>-.
p.
.w
·rl
·rl
·rl
0
·rl
[J)
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J]
~
"
0
"
c
·rl
·rl
·rl
!"i1
!"i1
'H
c >-.
(1j
0
[J)
[J]
·rl
8
l"ii
::r::
"'
ill
I
I.J)
rl
8
0
o\D
~
~
p,
I
I.J)
rl
~
8 H
H
;:I
""'
'0
"
"
0
(1j
0
Q)
p.
c
(1j
c
·rl
~
~
-
·rl
>-.
p.
.w
[J]
c
·rl
·rl
l"ii
0
·rl
l"ii
...:1
[J)
[J)
'H
[J)
[J)
'H
'0
8
-
·rl
·.-l
[J)
Ul
Ul
c
·rl
>-.
'H
0
0
;:I
0
H
8
-
-
!"i1
'H
0
l"ii
o\O
>-.
p.
.w
~
0
8
[/)
0
Ul
[J)
8
~
(j)
c
::;;:
·rl
~
·rl
0
·rl
0
8
l"ii
p'l
()
-
8
>-.
l"ii
;:I
o\"
p:j
()
p:j
()
H
u
0
·rl
H
0
~
~
~
[J]
H
·.-l
~
~
~
>-.
p.
.w
>-.
p.
.w
Q)
H
·rl
[J]
[J]
p,
o\O
::r::
p,
::;;:
Q)
[J]
[J]
·rl
8
!"i1
'0
'H
(1j
0
Q)
o\O
Q)
·~
'0
(1j
-
.w
Q)
rl
...:1
p'l
()
~
rl
o\'
::r::
(1j
>-.
'0
"'
'-'
(1j
Q)
r-1
>-.
0
Lamp Breakage
Landfill (Gas)
Flares
Lime
Manufacturing
Lubricating Oils
and Grease
Metal Household
Furniture
Miscellaneous
Manufacturing
Miscellaneous
Plastics Products
Naphthalene Miscellaneous
Uses
Naphthalene
Production (area)
Naphthalene
Sulfonates
Production
Nonmetallic
Mineral Products
OffJ.ce FurniLu:r:e,
Except Wood
Manufacturing
Other Biological
Incineration
Other
Miscellaneous
(SICs Combined)
Other Secondary
Nonferrous Metals
Recovery
VerDate Sep<11>2014
~
0
"'
·rl
13.80
r-1
0.2%
0.9%
0.70
0.45
0.3%
1. 50
0.4%
0.01
0.02
0.0%
0.50
0.0%
0.0%
0.01
0.19
0.00
0.0%
0.2%
0.0%
0.06
0.0%
0.00
0.0%
6.58
0.1%
5.76
0.1%
1. 25
0.0%
19.40
0.2%
6.53
0.1%
0.00
0.0%
6.45
0.1%
0.32
1.45
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
0.00
3.0%
PO 00000
Frm 00016
0.2%
0.25
Jkt 235001
0.25
0.0%
1.6%
0.2%
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
EP16DE14.040
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Source Category
Industrial
Turbines :
Natural Gas fired
Inorganic
Pigments
Manufacturing
Instrument
Manufacturing
Iron and Steel
Foundries
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
[J]
~
.Q
r-1
[J]
"
0
~
~
~
[J]
~
[J]
>-.
p.,
.w
·rl
·rl
·rl
0
·rl
[J)
[J]
[J)
[J]
[J]
[J]
[J)
[J]
[J]
~
"
0
"
~
·rl
·rl
·rl
!i1
!i1
0
[J)
[J]
·rl
8
l"ii
::r:
""
p,
I
I.J)
rl
8
'H
0
o\'
~
~
p,
I
I.J)
rl
~
8 H
~
(1j
(1j
0
>-.
p.,
.w
·rl
8
-
!i1
GJ
>-.
H H
;:J GJ
""'
'0
"
"
0
p.,
~
(1j
"
:<:
·rl
·rl
[J]
[J]
·rl
~
0
·rl
'0
~
(1j
0
GJ
o\o
·rl
·rl
Ul
Ul
·rl
l"ii
0
·rl
l"ii
...:1
'H
'0
0
o\O
0
8
>-.
l"ii
;::J
~
[J]
[J)
[J)
0
~
H
u
GJ
::;;:
·rl
>-.
p.,
.w
~
[/)
rn
-
H
~
~
-
~
0
l"ii
8
p'l
[_)
p,
·rl
H
Cl
[J]
[J]
>-.
p.,
.w
~
[J]
·rl
0
o\'
>-.
p.,
.w
~
-
'H
H
;:J
0
~
~
·rl
>-.
'H
~
[J)
rn
8
8
[J]
rn
'H
0
·rl
0
-
8
o\O
l"ii
p'l
[_)
p'l
[_)
::r:
p,
::;;:
GJ
·rl
8
!i1
'H
·~
GJ
'0
(1j
-
.w
(1j
r-1
H
p'l
[_)
~
rl
o\O
::r:
>-.
""
GJ
'0
GJ
'-'
(1j
r-1
>-.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
0
Source Category
Other Structural
Clay Products
Paints and Allied
Products (major)
Partitions and
Fixtures
Petroleum
Ref]ning: All
Processes (area)
Petroleum
Refining: All
Processes (major)
Pharmaceutical
Preparations and
Manufacturing
(SICs Combined)
Phthalic
Anhydride
Production (area)
Plastic Foam
Products
Manufacturing
Plastics Material
and Resins
Manufacturing
(area)
Porcelain
Electrical
Supplies
Primary Copper
Production
Primary Lead
Smelting
Primary Metal
Products
Manufacturing
(SICs Combined)
Public Building
and Related
Furniture
Pulp and Paper Sulfite Recovery
Furnaces
Scrap or Waste
Tire Incineration
VerDate Sep<11>2014
~
Cl
""
·rl
0.56
r-1
0.0%
0.0%
0.04
0.0%
0.00
0.0%
0.74
0.5%
1. 30
0.8%
0.1%
26.87
0.1%
0.01
4.35
0.11
0.3%
0. 77
0.0%
7.86
0.1%
109.56
1.4%
0.26
0.0%
2.08
0.0%
26.90
0.3%
11.60
0.1%
6.17
0.1%
0.01
0.0%
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
0.00
Frm 00017
0.0%
Fmt 4702
0.01
Sfmt 4725
3.3%
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
EP16DE14.041
74670
BILLING CODE 6560–50–C
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
C. What changes have been made to the
1990 baseline inventory since the 1998
Notice?
The EPA made a number of updates
to the section 112(c)(6) 1990 baseline
inventory and source category list as a
result of new information and further
evaluation of the source categories
during standard development. The EPA
had explained some of those actions in
prior notices, which the EPA has
identified in section III.A above. With
respect to updates that were not
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
provided in prior notices, they are
presented below.
1. Gasoline Distribution (Aviation)
In the 1998 Notice, the EPA identified
the Gasoline Distribution (Aviation)
source category as necessary for
achieving the 90 percent requirement
for alkylated lead. Aircraft use two
general types of fuel: Aviation gasoline
(avgas) and jet fuel. Avgas, which is
used for powering piston engine aircraft,
is the source of alkylated lead emissions
in the Gasoline Distribution (Aviation)
source category. Alkylated lead is added
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
74671
to avgas to reduce engine knock and
help lubricate internal engine
components. Research is underway to
find alternatives to lead for use in avgas.
While characterizing evaporative
emissions of alkylated lead compounds
from aviation gasoline, we became
aware of another stationary source of
other alkylated lead compounds
emissions in 1990. Specifically, we
identified a U.S. facility that was
manufacturing alkylated lead
compounds in 1990. Through
discussions with industry
representatives and technical evaluation
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
EP16DE14.042
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
74672
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
of the information supplied, we were
able to quantify an estimate of the
alkylated lead emissions for the
Alkylated Lead Production source
category for the year 1990 and are
adding this estimate to the section
112(c)(6) baseline inventory. Based on
information provided in the Toxics
Release Inventory (TRI), we identified
reported annual emissions of total lead
compounds from this single alkylated
lead production facility of 22 tons in
1990. The TRI did not provide the
amount of alkylated lead in the total.
Further analysis of the emission
inventory submitted to the state resulted
in an estimate of actual alkylated lead
emissions from this facility of
approximately 18 tons in 1990. As
shown in Table 1, the Alkylated Lead
Production source category (which as
explained above consists solely of this
one facility) contributed 99.7 percent of
the alkylated lead compounds emissions
in the updated 1990 baseline
inventory.9 Alkylated lead compounds
production is regulated by the
Hazardous Organic NESHAP 10 (HON).11
The EPA has therefore, through the
HON, met the 90 percent requirement
under section 112(c)(6) for alkylated
lead. In light of the above, we conclude
that we do not need Gasoline
Distribution (Aviation) to meet the 90
percent requirement for alkylated lead
under section 112(c)(6).
The 1990 baseline alkylated lead
emissions from gasoline distribution
source categories have also been
updated since the 1998 Notice. A review
of the 1990 alkylated lead emissions
from the distribution of leaded gasoline
revealed that the inventory data were
based on inaccurate estimates of
equipment component counts and leak
emission factors.12 Analysis showed
9 In addition to adding the baseline emissions for
the Alkylated Lead Production source category, the
other updates to the section 112(c)(6) baseline
inventory for alkylated lead include addition of the
Upstream Gasoline Distribution (Aviation) (see
section III.C.3) and revised baseline emission
estimates for Gasoline Distribution (Stage I) (see
sections III.A and III.C.2) and Gasoline Distribution
(Aviation) discussed in this section.
10 Also known as National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories:
Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the
Synthetic Organic Chemical Industry and Other
Processes Subject to the Negotiated Regulation for
Equipment Leaks. 59 FR 19402.
11 We further note that U.S. production of
alkylated lead compounds ended in 1993.
12 In the section 112(c)(6) inventory published in
1998, the baseline alkylated lead emissions estimate
for the Gasoline Distribution (Aviation) source
category was based on emission factors from a 1994
proposed major source standard for Gasoline
Distribution (Stage I) (Background Information
Document (BID) Volume I, Proposed National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Gasoline Distribution (Stage I), EPA–453/R–94–
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
that when the corrected equipment leak
data are used, the total estimated 1990
alkylated lead emissions from leaded
gasoline distribution would be less than
one half of the estimate in the 1990
inventory published in the 1998 Notice.
See 71 FR 66067. We have therefore
revised the alkylated lead baseline
emission estimates for all gasoline
distribution source categories, including
Gasoline Distribution (Aviation),
accordingly.
2. Gasoline Distribution Stage I (Area
Sources)
Alkylated lead emissions from this
source category have been updated
since the 1998 Notice in a manner
consistent with Gasoline Distribution
(Aviation), discussed in the previous
section. A review of the 1990 alkylated
lead emissions from the distribution of
leaded gasoline revealed that the
inventory data were based on inaccurate
estimates of equipment component
counts and leak emission factors.13
Analysis showed that when the
corrected equipment leak data are used,
the total estimated 1990 alkylated lead
emissions from leaded gasoline
distribution would be less than one half
of the estimate in the 1990 inventory
published in the 1998 Notice. We have
revised the alkylated lead baseline
emission estimates for all gasoline
distribution source categories, including
Gasoline Distribution Stage I (Area
Source), accordingly.
3. Upstream Gasoline Distribution
(Aviation)
Upstream Gasoline Distribution
(Aviation) is being added to the section
112(c)(6) inventory for emissions of
alkylated lead. At the time we issued
the 1998 Notice, we believed that avgas
was transported directly from refineries
to the airport terminals. Thus, we did
not estimate alkylated lead emissions
from the distribution of avgas
‘‘upstream’’ of the airport facilities in
the section 112(c)(6) emission inventory
published in 1998. However, we have
since learned that avgas is distributed
through bulk terminals located at
refineries, as well as through some
stand-alone bulk terminals, prior to
being delivered to airport facilities. We
002a). Based on analysis of public comments on
that proposed rule, EPA applied updated
equipment leak emission factors for the
promulgated major source standard for Gasoline
Distribution (Stage I) (BID Volume II, Promulgated
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Gasoline Distribution (Stage I), EPA–
453/R–94–002b). The updated emission factors
were also applied in the promulgation of area
source standards for Gasoline Distribution (Stage I)
(Area Source).
13 See footnote 4.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
have therefore updated the 112(c)(6)
baseline inventory for alkylated lead to
include estimated 1990-base year
alkylated lead emissions from the
distribution of avgas ‘‘upstream’’ of the
airport facilities. The alkylated lead
emissions for this category are presented
in Table 1.
4. Use of 16–PAH Inventory for
Polycyclic Organic Matter
In the Clean Air Act, POM is defined
as ‘‘organic compounds with more than
one benzene ring and which have a
boiling point greater than or equal to
100 °C’’. As shown in the 1998 Notice,
we created three inventories (7–PAH,14
16–PAH,15 and extractable organic
matter (EOM) 16) to represent baseline
POM emissions. Of the three POM
baseline inventories, the 16–PAH
inventory is the most robust, with data
on 16–PAH emissions for 94 categories.
In contrast, we have very limited data
on EOM, with data on EOM emissions
for only 18 source categories.17 The lack
of available data on EOM emissions
creates a distorted picture of the relative
contributions of source categories for
which there are available EOM data.
The lack of source categories making up
the total EOM inventory makes the
relative contribution of the few
categories that do have data
unrealistically inflated. We therefore
cannot say with confidence that, by
using the baseline inventory for EOM,
we are capturing 90 percent of the
baseline POM emissions, as required by
section 112(c)(6). Similarly, we have
data on 7–PAH for 32 categories,
considerably fewer than the 94
categories for which we have 16–PAH
data. Therefore, the 16–PAH inventory
allows for the most accurate
representation of the universe of
categories that emit POM. Because the
use of all three baseline inventories is
neither required nor necessary, and in
light of the concern described above
with the EOM and 7–PAH inventories,
14 Composed of benz(a)anthracene,
benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(b)fluoranthene,
benzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene,
dibenz(a,h)anthracene, and indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene.
15 Composed of benz(a)anthracene,
benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(b)fluoranthene,
benzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene,
dibenz(a,h)anthracene, indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene,
acenaphthene, acenaphthylene, anthracene,
benzo(ghi)perylene, fluoranthene, fluorene,
naphthalene, phenanthrene, and pyrene.
16 Any methylene chloride extractable organic
matter, measured gravimetrically.
17 When justifying its use in the 1998 inventory
background document, we said that the EPA would
undertake an effort to develop a robust inventory
for EOM sources to feed into the CAA section
112(c)(6) inventory. Had more data been gathered,
perhaps EOM would have proved to be a more
useful indicator of POM. However, the anticipated
inventory was not developed.
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
we decided to use only the 16–PAH
baseline inventory for determining the
90 percent threshold for POM under
section 112(c)(6).
5. Updates to the 1990 Baseline
Emission Inventory for Mercury
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
As mentioned above, the EPA added
1990 mercury emission estimates for
EAF and Gold Mine Ore Production and
Processing area source categories into
the section 112(c)(6) total baseline
inventory for mercury. In addition, the
EPA discovered that the 112(c)(6)
inventory for mercury published in the
1998 Federal Register notice included
inaccurate estimates for a number of
source categories and updated these
estimates. These updates are discussed
below.
a. Industrial/Commercial Boilers. The
estimate of mercury emissions from
Industrial/Commercial Boilers that was
presented in the 1998 Federal Register
notice for section 112(c)(6) was 28.9
tons of mercury for year 1990. There
were a number of technical problems
with this estimate, especially for coalfired boilers. One significant issue is
that the activity level (2,820 trillion
British thermal units (BTUs)) used in
the calculations in the section 112(c)(6)
inventory background document was
incorrect. This activity level represented
all coal use in industry, including
boilers and other uses (e.g., coke ovens).
The activity level used should have
been for boilers only. A more accurate
activity level for 1990 would be about
1,633 trillion BTUs.18
Additionally, we also believe that the
emissions factors used to calculate the
original estimate from coal-fired boilers
were inaccurate. The emission factors
were based on an assumption of zero
control and did not account for coal
washing. At that time, the EPA stated
‘‘because mercury reductions from coal
washing and any other reductions that
may occur across existing control
devices are not accounted for, the
emissions may be overestimated.’’ 19
Applying emission factors used in the
development of the major and area
source Boiler NESHAP 20 to the revised
18 Estimate based on 1990 historical statistics
from the Department of Energy’s Energy
Information Administration Web site of coal use in
industrial/commercial sectors (not including coke
plants).
19 Mercury Study Report to Congress. December
1997. Available at https://www.epa.gov/hg/
report.htm.
20 The revised emission factor for major source
boilers for this inventory was generated using a
weighted average of the six emission factors for
various types of control used in the February 21,
2011, Boiler NESHAP. The revised emission factor
for area sources was the uncontrolled group in the
Boiler NESHAP because these sources were largely
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:37 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
activity level for coal-fired boilers yields
estimates of roughly 2 tons and 1 ton of
mercury emissions for major and area
sources, respectively. Emissions factors
for oil-fired boilers (6.8 lb/trillion BTUs
and 7.2 lb/trillion BTUs) were also too
high. Converting these emission factors
into mercury concentrations in oil
results in an estimate of about 100 parts
per billion (ppb) mercury
concentrations in oil. However, based
on data gathered and analyzed for the
1998 EPA Utility Air Toxics Report to
Congress, the average mercury
concentration in oil is about 10 ppb.
Moreover, the emissions factor for
residual oil-fired boilers (of 0.4 lbs per
trillion BTUs) provided in the 1997 EPA
Locating and Estimating document 21 is
about 10 times lower than the emission
factors used for the original section
112(c)(6) estimates for oil-fired boilers.
The information discussed above
suggests that the emissions estimates for
mercury provided in the 1998 Notice for
oil-fired boilers were overestimated by
an order of magnitude. A more accurate
estimate of total mercury emissions
from oil-fired boilers (major and area
sources) is about 0.6 tons for 1990, as
reflected in Table 1.
b. Aerospace Industries (Surface
Coating). Aerospace Industries (Surface
Coating) had an estimate of 4 tons of
mercury emissions in the 112(c)(6)
inventory published in the 1998 Notice.
Another inventory developed for year
1990 for other regulatory purposes (the
112(k) 1990 inventory) had a much
lower estimate for this category (0.0026
tpy). Because of the large discrepancy,
we reviewed the 112(c)(6) inventory
data for this category, including
reviewing the original emissions factor
and calculations. We also consulted
with an industry representative. The
estimate in the 1998 Notice was based
on an extremely conservative
assumption. According to a 1997 docket
memo,22 the emissions estimate was
derived from reviewing Material Safety
Data Sheets (MSDS) from five of the
major coating suppliers. One of these
MSDS showed trace amounts of
mercury in only two products (0.00002
percent by weight), which was rounded
uncontrolled with respect to mercury emissions in
1990.
21 US EPA (1997): Locating and Estimating Air
Emissions From Sources of Mercury and Mercury
Compounds. Report EPA–454/R–97–012, (NTIS
PB98–117054), Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC. Available
at: https://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/le/.
22 Memo from Dave Reeves, Midwest Research
Institute to Barbara Driscoll, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards regarding HAP emission estimates
for aerospace surface coating. November 17, 1997.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
74673
up five orders of magnitude to 1 percent
in the inventory analysis.
In light of the above, we concluded
that this original estimate of mercury
emissions (or 4 tons) from Aerospace
Industries was substantially
overestimated. Therefore, we searched
and gathered information to calculate a
more reasonable estimate. We obtained
information on sales of aerospace
coatings and mercuric mildewcides in
1990. Using these data, potential
mercury emissions for 1990 were
calculated, as described in the following
paragraphs.
In 1990, aerospace coatings accounted
for 0.1 percent of the volume of coatings
produced. In 1990, approximately
400,000 pounds of mercuric
mildewcide/fungicide (as mercury) were
sold into the entire coatings market (this
amount substantially decreased after
1990 to nearly zero). Assuming these
products were used throughout the
industry, we calculate that 400 lbs (i.e.,
0.1% * 400,000 pounds = 400 lbs) of
mercuric mildewcides/fungicides were
used in aerospace coatings in 1990.
Thus, the maximum emissions would
have been 400 lbs of mercury assuming
100 percent of mercury in coatings were
released. However, mildewcides/
fungicides are intended to retard the
growth of fungi on applied surfaces over
time. They are intended to remain to a
large extent in the coating substrate. We
believe that at least 50 percent of the
mildewcide/fungicide remains in the
substrate. Therefore, mercury releases
from aerospace coatings are estimated to
be up to 200 lbs in 1990. Given this
information and calculations, we
estimate that this source category
emitted about 0.1 tons of mercury in
1990.
c. Industrial Turbines and Internal
Combustion Engines. In the 1998 Notice,
the mercury emissions from industrial
turbines and internal combustion
engines fired by natural gas were 1.6
tons and 4.7 tons, respectively. The
emissions factors used in those original
estimates for these two source categories
were 6.63 × 10¥6 lb/MMBTU and 1.14
× 10¥5 lb/MMBTU, respectively.
However, available data 23 indicate that
the level of mercury in natural gas is
very low and, therefore, mercury
emissions from this category are very
low. Based on this information, we
updated the 1990 mercury emissions for
this category. As shown in Table 1, the
revised mercury emissions estimates
23 Mercury Study Report to Congress. December
1997. Available at https://www.epa.gov/hg/
report.htm. Locating and Estimating Air Emissions
from Sources of Mercury and Mercury Compounds.
December 1997. Available at https://www.epa.gov/
ttnchie1/le/.
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
74674
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
from these two source categories are
0.001 and 0.009 tons, respectively.
d. Human Crematories. The mercury
emissions from human crematories in
the 1998 baseline 112(c)(6) inventory
(0.000377 tons per year) were revised
based on data used to calculate mercury
emissions in the 112(k) area source
inventory, which was developed
subsequent to the 1998 Notice. This
emission factor led to a revised estimate
of 0.6 tons of mercury in 1990 emitted
from human crematories.
e. Blast Furnaces and Steel Mills.
Mercury emissions from blast furnaces
and steel mills were reported as 0.25
tons in the 1998 baseline 112(c)(6)
inventory. Further review of this
estimate led to revision of the mercury
estimate from blast furnaces and steel
mills as well as electric arc furnace
steelmaking (as discussed in section
III.C above). Based on a revised
emission factor 24 from scrap steel, the
revised estimated mercury emissions are
3.1 tons for blast furnaces and steel
mills.
f. Portland Cement. We believe the
estimate for mercury emissions from
Portland Cement Manufacturing nonhazardous waste kilns (4.13 tons) in the
1998 Notice was slightly
underestimated. We used the mercury
emissions and installed clinker capacity
from 2006 25 to generate a ratio of
mercury emissions per ton of clinker
and applied this ratio to the 1990
clinker capacity. The mercury emissions
in 1990 were revised upward to 5.64
tons for this category.
D. What are the emissions standards
that the EPA has promulgated to meet
the 90 percent requirement under
section 112(c)(6)?
The EPA has promulgated emissions
standards sufficient to satisfy the
112(c)(6) requirement that sources
accounting for not less than 90 percent
of the aggregate emissions of seven
specific HAP are subject to standards
under 112(d)(2) or 112(d)(4). Table 2
provides a list of the emissions
standards, including the name of each of
the source categories, name of the
emissions standards that apply, and the
rule citation for each (i.e., CFR Part and
Subpart). Table 2 provides crossreferences for the 112(c)(6) category
names with the associated emission
standards (which may reference a
source category by a name different
from that used in the section 112(c)(6)
baseline inventory and source category
listing). Table 3 provides a list of the
specific regulations (including CFR
citations, Part and Subpart) that address
90 percent or more of each of the
112(c)(6) HAPs.
TABLE 2—CATEGORIES OF SOURCES WHOSE EMISSIONS OF 112(c)(6) HAPS ARE SUBJECT TO 112(d)(2), 112(d)(4), OR
129 STANDARDS 26
Section 112(c)(6) category name
Emission standard name(s)
Aerospace Industry (Surface Coating) ..............
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
the Aerospace Industries.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry for Process Vents, Storage Vessels, Transfer Operations, and Wastewater.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Equipment Leaks.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Certain Processes Subject to the Negotiated
Regulation for Equipment Leaks.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
the Asphalt Roofing Manufacturing.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
the Integrated Iron and Steel Manufacture.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry for Process Vents, Storage Vessels, Transfer Operations, and Wastewater.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Equipment Leaks.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Certain Processes Subject to the Negotiated
Regulation for Equipment Leaks.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry.
Alkylated Lead Production .................................
Asphalt Roofing Production ...............................
Blast Furnace and Steel Mills ............................
Chemical Manufacturing: Cyclic Crude and Intermediate Production.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Chlorinated Solvents Production .......................
24 Analysis of Mercury Data for Electric Arc
Furnace Steelmaking. Prepared for U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies
and Program Division, Metals and Minerals Group.
July 18, 2007. Docket Item 0070 in EPA Docket
Number OAR–2004–0083.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
25 Estimate of 2006 installed clinker capacity:
94,690,000 metric tons clinker per year. Estimate of
2006 mercury emissions from major and area
sources: 7.27 tons. Estimate of 1990 installed
clinker capacity: 73,518,000 metric tons clinker per
year.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
CFR part and subpart
40 CFR part 63 subpart GG.
40 CFR part 63 subpart F.
40 CFR part 63 subpart G.
40 CFR part 63 subpart H.
40 CFR part 63 subpart I.
40 CFR part 63 subpart
LLLLL.
40 CFR part 63 subpart
FFFFF.
40 CFR part 63 subpart F.
40 CFR part 63 subpart G.
40 CFR part 63 subpart H.
40 CFR part 63 subpart I.
40 CFR part 63 subpart F.
26 Because many of these standards were
developed to meet the EPA’s obligation under CAA
section 112(d)(1), the EPA had not focused on what
was needed to meet its section 112(c)(6) obligation
at the time of these rulemakings. Therefore, the EPA
did not reference section 112(c)(6) in the preambles
to some rules.
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
74675
TABLE 2—CATEGORIES OF SOURCES WHOSE EMISSIONS OF 112(c)(6) HAPS ARE SUBJECT TO 112(d)(2), 112(d)(4), OR
129 STANDARDS 26—Continued
Section 112(c)(6) category name
Emission standard name(s)
Coke Ovens: By-Product Recovery Plants ........
Coke Ovens: Charging, Topside & Door Leaks
Coke Ovens: Pushing, Quenching & Battery
Stacks.
Commercial Printing: Gravure ...........................
Electric Arc Furnaces (EAF)—Secondary Steel
Fabricated Metal Products .................................
Gasoline Distribution (Stage 1) ..........................
Gold Mines .........................................................
Hazardous Waste Incineration ...........................
Industrial Organic Chemicals Manufacturing .....
Industrial Stationary IC Engines—Diesel ...........
Industrial Stationary IC Engines—Natural Gas
Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Boilers .........
Lightweight Aggregate Kilns ..............................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Medical Waste Incineration ................................
Mercury Cell Chlor Alkali Production .................
Municipal Waste Combustion ............................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
CFR part and subpart
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry for Process Vents, Storage Vessels, Transfer Operations, and Wastewater.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Equipment Leaks.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Certain Processes Subject to the Negotiated
Regulation for Equipment Leaks.
National Emission Standard for Benzene Emissions from
Coke By-Product Recovery Plants.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Source Categories and for Coke Oven Batteries.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Coke Ovens: Pushing, Quenching, and Battery Stacks.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Source Categories and for Coke Oven Batteries.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Coke Ovens: Pushing, Quenching, and Battery Stacks.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Printing and Publishing Industry.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Area Sources: Electric Arc Furnace Steelmaking Facilities.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Gasoline Distribution Facilities (Bulk Gasoline Terminals
and Pipeline Breakout Stations).
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Gold Mine Ore Processing and Production Area Source
Category.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
from Hazardous Waste Combustors.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry for Process Vents, Storage Vessels, Transfer Operations, and Wastewater.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Equipment Leaks.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Certain Processes Subject to the Negotiated
Regulation for Equipment Leaks.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Boilers and Process
Heaters.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Area Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
from Hazardous Waste Combustors.
Standards of Performance and Emissions Guidelines for Hospitals/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Mercury Emissions from Mercury Cell Chlor Alkali Plants.
Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and
Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources: Large Municipal
Waste Combustion Units.
Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and
Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Small
Municipal Waste Combustion Units.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
40 CFR part 63 subpart G.
40 CFR part 63 subpart H.
40 CFR part 63 subpart I.
40 CFR part 61 subpart L.
40 CFR part 63 subpart L.
40 CFR part 63 subpart
CCCCC.
40 CFR part 63 subpart L.
40 CFR part 63 subpart
CCCCC.
40 CFR part 63 subpart KK.
40 CFR part 63 subpart
YYYYY.
40 CFR part 63 subpart
MMMM.
40 CFR part 63 subpart R.
40 CFR part 63 subpart
EEEEEEE.
40 CFR part 63 subpart EEE.
40 CFR part 63 subpart F.
40 CFR part 63 subpart G.
40 CFR part 63 subpart H.
40 CFR part 63 subpart I.
40 CFR part 63 subpart ZZZZ.
40 CFR part 63 subpart ZZZZ.
40 CFR part 63 subpart
DDDDD.
40 CFR part 63 subpart
JJJJJJ.
40 CFR part 63 subpart EEE.
40 CFR part 60 subpart Ce,
Ec; & 40 CFR part 62 subpart HHH.
40 CFR part 63 subpart IIIII.
40 CFR part 60 subpart Cb,
Ea, Eb; & 40 CFR part 62
subpart FFF.
40 CFR part 60 subpart
AAAA, BBBB & 40 CFR part
62 subpart JJJ.
74676
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2—CATEGORIES OF SOURCES WHOSE EMISSIONS OF 112(c)(6) HAPS ARE SUBJECT TO 112(d)(2), 112(d)(4), OR
129 STANDARDS 26—Continued
Section 112(c)(6) category name
Emission standard name(s)
Naphthalene Production ....................................
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry for Process Vents, Storage Vessels, Transfer Operations, and Wastewater.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Equipment Leaks.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Certain Processes Subject to the Negotiated
Regulation for Equipment Leaks.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Paper and Other Web Coating.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Pesticide Active Ingredient Production.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry for Process Vents, Storage Vessels, Transfer Operations, and Wastewater.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Equipment Leaks.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
from Petroleum Refineries.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic Cracking Units, Catalytic
Reforming Units, and Sulfur Recovery Units.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry for Process Vents, Storage Vessels, Transfer Operations, and Wastewater.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Equipment Leaks.
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Certain Processes Subject to the Negotiated
Regulation for Equipment Leaks.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Group IV Polymers and Resins.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
from Hazardous Waste Combustors.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda,
Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda,
Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Secondary Aluminum Production.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Secondary Lead Smelting.
Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and
Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources: Sewage Sludge
Incineration Units.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair (Surface Coating).
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light Duty Trucks
(Surface Coating of Plastic Parts and Products).
Paints and Allied Products (Major) ....................
Paper Coated and Laminated, Packaging .........
Pesticides Manufacture & Agricultural Chemicals.
Petroleum Refining: All Processes ....................
Phthalic Anhydride Production ...........................
Plastics Material and Resins Manufacturing .....
Portland Cement Manufacture: Hazardous
Waste Kilns.
Portland Cement Manufacture: Non-Hazardous
Waste Kilns.
Primary Aluminum Production ...........................
Pulp and Paper—Kraft Recovery Furnaces ......
Pulp and Paper—Lime Kilns ..............................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Secondary Aluminum Smelting ..........................
Secondary Lead Smelting ..................................
Sewage Sludge Incineration ..............................
Ship Building and Repair (Surface Coating) .....
Transportation Equipment Manufacturing (SICs
Combined).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
CFR part and subpart
16DEP1
40 CFR part 63 subpart F.
40 CFR part 63 subpart G.
40 CFR part 63 subpart H.
40 CFR part 63 subpart I.
40 CFR part 63 subpart FFFF.
40 CFR part 63 subpart JJJJ.
40 CFR part 63 subpart HHH.
40 CFR part 63 subpart F.
40 CFR part 63 subpart G.
40 CFR part 63 subpart H.
40 CFR part 63 subpart CC.
40 CFR part 63 subpart UUU.
40 CFR part 63 subpart F.
40 CFR part 63 subpart G.
40 CFR part 63 subpart H.
40 CFR part 63 subpart I.
40 CFR part 63 subpart JJJ.
40 CFR part 63 subpart EEE.
40 CFR part 63 subpart LLL.
40 CFR part 63 subpart LL.
40 CFR part 63 subpart MM.
40 CFR part 63 subpart MM.
40 CFR part 63 subpart RRR.
40 CFR part 63 subpart X.
40 CFR part 60 subparts
LLLL, MMMM.
40 CFR part 63 subpart II.
40 CFR part 63 subpart
PPPP.
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
74677
TABLE 2—CATEGORIES OF SOURCES WHOSE EMISSIONS OF 112(c)(6) HAPS ARE SUBJECT TO 112(d)(2), 112(d)(4), OR
129 STANDARDS 26—Continued
Section 112(c)(6) category name
Emission standard name(s)
CFR part and subpart
Wood Household Furniture Manufacturing ........
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
from Wood Furniture Manufacturing Operations.
40 CFR part 63 subpart JJ.
TABLE 3—FEDERAL REGULATIONS 27 ENSURING THAT SOURCES ACCOUNTING FOR AT LEAST 90 PERCENT OF THE
AGGREGATE EMISSIONS OF EACH 112(c)(6) POLLUTANT ARE SUBJECT TO 112(d)(2) OR 112(d)(4) STANDARDS
Percent of
aggregate
emissions
subject to
regulation
112(c)(6) pollutant
Alkylated Lead Compounds .......................................................
Polycyclic Organic Matter (Using 16–PAH Inventory) ...............
99.7
90.0
Hexachlorobenzene ...................................................................
Mercury Compounds ..................................................................
100
90.3
Polychlorinated Biphenyls ..........................................................
94.5
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofurans (furan)
achlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (dioxin).
95.3
and
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. Surrogate Pollutants Used by the
EPA To Ensure That the Section
112(c)(6) Requirements are Fulfilled
The EPA has promulgated regulations,
‘‘assuring that sources accounting for
not less than 90 per centum of the
aggregate emissions of each such
pollutant are subject to standards under
subsection (d)(2) or (d)(4).’’ 42 U.S.C.
7412(c)(6). The EPA set the required
standards under two approaches. In the
course of promulgating MACT
standards, the EPA has often established
emission standards that directly
regulated section 112(c)(6) HAP and
explained that these standards
contribute to fulfilling the agency’s
obligations under section 112(c)(6). For
example, the NESHAPs for Gold Mine
Ore Processing and Production (76 FR
9450), Portland Cement Manufacturing
Industry (75 FR 54970), Municipal
Waste Combustion Units (70 FR 75348),
Hospitals/Medical/Infectious Waste
Incinerators (74 FR 51368), Hazardous
Waste Combustors (70 FR 59402),
Sewage Sludge Incineration Units (76
FR 15372), and several other source
categories, include emissions limits that
specifically address mercury emissions.
27 An expanded version of this table, including
Federal Register citations, is available in the docket
for this action.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
2,3,7,8-Tetr
Code of Federal Regulations part and subparts that include
112(d)(2), 112 (d)(4), or 129 standards
40 CFR part 63 subparts F, G, H, I.
40 CFR part 63 subparts F, G, H, I, L, R, X, CC, GG, II, JJ,
KK, LL, MM, EEE, JJJ, LLL, MMM, UUU, FFFF, JJJJ,
MMMM, PPPP, ZZZZ, CCCCC, DDDDD, FFFFF, LLLLL,
JJJJJJ; 40 CFR part 60 subpart Cb, Ce, Ea, Eb, AAAA,
BBBB; 40 CFR part 62 subpart FFF, HHH, JJJ.
40 CFR part 63 subparts F, G, H, I, HHH.
40 CFR part 63 subparts GG, LL, MM, EEE, LLL, DDDDD,
IIIII, YYYYY, JJJJJJ, EEEEEEE; 40 CFR part 60 subpart
Cb, Ce, Ea, Eb, AAAA, BBBB, LLLL, MMMM; 40 CFR part
62 subpart FFF, HHH, JJJ.
40 CFR part 63 subparts EEE; 40 CFR part 60 subpart Cb,
Ce, Ea, Eb, AAAA, BBBB; 40 CFR part 62 subpart FFF,
HHH, JJJ.
40 CFR part 63 subparts X, LL, EEE, LLL, MMM, DDDDD,
JJJJJJ; 40 CFR part 60 subpart Cb, Ce, Ea, Eb, AAAA,
BBBB; 40 CFR part 62 subpart FFF, HHH, JJJ.
Likewise, the EPA has promulgated
many regulations that specifically
address dioxins and furans to achieve
the 90 percent requirement (such as
NESHAPs for Municipal Waste
Combustion Units (70 FR 75348),
Hospitals/Medical/Infectious Waste
Incinerators (74 FR 51368), Hazardous
Waste Combustors (70 FR 59402), and
Secondary Aluminum Production (64
FR 6946)). The public was provided an
opportunity to comment on the above
mentioned agency statements regarding
its section 112(c)(6) obligations, and
comments on those statements were
addressed in those rulemakings.
In some regulations, the EPA
subjected section 112(c)(6) HAP to
MACT level of control by setting
emission limits for another HAP or
compound,28 which serves as a
surrogate for the targeted section
112(c)(6) HAP. It is well established that
‘‘EPA may use a surrogate [substance] to
regulate hazardous pollutants if it is
‘reasonable’ to do so’’ Nat’l Lime Ass’n
v. EPA, 233 F.3d 625, 637 (D.C. Cir.
2000) (upholding EPA decision to
regulate particulate matter (‘‘PM’’)
emissions as a surrogate for regulation
of HAP metal emissions from cement
kilns, based on evidence that ‘‘HAP
28 Some standards used non-HAP compounds (or
groups of compounds) as surrogates for HAP.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
metals are invariably present in cement
kiln PM,’’ id. at 639); see also, e.g.,
Sierra Club v. EPA, 353 F.3d 976, 982–
85 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (upholding the EPA’s
use of particulate matter as a surrogate
for HAP emissions in setting MACT
standards for primary copper smelters);
Bluewater Network v. EPA, 370 F.3d 1,
18 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (upholding the EPA’s
regulation of HC emissions as a
surrogate for regulation of fine PM
emissions). See also Kennecott Greens
Creek Min. Co. v. Mine Safety and
Health Admin., 476 F.3d 946, 954–55
(D.C. Cir. 2007) (‘‘there is nothing
inherently problematic with an
regulating one substance as a surrogate
for another substance.’’). Some
examples of the EPA’s regulation of
section 112(c)(6) HAP through
surrogates include:
• National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Hazardous
Waste Combustors (64 FR 52828 and 70
FR 59402). POM and PCBs were
regulated through surrogate substances
(total hydrocarbons and carbon
monoxide (CO)). See 64 FR 52847 and
70 FR 59432 for discussions of these
surrogates.
• Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources and Emissions
Guidelines for Existing Sources:
Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
74678
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Incinerators (74 FR 51368). POM and
PCBs were regulated through surrogate
substances (CO and dioxins/furans). See
74 FR 51390, 51399 for discussion of
these surrogates.
• Standards of Performance for New
Stationary Sources and Emission
Guidelines for Existing Sources: Large
Municipal Waste Combustors (70 FR
75348). POM and PCBs were regulated
through surrogate substances (CO and
dioxins/furans). See 70 FR 75356 for
discussion of these surrogates.
• National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major
Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and
Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters
(76 FR 15608). POM was regulated using
CO as a surrogate. See 76 FR 15653 for
discussion of CO as a surrogate for
POM.
In all of the above mentioned
standards, which were promulgated
through notice and comment
rulemaking, the EPA had explained its
section 112(c)(6) obligations and, to the
extent surrogates were used, the
surrogacy relationship to the relevant
section 112(c)(6) HAP. We are not
requesting comments on these prior
rulemakings.
However, in some standards
promulgated prior to the EPA’s
development of the baseline emissions
inventory for section 112(c)(6) and
publication of the initial listing of
categories in the 1998 Notice, the EPA
did not always explain the surrogacy
relationship. As explained below, the
surrogates chosen for section 112(c)(6)
HAP in such rulemakings are reasonable
and ensure that the section 112(c)(6)
HAP are ‘‘subject to standards’’ for the
purposes of section 112(c)(6).
A. Surrogates for POM
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
1. Coke Oven Emissions as a Surrogate
for POM
The EPA promulgated emissions
standards under section 112(d)(2) for
coke oven emissions, which include
emissions of POM and other HAP from
coke oven batteries. See 40 CFR part 63,
Subpart L and Subpart CCCCC. POM is
a constituent of coke oven emissions.
See 57 FR 57535 and 69 FR 48341. The
EPA considered POM together with
other HAP that compose coke oven
emissions because of the difficulty of
measuring specific pollutants, including
POM, and because of the fugitive and
variable nature of the emissions. See 66
FR 33533 (discussing the impracticality
of measuring specific HAP compounds
emitted from coke ovens). Coke oven
batteries are not enclosed sources.
Consequently, coke oven emissions are
released from many different pieces of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
coke oven equipment through leaks that
can change in size and location over
time. The MACT standards for Coke
Oven Batteries were designed to
minimize coke oven emissions which
include POM as well as other HAP (see
69 FR 48341). Because of the
technological difficulty of collecting and
measuring coke oven emission from
coke oven batteries, the EPA concluded
that a mass emission limitation for coke
ovens was not technologically or
economically practicable. See 66 FR
33533. Instead, the EPA found limits
based on visible emissions to be the
only feasible means of regulating coke
oven emissions (including POM) from
coke oven batteries at the time the
MACT standards were developed. Id.
Such limits are expressed in terms of
the maximum allowable seconds of
visible emissions per charge for the
charging system and the maximum
allowable percent of doors, lids, and
offtake systems from which visible
emissions may occur at any one time.
For existing by-product batteries, the
final rule limits visible emissions from
coke oven doors, topside port lids, and
offtake systems. Accordingly, the MACT
standard requires a visible emission
method to measure coke oven emissions
and comply with the standard.
Under the standard, POM is
controlled at the same time as other
HAP. Observation and engineering
theory indicate that a reduction in
visible coke oven emissions results in a
reduction in mass emissions. For the
reasons stated above, the EPA has
assured that coke oven emissions
(which include POM) from coke oven
batteries are subject to MACT level of
control, as required under section
112(c)(6).
2. Total HAP, Total Organic Carbon,
Total Hydrocarbons, and Total Organic
HAP
Many of the source categories counted
towards our 90 percent requirement for
POM are surface coating operations. In
the NESHAP for Aerospace Industries 29
(60 FR 45956), the EPA set MACT
standards for total HAP in surface
coatings, which serves as a surrogate for
POM in coatings. Polycyclic organic
matter is a constituent of total HAP. The
Aerospace Industries NESHAP regulates
POM through limitation of total HAP
content in coatings applied (i.e., grams
of HAP per kilogram of coating used).
HAP are effectively controlled by
reducing those HAP in surface coatings,
29 Note that the NESHAP for this source category
also includes standards for volatile organic
compounds. The POM emitted from this source
category is naphthalene, which is considered a
volatile organic compound.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
which prevents them from being
subsequently emitted.
A number of other categories subject
to MACT standards for the purposes of
section 112(c)(6) are also surface coating
processes (fabricated metal products
manufacturing at major sources
(NESHAP for Surface Coating of
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products,
69 FR 130), coated and laminated paper
and packages at major sources (NESHAP
for Paper and Other Web Coating, 67 FR
72330), paint and allied products
(NESHAP for Miscellaneous Organic
Chemical Manufacturing, 68 FR 63852),
wood household furniture
manufacturing at major sources
(NESHAP for Wood Furniture
Manufacturing Operations, 60 FR
62930), transportation equipment
manufacturing (NESHAP for Surface
Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty
Trucks, 69 FR 22602), ship building and
repair (NESHAP for Shipbuilding and
Ship Repair (Surface Coating)
Operations, 60 FR 64330), and
commercial printing: Gravure at major
sources (NESHAP for Printing and
Publishing Industry, 67 FR 27132)).
These source categories address POM
(and other organic HAP emissions) by
regulating total organic HAP in coatings
and limiting emissions of those HAP
from coatings to levels equivalent to
those of the best performing coatings
(i.e., coatings with the lowest levels of
total organic HAP) through MACT
analyses, as required under section
112(d)(2). Total organic HAP serves as a
surrogate for POM and other organic
HAP compounds present in coatings in
these NESHAPS. These NESHAPs
employed identical rationales when
limiting HAP in coatings and there was
no technical basis in any of the above
mentioned surface coating NESHAPs to
differentiate between POM and other
organic HAP present in coatings.
Some source categories that are
subject to MACT standards for the
purposes of section 112(c)(6) employ
combustion processes that control
organic HAP. In numerous rulemakings,
the EPA has set standards for
combustion processes based on the long
term performance of a combustion
device under conditions typically
encountered in industrial
applications.30 In these NESHAPs, the
EPA determined that limiting outlet
concentrations of organic compounds to
20 parts per million by volume (ppmv)
or reducing total organic compound
emissions by 98 percent was MACT for
combustion processes. Some standards
counted towards meeting our 90 percent
30 See memorandum titled ‘‘Thermal Incinerators
and Flares,’’ available in the docket to this action.
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
requirement for the purposes of section
112(c)(6) set such MACT standards.
Two section 112(c)(6) categories (pulp
and paper—kraft recovery furnaces and
pulp and paper—lime kilns) are
combustion processes that are subject to
the NESHAPs for Pulp and Paper
Production (63 FR 18504 and 66 FR
3180). Kraft recovery furnaces and lime
kilns at pulp and paper mills are
combustion processes that are used to
recover chemicals in the paper
production process as well as to control
HAP emissions from other sources at
pulp and paper mills. The EPA
determined that a properly operated
kraft recovery furnace or lime kiln
would reduce total HAP exiting the
combustion process by at least 98
percent (or to a level below 20 parts per
million) and established this standard as
a surrogate for organic HAP, including
POM. See 63 FR 18508. This level of
control was determined to be MACT for
these sources and the two equivalent
forms of the standard (98 percent
reduction of total HAP or a numerical
emission limit of 20 ppmv of total HAP)
ensure that organic HAP are effectively
controlled. Id. Effective operation of the
kraft recovery furnace or lime kiln will
indiscriminately destroy POM along
with other HAP present in the exhaust
gases and is considered MACT.31 There
was no technical basis for differentiating
between POM and other organic HAP
emitted from these chemical recovery
processes since they are present together
and controlled using the same
combustion process.
Other section 112(c)(6) source
categories subject to standards for total
organic HAP as a surrogate for POM
include industrial organic chemicals
manufacturing and naphthalene
production. Total organic HAP is used
as a surrogate for regulating POM
emissions from industrial organic
chemicals manufacturing and
naphthalene production, both of which
are subject to the HON NESHAP.32 POM
is indiscriminately and effectively
controlled through the same combustion
processes as other organic HAP
regulated by the HON. In the HON, the
EPA grouped all of the organic HAP
(including POM) together and looked at
31 Use of a properly operated thermal oxidizer
(operated at a minimum temperature of 1,600 °F
and a minimum residence time of 0.75 seconds)
was also an equivalent control option.
32 Plastics material and resins manufacturing at
major sources are subject to the NESHAP for Group
IV Polymers and Resins, 61 FR 48208. The
requirements in this NESHAP mirror those found in
the HON. POM is regulated through the same
surrogate as the HON, as described in this section.
This category references the HON in its regulatory
requirements and the rationale for surrogates
chosen is identical to the HON.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
the total organic HAP for purposes of
applying controls and projecting
emissions reductions (except for
wastewater where HAP-specific
standards were promulgated). For the
industrial organic chemicals
manufacturing and naphthalene
production source categories, this was
appropriate because emissions of POM
come from the same types of activities
and operations as emissions of the other
HAP and the MACT combustion
controls used to limit POM have
essentially the same performance
regardless of the individual compound.
In other words, the EPA had no
technical reason to make distinctions
among various organic HAP except in
the case of wastewater, for which the
EPA promulgated organic HAP-specific
standards. As a result, the control
measures required by the HON reduce
emissions of POM and other organic
HAP from process vents, storage vessels,
transfer racks, and equipment leaks.
Emissions of POM generated from these
source categories are not controlled
differently than emissions of other
organic HAP. By contrast, the EPA did
not group all of the organic HAP
together for wastewater because
different HAP compounds have
different physical properties when
mixed with water. The analyses for
wastewater streams were conducted on
an organic HAP-specific basis, and the
EPA promulgated organic HAP-specific
standards for wastewater streams,
including a specific standard for
naphthalene, based upon physical
property information for each HAP. See
40 CFR part 63, subpart G, app. (table
9) listing the control requirements for
each, including a 99 percent control
requirement for naphthalene. The
control requirement for naphthalene is
designed to reduce emissions of POM
from wastewater streams generated
during industrial inorganic chemicals
manufacturing and naphthalene
production.
The section 112(c)(6) category
‘‘petroleum refining—all processes’’ is
subject to two NESHAPs for petroleum
refineries (NESHAP for Petroleum
Refineries, 60 FR 43244, and NESHAP
for Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic
Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming
Units, and Sulfur Recovery Units, 67 FR
17762). In the NESHAPs for petroleum
refineries, the EPA set MACT standards
for total organic carbon,33 which serves
as a surrogate for POM emitted from
combustion processes. POM is a
constituent of total organic carbon and
is controlled through the same
33 This NESHAP also allows sources to measure
total organic HAP for compliance purposes.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
74679
combustion process as other organic
carbon-containing compounds emitted
by this source category. Sources subject
to standards for total organic carbon in
the NESHAP for petroleum refineries
subject organic compounds, including
POM, to MACT levels of control through
combustion. POM, as well as other
organic compounds, are
indiscriminately and effectively
destroyed through combustion and there
is no technical reason to distinguish
between POM and other organic
compounds controlled through this
process. The MACT standard for total
organic carbon in the NESHAP is 98
percent destruction of organic
compounds including POM or an outlet
concentration of 20 ppmv. See 63 FR
48896.
The NESHAP for Asphalt Roofing
Manufacturing (68 FR 24561) regulates
POM and other organic HAP through
total hydrocarbons (THC) as a surrogate.
As explained in the final rule, the
combustion controls required in the
NESHAP effectively control
hydrocarbons, including POM and other
organic HAP. Emissions of POM and
other organic HAP are controlled
equally with other hydrocarbons and
there was no technical reasons to
differentiate between POM and other
hydrocarbons when establishing the
MACT standard. See 68 FR 24566.
3. Carbon Monoxide
In the NESHAP for Reciprocating
Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) (69
FR 33474), the EPA established
emission standards for carbon monoxide
as a surrogate for emissions of organic
hazardous air pollutants (including
POM). POM and carbon monoxide are
both emitted due to incomplete
combustion. Low levels of carbon
monoxide are an indicator of good
combustion practices. POM is a byproduct of combustion and good
combustion practices minimize
emissions of POM. While the
relationship between CO and POM was
not discussed in the context of section
112(c)(6) in the RICE rulemaking, it was
discussed in a number of other rules
such as the Major Source Boilers
NESHAP (76 FR 15608) and the section
129 standard for Hospital/Medical/
Infectious Waste Incinerators (74 FR
51368). This approach is based on the
demonstrated relationship between the
combustion process and these
pollutants. Combustion, such as occurs
in the units subject to the RICE NESHAP
and other rules, is the process of
breaking apart the organic (i.e., carboncontaining) molecules in the fuel and
converting them to carbon dioxide.
Perfectly complete combustion would
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
74680
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
convert all of the carbon in the fuel to
carbon dioxide. Completeness of the
combustion process is dependent on
several variables, including
temperature, amount of oxygen, and
mixing of the fuel and oxygen.
Incomplete combustion results in
production of partly broken down and
partially oxidized organic compounds,
including CO and POM. Because the
conversion of CO to carbon dioxide is a
difficult step, and the last one in the
destruction of hydrocarbons, including
organic HAPs, it is a good indicator of
the completeness of combustion. Thus,
decreasing levels of CO are correlated
with increasing destruction of organic
compounds until a threshold is reached
where, because combustion of CO is the
last step in combustion, the combustion
of organic materials is essentially
complete. CO concentration is thus an
indicator of the level of destruction of
organic compounds, and accordingly
can be used as a surrogate to control the
emissions of organic HAPs.
B. Surrogates for Hexachlorobenzene
(HCB)
As shown in the updated 1990
baseline inventory (Table 1), two source
categories (pesticides manufacturing
and chlorinated solvents production)
composed 100 percent of the 1990
baseline HCB emissions.
Chlorinated solvents production is
subject to the HON. 59 FR 19402. In the
HON NESHAP, EPA subject HCB
emissions from chlorinated solvent
production to MACT level of control by
regulating total organic HAP, which
serves as a surrogate for HCB. Consistent
with section 112(c)(6), the EPA
considered HCB emissions in
developing the HON. HCB was
identified as an organic HAP that would
be subject to the HON. See 59 FR 19463
(Table 1 to subpart F). The EPA
assumed that production of HCB would
result in air emissions from gaseous
discharges from reactors and other
equipment as well as losses of process
fluids from equipment seal failures,
emissions from product storage and
transfer, and emissions from wastewater
containing HCB. The estimates of
emissions from these processes were
derived from information on the
processes, physical property
information for HCB, and wellestablished engineering calculations for
different types of releases.
In most of the analyses, the EPA
grouped all of the organic HAP
(including HCB) together and looked at
the total organic HAP for purposes of
applying controls and projecting
emissions reductions. For the
chlorinated solvents production source
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
category, this was appropriate because
emissions of HCB come from the same
types of activities and operations as
emissions of the other HAP and because
most of the control technologies
required under section 112(d) were
expected to have essentially the same
performance regardless of the individual
compound. In other words, the EPA had
no technical reason to make distinctions
among various organic HAP except in
the case of wastewater, for which the
EPA promulgated organic HAP-specific
standards (discussed below). As a result,
the control measures required by the
HON reduce emissions of HCB and
other organic HAP from process vents,
storage vessels, transfer racks, and
equipment leaks. Emissions of HCB
during its production are not controlled
differently than emissions of other
organic HAP.
By contrast, the EPA did not group all
of the organic HAP together for
wastewater because different HAP
compounds have different physical
properties when mixed with water. The
analyses for wastewater streams were
conducted on an organic HAP-specific
basis, and the EPA promulgated organic
HAP-specific standards for wastewater
streams, including a specific standard
for HCB, based upon physical property
information for each HAP. See 40 CFR
part 63, subpart G, Appendix (Table 9,
listing the removal requirements for
each, including a 99 percent removal
requirement for HCB). The removal
requirement for HCB is designed to
reduce emissions of HCB from
wastewater streams generated during
HCB production.
The section 112(c)(6) source
categories, ‘‘pesticide manufacture and
agricultural chemicals’’ are subject to
the NESHAP for Pesticide Active
Ingredient Production (64 FR 33550). In
this NESHAP, the EPA set MACT
standards for total organic carbon and
total organic HAP, which serve as
surrogates for hexachlorobenzene. 64 FR
33549 (June 23, 1999). HCB is a
constituent of each surrogate and the
same logic for the choice of surrogate
discussed for the HON above applies
here (i.e., the combustion processes that
serve as the basis for MACT
indiscriminately and effectively control
HCB along with other organic HAP
compounds). Other sources, such as
wastewater, were required to comply
with organic HAP-specific standards
found in the HON, which specifically
lists HCB as one of the HAP emitted
from the source category and provided
HCB-specific control requirements. See
59 FR 19463, table listing HCB as one
of the section 112 organic HAP subject
to the rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
V. Conclusion
In light of the information presented
in this document, the EPA proposes that
we have fulfilled the 90 percent
requirements for all section 112(c)(6)
HAP. The EPA proposes that sources
accounting for at least 90 percent of the
aggregate emissions of each section
112(c)(6) HAP are ‘‘subject to standards’’
for the purposes of section 112(c)(6).
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action and was therefore not
submitted to the OMB for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
PRA because it does not contain any
information collection activities.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the RFA. This action will not
impose any requirements on small
entities. This action does not alter any
of the standards discussed in this
document.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538 and does
not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The action imposes no
enforceable duty on any state, local or
tribal governments or the private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national
government and the states or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175. This proposed action does
not materially alter the stringency of any
standards discussed in this document.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this action.
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 241 / Tuesday, December 16, 2014 / Proposed Rules
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 because the EPA does not
believe the environmental health risks
or safety risks addressed in this action
present a disproportionate risk to
children. A health and risk assessment
was not performed for this action
because it does not alter any of the
regulations discussed in this action.
RIN 0412–AA76
U.S. Agency for International
Development.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
This rulemaking does not involve
technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes the human health or
environmental risk addressed by this
action will not have potential
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on minority, low income or indigenous
populations because it does not affect
the level of protection provided to
human health or the environment. An
environmental justice evaluation was
not performed for this action because it
does not alter any of the regulations
discussed in this action.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 60
Administrative practice and
procedure, Air pollution control,
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
40 CFR Part 63
Administrative practice and
procedure, Air pollution control,
Hazardous materials, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:04 Dec 15, 2014
Jkt 235001
This proposed rule is a
companion document to the U.S.
Agency for International Development
(USAID) direct final rule (published in
the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of
this Federal Register), amending the
Agency for International Development
Acquisition Regulation (AIDAR). AIDAR
is revised to maintain consistency with
the Federal Acquisition Regulation
(FAR) and conform the regulation to
previously implemented policy.
Obsolete material is removed and
numerous clarifications and editorial
amendments are made to better specify
the regulation.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
January 15, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Address all comments
concerning this document to Marcelle
Wijesinghe, Bureau for Management,
Office of Acquisition and Assistance,
Policy Division (M/OAA/P), Room 867,
SA–44, Washington, DC 20523–2052.
Submit comments, identified by title of
the action and Regulatory Information
Number (RIN) by any of the following
methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Email: Submit electronic comments to
both mwijesinghe@usaid.gov and
lbond@usaid.gov. See SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION for file formats and other
information about electronic filing.
Mail: USAID, Bureau for Management,
Office of Acquisition & Assistance,
Policy Division, Room 867, SA–44,
Washington, DC 20523–2052.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lyudmila Bond, Telephone: 202–567–
4753 or Email: lbond@usaid.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: USAID is
publishing the amendment as a direct
final rule because the Agency views it
as a conforming and administrative
amendment and does not anticipate any
adverse comments. A detailed
discussion of the rule is set forth in the
preamble of the direct final rule.
SUMMARY:
This action is not a subject to
Executive Order 13211, because it is not
a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
[FR Doc. 2014–29482 Filed 12–15–14; 8:45 am]
Incorporate Various Administrative
Changes and Internal Policies Into the
USAID Acquisition Regulation (AIDAR)
AGENCY:
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
Dated: December 10, 2014.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
48 CFR Parts 701, 702, 703, 704, 705,
706, 707, 709, 711, 713, 714, 715, 716,
717, 719, 722, 725, 726, 727, 728, 731,
732, 733, 736, 742, 745, 747, 750, and
752
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
74681
If no adverse comments are received
in response to the direct final rule, no
further action will be taken related to
this proposed rule.
If adverse comments are received on
the direct final rule, USAID will publish
a timely partial withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public
what sections of the direct final rule
will not take effect. Any portions of the
final rule for which no adverse or
critical comments are received will
become final after the designated
period.
All public comments received on the
direct final rule will be addressed in a
subsequent final rule based on this
proposed rule. USAID will not institute
a second comment period. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action
should do so at this time.
A. Instructions
All comments must be in writing and
submitted through one of the methods
specified in the Addresses section
above. All submissions must include the
title of the action and RIN for this
rulemaking. Please include your name,
title, organization, postal address,
telephone number, and email address in
the text of the message.
Comments submitted by email must
be included in the text of the email or
attached as a PDF file. Please avoid
using special characters and any form of
encryption. Please note, however, that
because security screening precautions
have slowed the delivery and
dependability of surface mail to USAID/
Washington, USAID recommends
sending all comments to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal.
All comments will be made available
for public review without change,
including any personal information
provided, from three workdays after
receipt to finalization of action at https://
www.regulations.gov. Do not submit
information that you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI),
Personally Identifiable Information or
any information that is otherwise
protected from disclosure by statute.
As noted above, in the ‘‘Rules and
Regulations’’ section of this Federal
Register, USAID is publishing a direct
final rule with the same title that
announces revisions to the Agency for
International Development Acquisition
Regulation (AIDAR). For detailed
information on these revisions, please
see the direct final rule.
Dated: October 7, 2014.
Aman S. Djahanbani,
Chief Acquisition Officer.
[FR Doc. 2014–26050 Filed 12–15–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6116–01–P
E:\FR\FM\16DEP1.SGM
16DEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 241 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 74656-74681]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-29482]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 60 and 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0505; FRL-9920-49-OAR]
RIN 2060-AS42
Completion of Requirement To Promulgate Emissions Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this action, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
proposes that it has completed its statutory obligation of the Clean
Air Act to promulgate emissions standards for source categories
accounting for not less than ninety percent of the aggregated emissions
of each of the seven hazardous air pollutants enumerated in section
112(c)(6). This document explains the basis for the agency's conclusion
that it completed this obligation in February of 2011, identifies the
promulgated standards that collectively satisfy the obligation, and
provides the public an opportunity to comment.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 17, 2015.
Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA requesting to speak at a
public hearing by December 22, 2014, a public hearing will be held on
December 31, 2014 at the U.S. EPA building at 109 T.W. Alexander Drive,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. If you are interested in requesting a
public hearing or attending the public hearing, contact Ms. Virginia
Hunt at (919) 541-0832 or at hunt.virginia@epa.gov. If the EPA holds a
public hearing, the EPA will keep the record of the hearing open for 30
days after completion of the hearing to provide an opportunity for
submission of rebuttal and supplementary information. Under the
Paperwork Reduction Act, comments on the information collection
provisions are best assured of having full effect if the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) receives a copy of your comments on or
before January 15, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2004-0505, by one of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
Agency Web site: https://www.epa.gov/oar/docket.html.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the EPA Air and
Radiation Docket Web site.
Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. Include EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-
0505 in the subject line of the message.
Fax: Fax your comments to: (202) 566-9744, Attention
Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0505.
Mail: Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC), Mail Code 28221T, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-
0505, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please mail a
copy of your comments on the information collection provisions to the
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for the EPA, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.
Hand Delivery or Courier: EPA Docket Center, Room 3334,
EPA WJC West Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC
20004, Attention Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0505. Such deliveries
are only accepted 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 Number EPA-HQ-OAR-
2004-0505. The EPA 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
[[Page 74657]]
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 https://www.regulations.gov or
email. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous
access'' system, which means the EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through
https://www.regulations.gov, your email 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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the
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 the EPA
public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket. The EPA has established a docket for this rulemaking under
Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0505. 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 (e.g., 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 EPA
Docket Center, EPA WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
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 EPA Docket Center is (202) 566-1742.
Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA requesting a public
hearing by December 22, 2014, the public hearing will be held on
December 31, 2014 at the EPA's campus at 109 T.W. Alexander Drive,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. The hearing will begin at 10:00
a.m. (Eastern Standard Time) and conclude at 5:00 p.m. (Eastern
Standard Time). There will be a lunch break from 12:00 p.m. to 1:00
p.m. Please contact Ms. Virginia Hunt at (919) 541-0832 or at
hunt.virginia@epa.gov to register to speak at the hearing or to inquire
as to whether or not a hearing will be held. The last day to pre-
register in advance to speak at the hearing will be December 29, 2014.
Additionally, requests to speak will be taken the day of the hearing at
the hearing registration desk, although preferences on speaking times
may not be able to be accommodated. If you require the service of a
translator or special accommodations such as audio description, please
let us know at the time of registration. If you require an
accommodation, we ask that you pre-register for the hearing, as we may
not be able to arrange such accommodations without advance notice. The
hearing will provide interested parties the opportunity to present
data, views or arguments concerning the proposed action. The EPA will
make every effort to accommodate all speakers who arrive and register.
Because these hearing are being held at U.S. government facilities,
individuals planning to attend the hearing should be prepared to show
valid picture identification to the security staff in order to gain
access to the meeting room. Please note that the REAL ID Act, passed by
Congress in 2005, established new requirements for entering federal
facilities. If your driver's license is issued by Alaska, American
Samoa, Arizona, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota,
Montana, New York, Oklahoma or the state of Washington, you must
present an additional form of identification to enter the federal
building. Acceptable alternative forms of identification include:
Federal employee badges, passports, enhanced driver's licenses and
military identification cards. In addition, you will need to obtain a
property pass for any personal belongings you bring with you. Upon
leaving the building, you will be required to return this property pass
to the security desk. No large signs will be allowed in the building,
cameras may only be used outside of the building and demonstrations
will not be allowed on federal property for security reasons. The EPA
may ask clarifying questions during the oral presentations, but will
not respond to the presentations at that time. Written statements and
supporting information submitted during the comment period will be
considered with the same weight as oral comments and supporting
information presented at the public hearing.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this proposed
rule, contact Mr. Nathan Topham, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards; Sector Policies and Programs Division, Metals and Inorganic
Chemicals Group (D243-02); Environmental Protection Agency; Research
Triangle Park, NC 27111; telephone number: (919) 541-0483; fax number:
(919) 541-3207; email address: topham.nathan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
The information presented in this preamble is organized as follows:
I. General Information
A. What should I consider as I prepare my comments to the EPA?
B. Where can I get a copy of this document?
II. Background Information
A. What is the statutory background for this action?
B. What is the litigation history regarding this action?
III. How has the EPA satisfied its obligation under Clean Air Act
section 112(c)(6)?
A. How did the EPA determine what regulations would collectively
satisfy the 90 percent requirement under section 112(c)(6)?
B. What is the total updated 1990 baseline inventory of source
categories that emit section 112(c)(6) HAP and which source
categories are determined by the EPA to be necessary to meet the 90
percent requirement under section 112(c)(6)?
C. What changes have been made to the 1990 baseline inventory
since the 1998 notice?
D. What are the emissions standards that the EPA has promulgated
to meet the 90 percent requirement under section 112(c)(6)?
IV. Surrogate Pollutants Used by the EPA To Ensure That the Section
112(c)(6) Requirements Are Fulfilled
A. Surrogates for POM
B. Surrogates for Hexachlorobenzene (HCB)
V. Conclusion
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
[[Page 74658]]
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
I. General Information
A. What should I consider as I prepare my comments to the EPA?
Submitting CBI. Do not submit information containing CBI to the EPA
through https://www.regulations.gov or email. 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 the EPA, 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 disk 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 the EPA's
electronic public docket without prior notice. Information marked as
CBI will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set
forth in 40 CFR part 2. Send or deliver information identified as CBI
only to the following address: OAQPS Document Control Officer (C404-
02), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711,
Attention Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0505.
B. Where can I get a copy of this document?
In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this proposal will also be available on the Internet through the EPA's
Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature by the EPA
Administrator, a copy of this proposed action will be posted on the
TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules
at the following address: https://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/eparules.html. The
TTN provides information and technology exchange in various areas of
air pollution control.
II. Background Information
A. What is the statutory background for this action?
Section 112(c)(6) of the Clean Air Act requires EPA to take action
\1\ with respect to seven specific persistent, bioaccumulative
hazardous air pollutants (HAP). The section states, ``With respect to
alkylated lead compounds, polycyclic organic matter,
hexachlorobenzene,\2\ mercury, polychlorinated biphenyls,\3\ 2,3,7,8-
tetrachlorodibenzofurans \4\ and 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-
dioxin,\5\ the Administrator shall, not later than 5 years after
November 15, 1990, list categories and subcategories of sources
assuring that sources accounting for not less than 90 per centum of the
aggregate emissions of each such pollutant are subject to standards
under subsection (d)(2) or (d)(4) of this section.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Section 112(c)(6) also states that ``This paragraph shall
not be construed to require the Administrator to promulgate
standards for such pollutants emitted by electric utility steam
generating units.''
\2\ Referred to elsewhere in this document as ``HCB.''
\3\ Referred to elsewhere in this document as ``PCBs.''
\4\ Referred to elsewhere in this document as ``furan.''
\5\ Referred to elsewhere in this document as ``dioxin.'' Note
that dioxin and furan emissions are grouped together for the purpose
of the 1990 baseline inventory in Table 1 of this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 112(c)(6) requires the EPA to ensure that sources
responsible for 90 percent of the aggregate emissions of each of the
seven specified pollutants are subject to standards under sections
(d)(2) or (d)(4) of this section. 42 U.S.C. 7412(c)(6). It requires the
EPA to list, by November 15, 1995, source categories assuring that
sources responsible for 90 percent of the aggregate emissions are
subject to emission standards pursuant to section 112(d)(2) or (4), and
to promulgate such standards by November 15, 2000. Under section
112(d)(2), the EPA imposes emission standards that require ``the
maximum degree of reduction in emissions of the [HAPs]'' that the EPA
concludes are achievable based on a consideration of factors identified
in the statute. 42 U.S.C. 7412(d)(2). These are referred to as
``maximum achievable control technology'' or ``MACT.'' Section
112(d)(4) authorizes the EPA to set a health-based standard for a
limited set of hazardous air pollutants for which a health threshold
has been established, and that standard must provide for ``an ample
margin of safety.'' 42 U.S.C. 7412(d)(4).
B. What is the litigation history regarding this action?
In 2001, Sierra Club filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Columbia asserting, among other allegations, that the EPA
had failed to promulgate emission standards sufficient to satisfy the
90 percent requirement in CAA section 112(c)(6). See Sierra Club v.
Jackson, No. 01-1537 (D.D.C.). In an order issued March 31, 2006
(``2006 order''), the district court set a deadline (later extended)
for the EPA to complete that task. Sierra Club v. Johnson, 444 F. Supp.
2d 46, 59 (D.D.C. 2006). In the course of that suit, the EPA explained
that ``once [it] completes emission standards for the remaining source
categories under section 112(c)(6), it intends to issue a notice that
explains how it has satisfied the requirements of section 112(c)(6) in
terms of issuing emission standards for the source categories that
account for the statutory thresholds identified in section 112(c)(6).'
'' Id.
On March 21, 2011, having promulgated standards sufficient to meet
the 90 percent requirement under section 112(c)(6), the EPA published a
notice in the Federal Register (FR) announcing it had met its statutory
obligation. Completion of Requirement to Promulgate Emission Standards,
76 FR 15308 (March 21, 2011) (``90 Percent Notice'' or ``Notice''). The
March 21, 2011, notice contained the EPA Administrator's conclusion
that ``EPA has completed sufficient standards to meet the 90-percent
requirement under . . . section 112(c)(6).'' 76 FR 15308. The
Administrator based that determination on a technical memorandum
``document[ing] the actions the Agency has taken to meet these
requirements.'' Id. The technical memorandum titled Emission Standards
for Meeting the Ninety Percent Requirement under Section 112(c)(6) of
the Clean Air Act, which is available in the docket for this action
(Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0505), included an updated 1990 baseline
inventory, an updated list of the source categories necessary to meet
the 90 percent requirement, and a list of emission standards the EPA
has promulgated for these source categories.
In 2011, Sierra Club filed suit in U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit) challenging the March 21, 2011,
notice. The D.C. Circuit vacated the notice, holding that the notice
was a legislative rulemaking that must be issued through a notice and
comment rulemaking. Sierra Club v. EPA, 699 F.3d 530, 535 (D.C. Cir.
2012).
[[Page 74659]]
In 2013, Sierra Club filed a motion with the district court,
seeking enforcement of the 2006 order. In an opinion dated July 25,
2014, the district court held that the EPA failed to comply with the
2006 order and directed the EPA to initiate a process of notice and
comment rulemaking before the agency reissues, reconsiders or modifies
its determination regarding section 112(c)(6). Therefore, the EPA is
issuing this proposed rule as ordered by the district court and
providing an opportunity for comment on the EPA's proposed
determination that it has fulfilled the requirements of section
112(c)(6).
III. How has the EPA satisfied its obligation under clean air act
section 112(c)(6)?
A. How did the EPA determine what regulations would collectively
satisfy the 90 percent requirement under section 112(c)(6)?
In 1998, the EPA published an initial list of source categories and
subcategories in the Federal Register that the agency at that time
believed it needed to regulate under section 112(c)(6) to satisfy that
provision's 90 percent requirement. 63 FR 17838, April 10, 1998. The
EPA first developed a 1990 baseline inventory \6\ which identified all
known sources of the section 112(c)(6) HAPs at the time and included
estimated national annual emissions for each source category as of
1990. 63 FR 17847, Table 1. The EPA then identified source categories
considered subject to standards under 112(d)(2) and (d)(4), as well as
those subject to section 129 standards.\7\ 63 FR 17842. See also Table
2 of the 1998 Notice, 63 FR 17849. The EPA found that a majority of the
source categories needed to achieve the 90 percent requirement were
already subject to either section 112(d)(2) or (d)(4) standards or
section 129 standards or listed for such regulation. 63 FR 17839. Based
on the 1990 baseline emissions inventory, the EPA concluded that the 90
percent requirement had been met for five of seven 112(c)(6) HAP but
that additional regulations were needed for polycyclic organic matter
(POM) and alkylated lead to attain the 90 percent level for those two
HAP. 63 FR 17846. Therefore, the EPA added two more categories to the
initial section 112(c)(6) source category list. See Table 2, 63 FR
17850. However, the EPA also noted in that notice that ``many
uncertainties remain concerning the accuracy of its identification of
source categories and estimates of emissions.'' 63 FR 17845. The EPA
forewarned that ``Given the uncertainties, the EPA recognizes that the
list may be subject to change.'' 63 FR 17846. For example, in that
notice, the EPA explained:
\6\ The EPA chose 1990 as the baseline year because that was
when the section 112(c)(6) requirements came into force as part of
the CAA Amendments of 1990. See 62 FR 33627.
\7\ The EPA considers standards promulgated under section 129 as
substantively equivalent to those promulgated under section
112(c)(6). 63 FR 17846.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the Agency proceeds to develop appropriate emission
standards, it will necessarily develop improved source category-
specific information, which may affect the estimates of total
emissions, the percentage of emissions subject to standards,
allocation of emissions within a source category to major and area
sources, and source categories for which standards need to be
developed. As it proceeds to develop these standards and associated
information, EPA intends to further evaluate this information
against its obligation to assure that sources accounting for not
less than 90 percent of emissions are subject to standards.
63 FR 17845
In particular, the agency explained that, for regulations not yet
developed, it would subject area source categories with significant
emissions to the regulations required by section 7412(c)(6), but that
``[s]ome area categories may be negligible contributors to the 90
percent goal, and as such pose unwarranted burdens for subjecting to
[MACT] standards.'' Id.
Subsequent to the publication of the initial section 112(c)(6)
list, as the EPA continued evaluating source categories and developing
standards, the EPA has updated the listing several times. The EPA
issued the updates either as a separate notice or in conjunction with
development of specific standards. The updates are as follows:
Section 112(c)(6) Source Category List: Tire Production,
65 FR 47725, August 3, 2000. This action removed tire production
manufacturing from the list.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants;
Revision of Source Category List for Standards Under Section 112(c)(6)
and 112(k) of the Clean Air Act, 67 FR 68124, November 8, 2002. This
action added gasoline distribution Stage I to the list and removed area
sources in the following categories: Asphalt hot mix production,
fabricated metal products, paint and allied products, paper coated and
laminated, packaging and transportation equipment manufacturing.
Revision of Source Category Lists for Standards Under
Sections 112(c) and 112(k) of the Clean Air Act; and National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area Sources: Electric Arc
Furnace; Proposed Rule, 72 FR 53814, September 20, 2007. This action
added the electric arc furnace (EAF) steelmaking facility area source
category to the list.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Source Categories: Gasoline Distribution Bulk Terminals, Bulk
Plants, and Pipeline Facilities; and Gasoline Dispensing Facilities;
Final Rule, 73 FR 1916, January 10, 2008. This action finalized the
decision not to regulate gasoline distribution area sources under
section 112(c)(6).
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Gold Mine Ore Processing and Production Area Source Category; and
Addition to Source Category List for Standards; Final Rule, 76 FR 9450,
February 17, 2011. This action added the Gold Mine Ore Processing and
Production source category to the list.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Area Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers;
Final Rule, 76 FR 15554, March 21, 2011. This action explained that
area source wood and oil-fired boilers were not needed to meet the 90
percent requirement for POM and mercury under section 112(c)(6).
Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and
Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources: Sewage Sludge Incineration
Units; Final Rule, 76 FR 15372, March 21, 2011. This action explained
that sewage sludge incineration units were needed to meet the 90
percent requirement for mercury under section 112(c)(6). See 76 FR
15375.
[[Page 74660]]
Emission Standards for Meeting the Ninety Percent
Requirement under Section 112(c)(6) of the Clean Air Act, Docket ID:
EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0505-0006 (February 18, 2011). This technical
memorandum documented the actions the EPA had taken to meet the 90
percent requirement under section 112(c)(6) and included an updated
1990 baseline inventory, an updated list of the source categories
necessary to meet the 90 percent requirement, and a list of emission
standards the EPA promulgated for these source categories.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ As explained earlier in this document, this technical
memorandum was the basis of the EPA's conclusion in a March 21,
2011, FR notice that it has completed its obligation under section
112(c)(6). See Completion of Requirement to Promulgate Emission
Standards, 76 FR 15308, March 21, 2011. The 2011 notice was later
vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia,
which held that the notice must be issued through a notice and
comment rulemaking. Sierra Club v. EPA, 699 F.3d 530, 535 (D.C. Cir.
2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. What is the total updated 1990 baseline inventory of source
categories that emit 112(c)(6) HAP and which source categories are
determined by the EPA to be necessary to meet the 90 percent
requirement under section 112(c)(6)?
1. Updated 1990 Baseline Emissions Inventory for Section 112(c)(6) HAPs
Table 1 presents the updated 1990 baseline emission inventory for
the section 112(c)(6) pollutants based on the history, actions, updates
and documentation explained elsewhere in this document. Table 1
includes the updated estimated emissions (in tons per year or pounds
per year) for year 1990 for each of the section 112(c)(6) pollutants
for each source category and the percent of the total emissions for
1990. Table 1 also identifies the categories that the EPA is counting
towards meeting the EPA's 90 percent requirement for each section
112(c)(6) HAP. Table 1 also identifies remaining source categories
(which added together account for 10 percent or less of the total
inventory) that emit section 112(c)(6) HAP. By February 21, 2011, the
EPA had promulgated either MACT or equivalent standards under section
129 for each of the source categories identified in the top portion of
Table 1 (i.e., the portion labeled ``Categories Subject to
Regulation'').
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
[[Page 74661]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16DE14.032
[[Page 74662]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16DE14.033
[[Page 74663]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16DE14.034
[[Page 74664]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16DE14.035
[[Page 74665]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16DE14.036
[[Page 74666]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16DE14.037
[[Page 74667]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16DE14.038
[[Page 74668]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16DE14.039
[[Page 74669]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16DE14.040
[[Page 74670]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16DE14.041
[[Page 74671]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP16DE14.042
BILLING CODE 6560-50-C
C. What changes have been made to the 1990 baseline inventory since the
1998 Notice?
The EPA made a number of updates to the section 112(c)(6) 1990
baseline inventory and source category list as a result of new
information and further evaluation of the source categories during
standard development. The EPA had explained some of those actions in
prior notices, which the EPA has identified in section III.A above.
With respect to updates that were not provided in prior notices, they
are presented below.
1. Gasoline Distribution (Aviation)
In the 1998 Notice, the EPA identified the Gasoline Distribution
(Aviation) source category as necessary for achieving the 90 percent
requirement for alkylated lead. Aircraft use two general types of fuel:
Aviation gasoline (avgas) and jet fuel. Avgas, which is used for
powering piston engine aircraft, is the source of alkylated lead
emissions in the Gasoline Distribution (Aviation) source category.
Alkylated lead is added to avgas to reduce engine knock and help
lubricate internal engine components. Research is underway to find
alternatives to lead for use in avgas.
While characterizing evaporative emissions of alkylated lead
compounds from aviation gasoline, we became aware of another stationary
source of other alkylated lead compounds emissions in 1990.
Specifically, we identified a U.S. facility that was manufacturing
alkylated lead compounds in 1990. Through discussions with industry
representatives and technical evaluation
[[Page 74672]]
of the information supplied, we were able to quantify an estimate of
the alkylated lead emissions for the Alkylated Lead Production source
category for the year 1990 and are adding this estimate to the section
112(c)(6) baseline inventory. Based on information provided in the
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), we identified reported annual emissions
of total lead compounds from this single alkylated lead production
facility of 22 tons in 1990. The TRI did not provide the amount of
alkylated lead in the total. Further analysis of the emission inventory
submitted to the state resulted in an estimate of actual alkylated lead
emissions from this facility of approximately 18 tons in 1990. As shown
in Table 1, the Alkylated Lead Production source category (which as
explained above consists solely of this one facility) contributed 99.7
percent of the alkylated lead compounds emissions in the updated 1990
baseline inventory.\9\ Alkylated lead compounds production is regulated
by the Hazardous Organic NESHAP \10\ (HON).\11\ The EPA has therefore,
through the HON, met the 90 percent requirement under section 112(c)(6)
for alkylated lead. In light of the above, we conclude that we do not
need Gasoline Distribution (Aviation) to meet the 90 percent
requirement for alkylated lead under section 112(c)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ In addition to adding the baseline emissions for the
Alkylated Lead Production source category, the other updates to the
section 112(c)(6) baseline inventory for alkylated lead include
addition of the Upstream Gasoline Distribution (Aviation) (see
section III.C.3) and revised baseline emission estimates for
Gasoline Distribution (Stage I) (see sections III.A and III.C.2) and
Gasoline Distribution (Aviation) discussed in this section.
\10\ Also known as National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Source Categories: Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants
from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Industry and Other Processes
Subject to the Negotiated Regulation for Equipment Leaks. 59 FR
19402.
\11\ We further note that U.S. production of alkylated lead
compounds ended in 1993.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 1990 baseline alkylated lead emissions from gasoline
distribution source categories have also been updated since the 1998
Notice. A review of the 1990 alkylated lead emissions from the
distribution of leaded gasoline revealed that the inventory data were
based on inaccurate estimates of equipment component counts and leak
emission factors.\12\ Analysis showed that when the corrected equipment
leak data are used, the total estimated 1990 alkylated lead emissions
from leaded gasoline distribution would be less than one half of the
estimate in the 1990 inventory published in the 1998 Notice. See 71 FR
66067. We have therefore revised the alkylated lead baseline emission
estimates for all gasoline distribution source categories, including
Gasoline Distribution (Aviation), accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ In the section 112(c)(6) inventory published in 1998, the
baseline alkylated lead emissions estimate for the Gasoline
Distribution (Aviation) source category was based on emission
factors from a 1994 proposed major source standard for Gasoline
Distribution (Stage I) (Background Information Document (BID) Volume
I, Proposed National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Gasoline Distribution (Stage I), EPA-453/R-94-002a). Based on
analysis of public comments on that proposed rule, EPA applied
updated equipment leak emission factors for the promulgated major
source standard for Gasoline Distribution (Stage I) (BID Volume II,
Promulgated National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Gasoline Distribution (Stage I), EPA-453/R-94-002b). The updated
emission factors were also applied in the promulgation of area
source standards for Gasoline Distribution (Stage I) (Area Source).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Gasoline Distribution Stage I (Area Sources)
Alkylated lead emissions from this source category have been
updated since the 1998 Notice in a manner consistent with Gasoline
Distribution (Aviation), discussed in the previous section. A review of
the 1990 alkylated lead emissions from the distribution of leaded
gasoline revealed that the inventory data were based on inaccurate
estimates of equipment component counts and leak emission factors.\13\
Analysis showed that when the corrected equipment leak data are used,
the total estimated 1990 alkylated lead emissions from leaded gasoline
distribution would be less than one half of the estimate in the 1990
inventory published in the 1998 Notice. We have revised the alkylated
lead baseline emission estimates for all gasoline distribution source
categories, including Gasoline Distribution Stage I (Area Source),
accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See footnote 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Upstream Gasoline Distribution (Aviation)
Upstream Gasoline Distribution (Aviation) is being added to the
section 112(c)(6) inventory for emissions of alkylated lead. At the
time we issued the 1998 Notice, we believed that avgas was transported
directly from refineries to the airport terminals. Thus, we did not
estimate alkylated lead emissions from the distribution of avgas
``upstream'' of the airport facilities in the section 112(c)(6)
emission inventory published in 1998. However, we have since learned
that avgas is distributed through bulk terminals located at refineries,
as well as through some stand-alone bulk terminals, prior to being
delivered to airport facilities. We have therefore updated the
112(c)(6) baseline inventory for alkylated lead to include estimated
1990-base year alkylated lead emissions from the distribution of avgas
``upstream'' of the airport facilities. The alkylated lead emissions
for this category are presented in Table 1.
4. Use of 16-PAH Inventory for Polycyclic Organic Matter
In the Clean Air Act, POM is defined as ``organic compounds with
more than one benzene ring and which have a boiling point greater than
or equal to 100 [deg]C''. As shown in the 1998 Notice, we created three
inventories (7-PAH,\14\ 16-PAH,\15\ and extractable organic matter
(EOM) \16\) to represent baseline POM emissions. Of the three POM
baseline inventories, the 16-PAH inventory is the most robust, with
data on 16-PAH emissions for 94 categories. In contrast, we have very
limited data on EOM, with data on EOM emissions for only 18 source
categories.\17\ The lack of available data on EOM emissions creates a
distorted picture of the relative contributions of source categories
for which there are available EOM data. The lack of source categories
making up the total EOM inventory makes the relative contribution of
the few categories that do have data unrealistically inflated. We
therefore cannot say with confidence that, by using the baseline
inventory for EOM, we are capturing 90 percent of the baseline POM
emissions, as required by section 112(c)(6). Similarly, we have data on
7-PAH for 32 categories, considerably fewer than the 94 categories for
which we have 16-PAH data. Therefore, the 16-PAH inventory allows for
the most accurate representation of the universe of categories that
emit POM. Because the use of all three baseline inventories is neither
required nor necessary, and in light of the concern described above
with the EOM and 7-PAH inventories,
[[Page 74673]]
we decided to use only the 16-PAH baseline inventory for determining
the 90 percent threshold for POM under section 112(c)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Composed of benz(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene,
benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene,
dibenz(a,h)anthracene, and indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene.
\15\ Composed of benz(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene,
benzo(b)fluoranthene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, chrysene,
dibenz(a,h)anthracene, indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene, acenaphthene,
acenaphthylene, anthracene, benzo(ghi)perylene, fluoranthene,
fluorene, naphthalene, phenanthrene, and pyrene.
\16\ Any methylene chloride extractable organic matter, measured
gravimetrically.
\17\ When justifying its use in the 1998 inventory background
document, we said that the EPA would undertake an effort to develop
a robust inventory for EOM sources to feed into the CAA section
112(c)(6) inventory. Had more data been gathered, perhaps EOM would
have proved to be a more useful indicator of POM. However, the
anticipated inventory was not developed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Updates to the 1990 Baseline Emission Inventory for Mercury
As mentioned above, the EPA added 1990 mercury emission estimates
for EAF and Gold Mine Ore Production and Processing area source
categories into the section 112(c)(6) total baseline inventory for
mercury. In addition, the EPA discovered that the 112(c)(6) inventory
for mercury published in the 1998 Federal Register notice included
inaccurate estimates for a number of source categories and updated
these estimates. These updates are discussed below.
a. Industrial/Commercial Boilers. The estimate of mercury emissions
from Industrial/Commercial Boilers that was presented in the 1998
Federal Register notice for section 112(c)(6) was 28.9 tons of mercury
for year 1990. There were a number of technical problems with this
estimate, especially for coal-fired boilers. One significant issue is
that the activity level (2,820 trillion British thermal units (BTUs))
used in the calculations in the section 112(c)(6) inventory background
document was incorrect. This activity level represented all coal use in
industry, including boilers and other uses (e.g., coke ovens). The
activity level used should have been for boilers only. A more accurate
activity level for 1990 would be about 1,633 trillion BTUs.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Estimate based on 1990 historical statistics from the
Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration Web site of
coal use in industrial/commercial sectors (not including coke
plants).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, we also believe that the emissions factors used to
calculate the original estimate from coal-fired boilers were
inaccurate. The emission factors were based on an assumption of zero
control and did not account for coal washing. At that time, the EPA
stated ``because mercury reductions from coal washing and any other
reductions that may occur across existing control devices are not
accounted for, the emissions may be overestimated.'' \19\ Applying
emission factors used in the development of the major and area source
Boiler NESHAP \20\ to the revised activity level for coal-fired boilers
yields estimates of roughly 2 tons and 1 ton of mercury emissions for
major and area sources, respectively. Emissions factors for oil-fired
boilers (6.8 lb/trillion BTUs and 7.2 lb/trillion BTUs) were also too
high. Converting these emission factors into mercury concentrations in
oil results in an estimate of about 100 parts per billion (ppb) mercury
concentrations in oil. However, based on data gathered and analyzed for
the 1998 EPA Utility Air Toxics Report to Congress, the average mercury
concentration in oil is about 10 ppb. Moreover, the emissions factor
for residual oil-fired boilers (of 0.4 lbs per trillion BTUs) provided
in the 1997 EPA Locating and Estimating document \21\ is about 10 times
lower than the emission factors used for the original section 112(c)(6)
estimates for oil-fired boilers. The information discussed above
suggests that the emissions estimates for mercury provided in the 1998
Notice for oil-fired boilers were overestimated by an order of
magnitude. A more accurate estimate of total mercury emissions from
oil-fired boilers (major and area sources) is about 0.6 tons for 1990,
as reflected in Table 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Mercury Study Report to Congress. December 1997. Available
at https://www.epa.gov/hg/report.htm.
\20\ The revised emission factor for major source boilers for
this inventory was generated using a weighted average of the six
emission factors for various types of control used in the February
21, 2011, Boiler NESHAP. The revised emission factor for area
sources was the uncontrolled group in the Boiler NESHAP because
these sources were largely uncontrolled with respect to mercury
emissions in 1990.
\21\ US EPA (1997): Locating and Estimating Air Emissions From
Sources of Mercury and Mercury Compounds. Report EPA-454/R-97-012,
(NTIS PB98-117054), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Research Triangle Park, NC. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/le/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Aerospace Industries (Surface Coating). Aerospace Industries
(Surface Coating) had an estimate of 4 tons of mercury emissions in the
112(c)(6) inventory published in the 1998 Notice. Another inventory
developed for year 1990 for other regulatory purposes (the 112(k) 1990
inventory) had a much lower estimate for this category (0.0026 tpy).
Because of the large discrepancy, we reviewed the 112(c)(6) inventory
data for this category, including reviewing the original emissions
factor and calculations. We also consulted with an industry
representative. The estimate in the 1998 Notice was based on an
extremely conservative assumption. According to a 1997 docket memo,\22\
the emissions estimate was derived from reviewing Material Safety Data
Sheets (MSDS) from five of the major coating suppliers. One of these
MSDS showed trace amounts of mercury in only two products (0.00002
percent by weight), which was rounded up five orders of magnitude to 1
percent in the inventory analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Memo from Dave Reeves, Midwest Research Institute to
Barbara Driscoll, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards regarding HAP emission estimates
for aerospace surface coating. November 17, 1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In light of the above, we concluded that this original estimate of
mercury emissions (or 4 tons) from Aerospace Industries was
substantially overestimated. Therefore, we searched and gathered
information to calculate a more reasonable estimate. We obtained
information on sales of aerospace coatings and mercuric mildewcides in
1990. Using these data, potential mercury emissions for 1990 were
calculated, as described in the following paragraphs.
In 1990, aerospace coatings accounted for 0.1 percent of the volume
of coatings produced. In 1990, approximately 400,000 pounds of mercuric
mildewcide/fungicide (as mercury) were sold into the entire coatings
market (this amount substantially decreased after 1990 to nearly zero).
Assuming these products were used throughout the industry, we calculate
that 400 lbs (i.e., 0.1% * 400,000 pounds = 400 lbs) of mercuric
mildewcides/fungicides were used in aerospace coatings in 1990. Thus,
the maximum emissions would have been 400 lbs of mercury assuming 100
percent of mercury in coatings were released. However, mildewcides/
fungicides are intended to retard the growth of fungi on applied
surfaces over time. They are intended to remain to a large extent in
the coating substrate. We believe that at least 50 percent of the
mildewcide/fungicide remains in the substrate. Therefore, mercury
releases from aerospace coatings are estimated to be up to 200 lbs in
1990. Given this information and calculations, we estimate that this
source category emitted about 0.1 tons of mercury in 1990.
c. Industrial Turbines and Internal Combustion Engines. In the 1998
Notice, the mercury emissions from industrial turbines and internal
combustion engines fired by natural gas were 1.6 tons and 4.7 tons,
respectively. The emissions factors used in those original estimates
for these two source categories were 6.63 x 10-\6\ lb/MMBTU
and 1.14 x 10-\5\ lb/MMBTU, respectively. However, available
data \23\ indicate that the level of mercury in natural gas is very low
and, therefore, mercury emissions from this category are very low.
Based on this information, we updated the 1990 mercury emissions for
this category. As shown in Table 1, the revised mercury emissions
estimates
[[Page 74674]]
from these two source categories are 0.001 and 0.009 tons,
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Mercury Study Report to Congress. December 1997. Available
at https://www.epa.gov/hg/report.htm. Locating and Estimating Air
Emissions from Sources of Mercury and Mercury Compounds. December
1997. Available at https://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/le/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. Human Crematories. The mercury emissions from human crematories
in the 1998 baseline 112(c)(6) inventory (0.000377 tons per year) were
revised based on data used to calculate mercury emissions in the 112(k)
area source inventory, which was developed subsequent to the 1998
Notice. This emission factor led to a revised estimate of 0.6 tons of
mercury in 1990 emitted from human crematories.
e. Blast Furnaces and Steel Mills. Mercury emissions from blast
furnaces and steel mills were reported as 0.25 tons in the 1998
baseline 112(c)(6) inventory. Further review of this estimate led to
revision of the mercury estimate from blast furnaces and steel mills as
well as electric arc furnace steelmaking (as discussed in section III.C
above). Based on a revised emission factor \24\ from scrap steel, the
revised estimated mercury emissions are 3.1 tons for blast furnaces and
steel mills.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Analysis of Mercury Data for Electric Arc Furnace
Steelmaking. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and
Program Division, Metals and Minerals Group. July 18, 2007. Docket
Item 0070 in EPA Docket Number OAR-2004-0083.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
f. Portland Cement. We believe the estimate for mercury emissions
from Portland Cement Manufacturing non-hazardous waste kilns (4.13
tons) in the 1998 Notice was slightly underestimated. We used the
mercury emissions and installed clinker capacity from 2006 \25\ to
generate a ratio of mercury emissions per ton of clinker and applied
this ratio to the 1990 clinker capacity. The mercury emissions in 1990
were revised upward to 5.64 tons for this category.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Estimate of 2006 installed clinker capacity: 94,690,000
metric tons clinker per year. Estimate of 2006 mercury emissions
from major and area sources: 7.27 tons. Estimate of 1990 installed
clinker capacity: 73,518,000 metric tons clinker per year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. What are the emissions standards that the EPA has promulgated to
meet the 90 percent requirement under section 112(c)(6)?
The EPA has promulgated emissions standards sufficient to satisfy
the 112(c)(6) requirement that sources accounting for not less than 90
percent of the aggregate emissions of seven specific HAP are subject to
standards under 112(d)(2) or 112(d)(4). Table 2 provides a list of the
emissions standards, including the name of each of the source
categories, name of the emissions standards that apply, and the rule
citation for each (i.e., CFR Part and Subpart). Table 2 provides cross-
references for the 112(c)(6) category names with the associated
emission standards (which may reference a source category by a name
different from that used in the section 112(c)(6) baseline inventory
and source category listing). Table 3 provides a list of the specific
regulations (including CFR citations, Part and Subpart) that address 90
percent or more of each of the 112(c)(6) HAPs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Because many of these standards were developed to meet the
EPA's obligation under CAA section 112(d)(1), the EPA had not
focused on what was needed to meet its section 112(c)(6) obligation
at the time of these rulemakings. Therefore, the EPA did not
reference section 112(c)(6) in the preambles to some rules.
Table 2--Categories of Sources Whose Emissions of 112(c)(6) HAPs Are
Subject to 112(d)(2), 112(d)(4), or 129 Standards \26\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 112(c)(6) category Emission standard CFR part and
name name(s) subpart
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aerospace Industry (Surface National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Coating). Standards for subpart GG.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for the
Aerospace Industries.
Alkylated Lead Production..... National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart F.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from the
Synthetic Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Industry.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart G.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from the
Synthetic Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Industry for Process
Vents, Storage
Vessels, Transfer
Operations, and
Wastewater.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart H.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Equipment Leaks.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart I.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Certain Processes
Subject to the
Negotiated Regulation
for Equipment Leaks.
Asphalt Roofing Production.... National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for subpart LLLLL.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for the
Asphalt Roofing
Manufacturing.
Blast Furnace and Steel Mills. National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for subpart FFFFF.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for the
Integrated Iron and
Steel Manufacture.
Chemical Manufacturing: Cyclic National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Crude and Intermediate Standards for Organic subpart F.
Production. Hazardous Air
Pollutants from the
Synthetic Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Industry.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart G.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from the
Synthetic Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Industry for Process
Vents, Storage
Vessels, Transfer
Operations, and
Wastewater.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart H.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Equipment Leaks.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart I.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Certain Processes
Subject to the
Negotiated Regulation
for Equipment Leaks.
Chlorinated Solvents National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Production. Standards for Organic subpart F.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from the
Synthetic Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Industry.
[[Page 74675]]
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart G.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from the
Synthetic Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Industry for Process
Vents, Storage
Vessels, Transfer
Operations, and
Wastewater.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart H.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Equipment Leaks.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart I.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Certain Processes
Subject to the
Negotiated Regulation
for Equipment Leaks.
Coke Ovens: By-Product National Emission 40 CFR part 61
Recovery Plants. Standard for Benzene subpart L.
Emissions from Coke
By-Product Recovery
Plants.
Coke Ovens: Charging, Topside National Emission 40 CFR part 63
& Door Leaks. Standards for subpart L.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Source
Categories and for
Coke Oven Batteries.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for subpart CCCCC.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Coke
Ovens: Pushing,
Quenching, and
Battery Stacks.
Coke Ovens: Pushing, Quenching National Emission 40 CFR part 63
& Battery Stacks. Standards for subpart L.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Source
Categories and for
Coke Oven Batteries.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for subpart CCCCC.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Coke
Ovens: Pushing,
Quenching, and
Battery Stacks.
Commercial Printing: Gravure.. National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for subpart KK.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Printing
and Publishing
Industry.
Electric Arc Furnaces National Emission 40 CFR part 63
(EAF)_Secondary Steel. Standards for subpart YYYYY.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Area
Sources: Electric Arc
Furnace Steelmaking
Facilities.
Fabricated Metal Products..... National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for subpart MMMM.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Surface
Coating of
Miscellaneous Metal
Parts and Products.
Gasoline Distribution (Stage National Emission 40 CFR part 63
1). Standards for subpart R.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Gasoline Distribution
Facilities (Bulk
Gasoline Terminals
and Pipeline Breakout
Stations).
Gold Mines.................... National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for subpart
Hazardous Air EEEEEEE.
Pollutants: Gold Mine
Ore Processing and
Production Area
Source Category.
Hazardous Waste Incineration.. National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for subpart EEE.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from
Hazardous Waste
Combustors.
Industrial Organic Chemicals National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Manufacturing. Standards for Organic subpart F.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from the
Synthetic Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Industry.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart G.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from the
Synthetic Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Industry for Process
Vents, Storage
Vessels, Transfer
Operations, and
Wastewater.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart H.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Equipment Leaks.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart I.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Certain Processes
Subject to the
Negotiated Regulation
for Equipment Leaks.
Industrial Stationary IC National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Engines_Diesel. Standards for subpart ZZZZ.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Reciprocating
Internal Combustion
Engines.
Industrial Stationary IC National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Engines_Natural Gas. Standards for subpart ZZZZ.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Reciprocating
Internal Combustion
Engines.
Industrial/Commercial/ National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Institutional Boilers. Standards for subpart DDDDD.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Industrial/Commercial/
Institutional Boilers
and Process Heaters.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for subpart JJJJJJ.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Area
Sources: Industrial,
Commercial, and
Institutional Boilers.
Lightweight Aggregate Kilns... National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for subpart EEE.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from
Hazardous Waste
Combustors.
Medical Waste Incineration.... Standards of 40 CFR part 60
Performance and subpart Ce, Ec;
Emissions Guidelines & 40 CFR part
for Hospitals/Medical/ 62 subpart HHH.
Infectious Waste
Incinerators.
Mercury Cell Chlor Alkali National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Production. Standards for subpart IIIII.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Mercury
Emissions from
Mercury Cell Chlor
Alkali Plants.
Municipal Waste Combustion.... Standards of 40 CFR part 60
Performance for New subpart Cb, Ea,
Stationary Sources Eb; & 40 CFR
and Emission part 62 subpart
Guidelines for FFF.
Existing Sources:
Large Municipal Waste
Combustion Units.
Standards of 40 CFR part 60
Performance for New subpart AAAA,
Stationary Sources BBBB & 40 CFR
and Emission part 62 subpart
Guidelines for JJJ.
Existing Stationary
Sources: Small
Municipal Waste
Combustion Units.
[[Page 74676]]
Naphthalene Production........ National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart F.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from the
Synthetic Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Industry.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart G.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from the
Synthetic Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Industry for Process
Vents, Storage
Vessels, Transfer
Operations, and
Wastewater.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart H.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Equipment Leaks.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart I.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Certain Processes
Subject to the
Negotiated Regulation
for Equipment Leaks.
Paints and Allied Products National Emission 40 CFR part 63
(Major). Standards for subpart FFFF.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants:
Miscellaneous Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing.
Paper Coated and Laminated, National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Packaging. Standards for subpart JJJJ.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Paper and
Other Web Coating.
Pesticides Manufacture & National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Agricultural Chemicals. Standards for subpart HHH.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Pesticide
Active Ingredient
Production.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart F.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from the
Synthetic Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Industry.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart G.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from the
Synthetic Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Industry for Process
Vents, Storage
Vessels, Transfer
Operations, and
Wastewater.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart H.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Equipment Leaks.
Petroleum Refining: All National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Processes. Standards for subpart CC.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from
Petroleum Refineries.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for subpart UUU.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Petroleum Refineries:
Catalytic Cracking
Units, Catalytic
Reforming Units, and
Sulfur Recovery Units.
Phthalic Anhydride Production. National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart F.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from the
Synthetic Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Industry.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart G.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from the
Synthetic Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Industry for Process
Vents, Storage
Vessels, Transfer
Operations, and
Wastewater.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart H.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Equipment Leaks.
National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for Organic subpart I.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Certain Processes
Subject to the
Negotiated Regulation
for Equipment Leaks.
Plastics Material and Resins National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Manufacturing. Standards for subpart JJJ.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Group
IV Polymers and
Resins.
Portland Cement Manufacture: National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Hazardous Waste Kilns. Standards for subpart EEE.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from
Hazardous Waste
Combustors.
Portland Cement Manufacture: National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Non-Hazardous Waste Kilns. Standards for subpart LLL.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for the
Portland Cement
Manufacturing
Industry.
Primary Aluminum Production... National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for subpart LL.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Primary Aluminum
Reduction Plants.
Pulp and Paper_Kraft Recovery National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Furnaces. Standards for subpart MM.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Chemical Recovery
Combustion Sources at
Kraft, Soda, Sulfite,
and Stand-Alone
Semichemical Pulp
Mills.
Pulp and Paper_Lime Kilns..... National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for subpart MM.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Chemical Recovery
Combustion Sources at
Kraft, Soda, Sulfite,
and Stand-Alone
Semichemical Pulp
Mills.
Secondary Aluminum Smelting... National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for subpart RRR.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Secondary Aluminum
Production.
Secondary Lead Smelting....... National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Standards for subpart X.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Secondary Lead
Smelting.
Sewage Sludge Incineration.... Standards of 40 CFR part 60
Performance for New subparts LLLL,
Stationary Sources MMMM.
and Emission
Guidelines for
Existing Sources:
Sewage Sludge
Incineration Units.
Ship Building and Repair National Emission 40 CFR part 63
(Surface Coating). Standards for subpart II.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants for
Shipbuilding and Ship
Repair (Surface
Coating).
Transportation Equipment National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Manufacturing (SICs Combined). Standards for subpart PPPP.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Surface
Coating of
Automobiles and Light
Duty Trucks (Surface
Coating of Plastic
Parts and Products).
[[Page 74677]]
Wood Household Furniture National Emission 40 CFR part 63
Manufacturing. Standards for subpart JJ.
Hazardous Air
Pollutants from Wood
Furniture
Manufacturing
Operations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3--Federal Regulations \27\ Ensuring That Sources Accounting for
at Least 90 Percent of the Aggregate Emissions of Each 112(c)(6)
Pollutant Are Subject to 112(d)(2) or 112(d)(4) Standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Code of Federal
Percent of Regulations part and
aggregate subparts that
112(c)(6) pollutant emissions include 112(d)(2),
subject to 112 (d)(4), or 129
regulation standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alkylated Lead Compounds......... 99.7 40 CFR part 63
subparts F, G, H,
I.
Polycyclic Organic Matter (Using 90.0 40 CFR part 63
16-PAH Inventory). subparts F, G, H,
I, L, R, X, CC, GG,
II, JJ, KK, LL, MM,
EEE, JJJ, LLL, MMM,
UUU, FFFF, JJJJ,
MMMM, PPPP, ZZZZ,
CCCCC, DDDDD,
FFFFF, LLLLL,
JJJJJJ; 40 CFR part
60 subpart Cb, Ce,
Ea, Eb, AAAA, BBBB;
40 CFR part 62
subpart FFF, HHH,
JJJ.
Hexachlorobenzene................ 100 40 CFR part 63
subparts F, G, H,
I, HHH.
Mercury Compounds................ 90.3 40 CFR part 63
subparts GG, LL,
MM, EEE, LLL,
DDDDD, IIIII,
YYYYY, JJJJJJ,
EEEEEEE; 40 CFR
part 60 subpart Cb,
Ce, Ea, Eb, AAAA,
BBBB, LLLL, MMMM;
40 CFR part 62
subpart FFF, HHH,
JJJ.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls........ 94.5 40 CFR part 63
subparts EEE; 40
CFR part 60 subpart
Cb, Ce, Ea, Eb,
AAAA, BBBB; 40 CFR
part 62 subpart
FFF, HHH, JJJ.
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofurans 95.3 40 CFR part 63
(furan) and 2,3,7,8- subparts X, LL,
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin EEE, LLL, MMM,
(dioxin). DDDDD, JJJJJJ; 40
CFR part 60 subpart
Cb, Ce, Ea, Eb,
AAAA, BBBB; 40 CFR
part 62 subpart
FFF, HHH, JJJ.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Surrogate Pollutants Used by the EPA To Ensure That the Section
112(c)(6) Requirements are Fulfilled
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ An expanded version of this table, including Federal
Register citations, is available in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA has promulgated regulations, ``assuring that sources
accounting for not less than 90 per centum of the aggregate emissions
of each such pollutant are subject to standards under subsection (d)(2)
or (d)(4).'' 42 U.S.C. 7412(c)(6). The EPA set the required standards
under two approaches. In the course of promulgating MACT standards, the
EPA has often established emission standards that directly regulated
section 112(c)(6) HAP and explained that these standards contribute to
fulfilling the agency's obligations under section 112(c)(6). For
example, the NESHAPs for Gold Mine Ore Processing and Production (76 FR
9450), Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry (75 FR 54970), Municipal
Waste Combustion Units (70 FR 75348), Hospitals/Medical/Infectious
Waste Incinerators (74 FR 51368), Hazardous Waste Combustors (70 FR
59402), Sewage Sludge Incineration Units (76 FR 15372), and several
other source categories, include emissions limits that specifically
address mercury emissions. Likewise, the EPA has promulgated many
regulations that specifically address dioxins and furans to achieve the
90 percent requirement (such as NESHAPs for Municipal Waste Combustion
Units (70 FR 75348), Hospitals/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators
(74 FR 51368), Hazardous Waste Combustors (70 FR 59402), and Secondary
Aluminum Production (64 FR 6946)). The public was provided an
opportunity to comment on the above mentioned agency statements
regarding its section 112(c)(6) obligations, and comments on those
statements were addressed in those rulemakings.
In some regulations, the EPA subjected section 112(c)(6) HAP to
MACT level of control by setting emission limits for another HAP or
compound,\28\ which serves as a surrogate for the targeted section
112(c)(6) HAP. It is well established that ``EPA may use a surrogate
[substance] to regulate hazardous pollutants if it is `reasonable' to
do so'' Nat'l Lime Ass'n v. EPA, 233 F.3d 625, 637 (D.C. Cir. 2000)
(upholding EPA decision to regulate particulate matter (``PM'')
emissions as a surrogate for regulation of HAP metal emissions from
cement kilns, based on evidence that ``HAP metals are invariably
present in cement kiln PM,'' id. at 639); see also, e.g., Sierra Club
v. EPA, 353 F.3d 976, 982-85 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (upholding the EPA's use
of particulate matter as a surrogate for HAP emissions in setting MACT
standards for primary copper smelters); Bluewater Network v. EPA, 370
F.3d 1, 18 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (upholding the EPA's regulation of HC
emissions as a surrogate for regulation of fine PM emissions). See also
Kennecott Greens Creek Min. Co. v. Mine Safety and Health Admin., 476
F.3d 946, 954-55 (D.C. Cir. 2007) (``there is nothing inherently
problematic with an regulating one substance as a surrogate for another
substance.''). Some examples of the EPA's regulation of section
112(c)(6) HAP through surrogates include:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Some standards used non-HAP compounds (or groups of
compounds) as surrogates for HAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Hazardous Waste Combustors (64 FR 52828 and 70 FR 59402). POM and
PCBs were regulated through surrogate substances (total hydrocarbons
and carbon monoxide (CO)). See 64 FR 52847 and 70 FR 59432 for
discussions of these surrogates.
Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and
Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Hospital/Medical/Infectious
Waste
[[Page 74678]]
Incinerators (74 FR 51368). POM and PCBs were regulated through
surrogate substances (CO and dioxins/furans). See 74 FR 51390, 51399
for discussion of these surrogates.
Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and
Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources: Large Municipal Waste
Combustors (70 FR 75348). POM and PCBs were regulated through surrogate
substances (CO and dioxins/furans). See 70 FR 75356 for discussion of
these surrogates.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers
and Process Heaters (76 FR 15608). POM was regulated using CO as a
surrogate. See 76 FR 15653 for discussion of CO as a surrogate for POM.
In all of the above mentioned standards, which were promulgated
through notice and comment rulemaking, the EPA had explained its
section 112(c)(6) obligations and, to the extent surrogates were used,
the surrogacy relationship to the relevant section 112(c)(6) HAP. We
are not requesting comments on these prior rulemakings.
However, in some standards promulgated prior to the EPA's
development of the baseline emissions inventory for section 112(c)(6)
and publication of the initial listing of categories in the 1998
Notice, the EPA did not always explain the surrogacy relationship. As
explained below, the surrogates chosen for section 112(c)(6) HAP in
such rulemakings are reasonable and ensure that the section 112(c)(6)
HAP are ``subject to standards'' for the purposes of section 112(c)(6).
A. Surrogates for POM
1. Coke Oven Emissions as a Surrogate for POM
The EPA promulgated emissions standards under section 112(d)(2) for
coke oven emissions, which include emissions of POM and other HAP from
coke oven batteries. See 40 CFR part 63, Subpart L and Subpart CCCCC.
POM is a constituent of coke oven emissions. See 57 FR 57535 and 69 FR
48341. The EPA considered POM together with other HAP that compose coke
oven emissions because of the difficulty of measuring specific
pollutants, including POM, and because of the fugitive and variable
nature of the emissions. See 66 FR 33533 (discussing the impracticality
of measuring specific HAP compounds emitted from coke ovens). Coke oven
batteries are not enclosed sources. Consequently, coke oven emissions
are released from many different pieces of coke oven equipment through
leaks that can change in size and location over time. The MACT
standards for Coke Oven Batteries were designed to minimize coke oven
emissions which include POM as well as other HAP (see 69 FR 48341).
Because of the technological difficulty of collecting and measuring
coke oven emission from coke oven batteries, the EPA concluded that a
mass emission limitation for coke ovens was not technologically or
economically practicable. See 66 FR 33533. Instead, the EPA found
limits based on visible emissions to be the only feasible means of
regulating coke oven emissions (including POM) from coke oven batteries
at the time the MACT standards were developed. Id. Such limits are
expressed in terms of the maximum allowable seconds of visible
emissions per charge for the charging system and the maximum allowable
percent of doors, lids, and offtake systems from which visible
emissions may occur at any one time. For existing by-product batteries,
the final rule limits visible emissions from coke oven doors, topside
port lids, and offtake systems. Accordingly, the MACT standard requires
a visible emission method to measure coke oven emissions and comply
with the standard.
Under the standard, POM is controlled at the same time as other
HAP. Observation and engineering theory indicate that a reduction in
visible coke oven emissions results in a reduction in mass emissions.
For the reasons stated above, the EPA has assured that coke oven
emissions (which include POM) from coke oven batteries are subject to
MACT level of control, as required under section 112(c)(6).
2. Total HAP, Total Organic Carbon, Total Hydrocarbons, and Total
Organic HAP
Many of the source categories counted towards our 90 percent
requirement for POM are surface coating operations. In the NESHAP for
Aerospace Industries \29\ (60 FR 45956), the EPA set MACT standards for
total HAP in surface coatings, which serves as a surrogate for POM in
coatings. Polycyclic organic matter is a constituent of total HAP. The
Aerospace Industries NESHAP regulates POM through limitation of total
HAP content in coatings applied (i.e., grams of HAP per kilogram of
coating used). HAP are effectively controlled by reducing those HAP in
surface coatings, which prevents them from being subsequently emitted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Note that the NESHAP for this source category also includes
standards for volatile organic compounds. The POM emitted from this
source category is naphthalene, which is considered a volatile
organic compound.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A number of other categories subject to MACT standards for the
purposes of section 112(c)(6) are also surface coating processes
(fabricated metal products manufacturing at major sources (NESHAP for
Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products, 69 FR 130),
coated and laminated paper and packages at major sources (NESHAP for
Paper and Other Web Coating, 67 FR 72330), paint and allied products
(NESHAP for Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing, 68 FR 63852),
wood household furniture manufacturing at major sources (NESHAP for
Wood Furniture Manufacturing Operations, 60 FR 62930), transportation
equipment manufacturing (NESHAP for Surface Coating of Automobiles and
Light-Duty Trucks, 69 FR 22602), ship building and repair (NESHAP for
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair (Surface Coating) Operations, 60 FR
64330), and commercial printing: Gravure at major sources (NESHAP for
Printing and Publishing Industry, 67 FR 27132)). These source
categories address POM (and other organic HAP emissions) by regulating
total organic HAP in coatings and limiting emissions of those HAP from
coatings to levels equivalent to those of the best performing coatings
(i.e., coatings with the lowest levels of total organic HAP) through
MACT analyses, as required under section 112(d)(2). Total organic HAP
serves as a surrogate for POM and other organic HAP compounds present
in coatings in these NESHAPS. These NESHAPs employed identical
rationales when limiting HAP in coatings and there was no technical
basis in any of the above mentioned surface coating NESHAPs to
differentiate between POM and other organic HAP present in coatings.
Some source categories that are subject to MACT standards for the
purposes of section 112(c)(6) employ combustion processes that control
organic HAP. In numerous rulemakings, the EPA has set standards for
combustion processes based on the long term performance of a combustion
device under conditions typically encountered in industrial
applications.\30\ In these NESHAPs, the EPA determined that limiting
outlet concentrations of organic compounds to 20 parts per million by
volume (ppmv) or reducing total organic compound emissions by 98
percent was MACT for combustion processes. Some standards counted
towards meeting our 90 percent
[[Page 74679]]
requirement for the purposes of section 112(c)(6) set such MACT
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ See memorandum titled ``Thermal Incinerators and Flares,''
available in the docket to this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two section 112(c)(6) categories (pulp and paper--kraft recovery
furnaces and pulp and paper--lime kilns) are combustion processes that
are subject to the NESHAPs for Pulp and Paper Production (63 FR 18504
and 66 FR 3180). Kraft recovery furnaces and lime kilns at pulp and
paper mills are combustion processes that are used to recover chemicals
in the paper production process as well as to control HAP emissions
from other sources at pulp and paper mills. The EPA determined that a
properly operated kraft recovery furnace or lime kiln would reduce
total HAP exiting the combustion process by at least 98 percent (or to
a level below 20 parts per million) and established this standard as a
surrogate for organic HAP, including POM. See 63 FR 18508. This level
of control was determined to be MACT for these sources and the two
equivalent forms of the standard (98 percent reduction of total HAP or
a numerical emission limit of 20 ppmv of total HAP) ensure that organic
HAP are effectively controlled. Id. Effective operation of the kraft
recovery furnace or lime kiln will indiscriminately destroy POM along
with other HAP present in the exhaust gases and is considered MACT.\31\
There was no technical basis for differentiating between POM and other
organic HAP emitted from these chemical recovery processes since they
are present together and controlled using the same combustion process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ Use of a properly operated thermal oxidizer (operated at a
minimum temperature of 1,600[emsp14][deg]F and a minimum residence
time of 0.75 seconds) was also an equivalent control option.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other section 112(c)(6) source categories subject to standards for
total organic HAP as a surrogate for POM include industrial organic
chemicals manufacturing and naphthalene production. Total organic HAP
is used as a surrogate for regulating POM emissions from industrial
organic chemicals manufacturing and naphthalene production, both of
which are subject to the HON NESHAP.\32\ POM is indiscriminately and
effectively controlled through the same combustion processes as other
organic HAP regulated by the HON. In the HON, the EPA grouped all of
the organic HAP (including POM) together and looked at the total
organic HAP for purposes of applying controls and projecting emissions
reductions (except for wastewater where HAP-specific standards were
promulgated). For the industrial organic chemicals manufacturing and
naphthalene production source categories, this was appropriate because
emissions of POM come from the same types of activities and operations
as emissions of the other HAP and the MACT combustion controls used to
limit POM have essentially the same performance regardless of the
individual compound. In other words, the EPA had no technical reason to
make distinctions among various organic HAP except in the case of
wastewater, for which the EPA promulgated organic HAP-specific
standards. As a result, the control measures required by the HON reduce
emissions of POM and other organic HAP from process vents, storage
vessels, transfer racks, and equipment leaks. Emissions of POM
generated from these source categories are not controlled differently
than emissions of other organic HAP. By contrast, the EPA did not group
all of the organic HAP together for wastewater because different HAP
compounds have different physical properties when mixed with water. The
analyses for wastewater streams were conducted on an organic HAP-
specific basis, and the EPA promulgated organic HAP-specific standards
for wastewater streams, including a specific standard for naphthalene,
based upon physical property information for each HAP. See 40 CFR part
63, subpart G, app. (table 9) listing the control requirements for
each, including a 99 percent control requirement for naphthalene. The
control requirement for naphthalene is designed to reduce emissions of
POM from wastewater streams generated during industrial inorganic
chemicals manufacturing and naphthalene production.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Plastics material and resins manufacturing at major sources
are subject to the NESHAP for Group IV Polymers and Resins, 61 FR
48208. The requirements in this NESHAP mirror those found in the
HON. POM is regulated through the same surrogate as the HON, as
described in this section. This category references the HON in its
regulatory requirements and the rationale for surrogates chosen is
identical to the HON.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The section 112(c)(6) category ``petroleum refining--all
processes'' is subject to two NESHAPs for petroleum refineries (NESHAP
for Petroleum Refineries, 60 FR 43244, and NESHAP for Petroleum
Refineries: Catalytic Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming Units, and
Sulfur Recovery Units, 67 FR 17762). In the NESHAPs for petroleum
refineries, the EPA set MACT standards for total organic carbon,\33\
which serves as a surrogate for POM emitted from combustion processes.
POM is a constituent of total organic carbon and is controlled through
the same combustion process as other organic carbon-containing
compounds emitted by this source category. Sources subject to standards
for total organic carbon in the NESHAP for petroleum refineries subject
organic compounds, including POM, to MACT levels of control through
combustion. POM, as well as other organic compounds, are
indiscriminately and effectively destroyed through combustion and there
is no technical reason to distinguish between POM and other organic
compounds controlled through this process. The MACT standard for total
organic carbon in the NESHAP is 98 percent destruction of organic
compounds including POM or an outlet concentration of 20 ppmv. See 63
FR 48896.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ This NESHAP also allows sources to measure total organic
HAP for compliance purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NESHAP for Asphalt Roofing Manufacturing (68 FR 24561)
regulates POM and other organic HAP through total hydrocarbons (THC) as
a surrogate. As explained in the final rule, the combustion controls
required in the NESHAP effectively control hydrocarbons, including POM
and other organic HAP. Emissions of POM and other organic HAP are
controlled equally with other hydrocarbons and there was no technical
reasons to differentiate between POM and other hydrocarbons when
establishing the MACT standard. See 68 FR 24566.
3. Carbon Monoxide
In the NESHAP for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE)
(69 FR 33474), the EPA established emission standards for carbon
monoxide as a surrogate for emissions of organic hazardous air
pollutants (including POM). POM and carbon monoxide are both emitted
due to incomplete combustion. Low levels of carbon monoxide are an
indicator of good combustion practices. POM is a by-product of
combustion and good combustion practices minimize emissions of POM.
While the relationship between CO and POM was not discussed in the
context of section 112(c)(6) in the RICE rulemaking, it was discussed
in a number of other rules such as the Major Source Boilers NESHAP (76
FR 15608) and the section 129 standard for Hospital/Medical/Infectious
Waste Incinerators (74 FR 51368). This approach is based on the
demonstrated relationship between the combustion process and these
pollutants. Combustion, such as occurs in the units subject to the RICE
NESHAP and other rules, is the process of breaking apart the organic
(i.e., carbon-containing) molecules in the fuel and converting them to
carbon dioxide. Perfectly complete combustion would
[[Page 74680]]
convert all of the carbon in the fuel to carbon dioxide. Completeness
of the combustion process is dependent on several variables, including
temperature, amount of oxygen, and mixing of the fuel and oxygen.
Incomplete combustion results in production of partly broken down and
partially oxidized organic compounds, including CO and POM. Because the
conversion of CO to carbon dioxide is a difficult step, and the last
one in the destruction of hydrocarbons, including organic HAPs, it is a
good indicator of the completeness of combustion. Thus, decreasing
levels of CO are correlated with increasing destruction of organic
compounds until a threshold is reached where, because combustion of CO
is the last step in combustion, the combustion of organic materials is
essentially complete. CO concentration is thus an indicator of the
level of destruction of organic compounds, and accordingly can be used
as a surrogate to control the emissions of organic HAPs.
B. Surrogates for Hexachlorobenzene (HCB)
As shown in the updated 1990 baseline inventory (Table 1), two
source categories (pesticides manufacturing and chlorinated solvents
production) composed 100 percent of the 1990 baseline HCB emissions.
Chlorinated solvents production is subject to the HON. 59 FR 19402.
In the HON NESHAP, EPA subject HCB emissions from chlorinated solvent
production to MACT level of control by regulating total organic HAP,
which serves as a surrogate for HCB. Consistent with section 112(c)(6),
the EPA considered HCB emissions in developing the HON. HCB was
identified as an organic HAP that would be subject to the HON. See 59
FR 19463 (Table 1 to subpart F). The EPA assumed that production of HCB
would result in air emissions from gaseous discharges from reactors and
other equipment as well as losses of process fluids from equipment seal
failures, emissions from product storage and transfer, and emissions
from wastewater containing HCB. The estimates of emissions from these
processes were derived from information on the processes, physical
property information for HCB, and well-established engineering
calculations for different types of releases.
In most of the analyses, the EPA grouped all of the organic HAP
(including HCB) together and looked at the total organic HAP for
purposes of applying controls and projecting emissions reductions. For
the chlorinated solvents production source category, this was
appropriate because emissions of HCB come from the same types of
activities and operations as emissions of the other HAP and because
most of the control technologies required under section 112(d) were
expected to have essentially the same performance regardless of the
individual compound. In other words, the EPA had no technical reason to
make distinctions among various organic HAP except in the case of
wastewater, for which the EPA promulgated organic HAP-specific
standards (discussed below). As a result, the control measures required
by the HON reduce emissions of HCB and other organic HAP from process
vents, storage vessels, transfer racks, and equipment leaks. Emissions
of HCB during its production are not controlled differently than
emissions of other organic HAP.
By contrast, the EPA did not group all of the organic HAP together
for wastewater because different HAP compounds have different physical
properties when mixed with water. The analyses for wastewater streams
were conducted on an organic HAP-specific basis, and the EPA
promulgated organic HAP-specific standards for wastewater streams,
including a specific standard for HCB, based upon physical property
information for each HAP. See 40 CFR part 63, subpart G, Appendix
(Table 9, listing the removal requirements for each, including a 99
percent removal requirement for HCB). The removal requirement for HCB
is designed to reduce emissions of HCB from wastewater streams
generated during HCB production.
The section 112(c)(6) source categories, ``pesticide manufacture
and agricultural chemicals'' are subject to the NESHAP for Pesticide
Active Ingredient Production (64 FR 33550). In this NESHAP, the EPA set
MACT standards for total organic carbon and total organic HAP, which
serve as surrogates for hexachlorobenzene. 64 FR 33549 (June 23, 1999).
HCB is a constituent of each surrogate and the same logic for the
choice of surrogate discussed for the HON above applies here (i.e., the
combustion processes that serve as the basis for MACT indiscriminately
and effectively control HCB along with other organic HAP compounds).
Other sources, such as wastewater, were required to comply with organic
HAP-specific standards found in the HON, which specifically lists HCB
as one of the HAP emitted from the source category and provided HCB-
specific control requirements. See 59 FR 19463, table listing HCB as
one of the section 112 organic HAP subject to the rule.
V. Conclusion
In light of the information presented in this document, the EPA
proposes that we have fulfilled the 90 percent requirements for all
section 112(c)(6) HAP. The EPA proposes that sources accounting for at
least 90 percent of the aggregate emissions of each section 112(c)(6)
HAP are ``subject to standards'' for the purposes of section 112(c)(6).
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the OMB for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA because it does not contain any information collection
activities.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. This action
does not alter any of the standards discussed in this document.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538 and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state,
local or tribal governments or the private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This proposed action does not materially alter
the stringency of any standards discussed in this document. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
[[Page 74681]]
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because the EPA
does not believe the environmental health risks or safety risks
addressed in this action present a disproportionate risk to children. A
health and risk assessment was not performed for this action because it
does not alter any of the regulations discussed in this action.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not a subject to Executive Order 13211, because it
is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low income
or indigenous populations because it does not affect the level of
protection provided to human health or the environment. An
environmental justice evaluation was not performed for this action
because it does not alter any of the regulations discussed in this
action.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 60
Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control,
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 63
Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control,
Hazardous materials, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: December 10, 2014.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014-29482 Filed 12-15-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P