National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions: Petroleum Refinery Sector Amendments, 45232-45245 [2016-16451]
Download as PDF
45232
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(iii) Shelf life.
(iv) Compatibility information for use
in the magnetic resonance environment.
(v) Stent foreshortening information
supported by dimensional testing.
Dated: July 6, 2016.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016–16530 Filed 7–12–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2016–0643]
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Willamette River at Portland, OR
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of deviation from
drawbridge regulation.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard has issued a
temporary deviation from the operating
schedule that governs four Multnomah
County bridges: The Broadway Bridge,
mile 11.7; Burnside Bridge, mile 12.4;
Morrison Bridge, mile 12.8; and
Hawthorne Bridge, mile 13.1; all
crossing the Willamette River at
Portland, OR. This deviation is
necessary to accommodate the annual
Portland Providence Bridge Pedal event.
The deviation allows the bridges to
remain in the closed-to-navigation
position to allow safe roadway
movement of event participants.
DATES: This deviation is effective from
6 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. on August 14, 2016.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this
deviation, [USCG–2016–00643] is
available at https://www.regulations.gov.
Type the docket number in the
‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’
Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this temporary
deviation, call or email Mr. Steven
Fischer, Bridge Administrator,
Thirteenth Coast Guard District;
telephone 206–220–7282, email d13-pfd13bridges@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Multnomah County has requested a
temporary deviation from the operating
schedule for the Broadway Bridge, mile
11.7; Burnside Bridge, mile 12.4;
Morrison Bridge, mile 12.8; and
Hawthorne Bridge, mile 13.1; all
crossing the Willamette River at
Portland, OR. The requested deviation is
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:54 Jul 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
to accommodate the annual Portland
Providence Bridge Pedal event. To
facilitate this event, the draws of theses
bridges will be maintained as follows:
The Broadway Bridge provides a
vertical clearance of 90 feet in the
closed-to-navigation position; Burnside
Bridge provides a vertical clearance of
64 feet in the closed-to-navigation
position; Morrison Bridge provides a
vertical clearance of 69 feet in the
closed-to-navigation position; and
Hawthorne Bridge provides a vertical
clearance of 49 feet in the closed-tonavigation position; all clearances are
referenced to the vertical clearance
above Columbia River Datum 0.0. The
normal operating schedule for all four
bridges is in 33 CFR 117.897. This
deviation allows the Broadway Bridge,
Burnside Bridge, Morrison Bridge, and
Hawthorne Bridge to remain in the
closed-to-navigation position and need
not open for maritime traffic from 6 a.m.
to 12:30 p.m. on August 14, 2016.
Waterway usage on this part of the
Willamette River includes vessels
ranging from commercial tug and barge
to small pleasure craft.
Vessels able to pass through the
bridge in the closed-to-navigation
positions may do so at any time. The
bridges will be able to open for
emergencies, and there is no immediate
alternate route for vessels to pass. The
Coast Guard will inform the users of the
waterway, through our Local and
Broadcast Notices to Mariners, of the
change in operating schedule for the
bridges so that vessels can arrange their
transits to minimize any impact caused
by the temporary deviation.
In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e),
the drawbridges must return to their
regular operating schedules
immediately at the end of the effective
period of this temporary deviation. This
deviation from the operating regulations
is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.
Dated: July 6, 2016.
Steven M. Fischer,
Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2016–16471 Filed 7–12–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 60 and 63
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0682; FRL–9948–92–
OAR]
RIN 2016–AS83
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions:
Petroleum Refinery Sector
Amendments
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This action amends the
National Emissions Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for
Petroleum Refineries in three respects.
First, this action adjusts the compliance
date for regulatory requirements that
apply at maintenance vents during
periods of startup, shutdown,
maintenance or inspection for sources
constructed or reconstructed on or
before June 30, 2014. Second, this action
amends the compliance dates for the
regulatory requirements that apply
during startup, shutdown, or hot
standby for fluid catalytic cracking units
(FCCU) and startup and shutdown for
sulfur recovery units (SRU) constructed
or reconstructed on or before June 30,
2014. Finally, this action finalizes
technical corrections and clarifications
to the NESHAP and the New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS) for
Petroleum Refineries. These
amendments are being finalized in
response to new information submitted
after these regulatory requirements were
promulgated as part of the residual risk
and technology review (RTR)
rulemaking, which was published on
December 1, 2015. This action will have
an insignificant effect on emissions
reductions and costs.
DATES: This final rule is effective on July
13, 2016.
ADDRESSES: The Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) has established
a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0682. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov Web
site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., confidential business information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
13JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
A. Executive Orders 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 (NTTAA)
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
To Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
available electronically through https://
www.regulations.gov.
Ms.
Brenda Shine, Sector Policies and
Programs Division, Refining and
Chemicals Group (E143–01), Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711; telephone number: (919) 541–
3608; email address: shine.brenda@
epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Preamble Acronyms and
Abbreviations. We use multiple
acronyms and terms in this preamble.
While this list may not be exhaustive, to
ease the reading of this preamble and for
reference purposes, the EPA defines the
following terms and acronyms here:
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI confidential business information
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COMS continuous opacity monitoring
system
CPMS continuous parameter monitoring
system
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ESP electrostatic precipitator
FCCU fluid catalytic cracking unit
HAP hazardous air pollutants
LEL lower explosive limit
NESHAP national emissions standards for
hazardous air pollutants
NSPS new source performance standards
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health
Administration
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
PSM Process Safety Management
QA quality assurance
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RMP Risk Management Plan
RSR Refinery Sector Rule
RTR residual risk and technology review
SRU sulfur recovery unit
TTN Technology Transfer Network
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Organization of This Document. The
information in this preamble is
organized as follows:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
B. Where can I get a copy of this document
and other related information?
C. Judicial Review and Administrative
Reconsideration
II. Background Information
III. Final Revisions to Compliance Dates and
Technical Corrections in the NSPS and
NESHAP for Petroleum Refineries and
Revisions on the February 9, 2016
Proposal
IV. Summary of Comments and Responses
A. Compliance Date Amendments
B. Technical and Editorial Corrections
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:54 Jul 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
Regulated Entities. Categories and
entities potentially regulated by this
action are shown in Table 1 of this
preamble.
TABLE 1—INDUSTRIAL SOURCE CATEGORIES AFFECTED BY THIS FINAL
ACTION
NESHAP and source
category
NAICS a Code
Petroleum Refining Industry
a North
American
Industry
324110
Classification
System.
Table 1 of this preamble is not
intended to be exhaustive, but rather to
provide a guide for readers regarding
entities likely to be affected by the final
action for the source categories listed.
To determine whether your facility is
affected, you should examine the
applicability criteria in the appropriate
NESHAP or NSPS. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of
any aspect of these NESHAP or NSPS,
please contact the appropriate person
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble.
B. Where can I get a copy of this
document and other related
information?
In addition to being available in the
docket, an electronic copy of this final
action will also be available on the
Internet through the Technology
Transfer Network (TTN) Web site, a
forum for information and technology
exchange in various areas of air
pollution control. Following signature
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45233
by the EPA Administrator, the EPA will
post a copy of this final action at https://
www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/petref.html.
Following publication in the Federal
Register, the EPA will post the Federal
Register version and key technical
documents at this same Web site.
C. Judicial Review and Administrative
Reconsideration
Under Clean Air Act (CAA) section
307(b)(1), judicial review of this final
action is available only by filing a
petition for review in the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit by September 12,
2016. Under CAA section 307(b)(2), the
requirements established by this final
rule may not be challenged separately in
any civil or criminal proceedings
brought by the EPA to enforce the
requirements.
Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA
further provides that ‘‘[o]nly an
objection to a rule or procedure which
was raised with reasonable specificity
during the period for public comment
(including any public hearing) may be
raised during judicial review.’’ This
section also provides a mechanism for
the EPA to reconsider the rule ‘‘[i]f the
person raising an objection can
demonstrate to the Administrator that it
was impracticable to raise such
objection within [the period for public
comment] or if the grounds for such
objection arose after the period for
public comment (but within the time
specified for judicial review) and if such
objection is of central relevance to the
outcome of the rule.’’ Any person
seeking to make such a demonstration
should submit a Petition for
Reconsideration to the Office of the
Administrator, U.S. EPA, Room 3000,
EPA WJC North Building, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460, with a copy to the person
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section, and the
Associate General Counsel for the Air
and Radiation Law Office, Office of
General Counsel (Mail Code 2344A),
U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
II. Background Information
The EPA promulgated NESHAP
pursuant to the CAA sections 112(d)(2)
and (3) for petroleum refineries located
at major sources in three separate rules.
These standards are also referred to as
maximum achievable control
technology (MACT) standards. The first
rule was promulgated on August 18,
1995, in 40 CFR part 63, subpart CC
(also referred to as Refinery MACT 1)
and regulates miscellaneous process
vents, storage vessels, wastewater,
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
13JYR1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
45234
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
equipment leaks, gasoline loading racks,
marine tank vessel loading, and heat
exchange systems. The second rule was
promulgated on April 11, 2002, in 40
CFR part 63, subpart UUU (also referred
to as Refinery MACT 2) and regulates
process vents on catalytic cracking units
(CCU, including FCCU), catalytic
reforming units, and SRU. Finally, on
October 28, 2009, the EPA promulgated
amendments to Refinery MACT 1 to
include MACT standards for heat
exchange systems, which were not
originally addressed in Refinery MACT
1. This same rulemaking included
updating cross-references to the General
Provisions in 40 CFR part 63.
The EPA completed an RTR of
Refinery MACT 1 and 2, publishing
proposed amendments on June 30, 2014.
These proposed amendments also
included technical corrections and
clarifications raised in a 2008 industry
petition for reconsideration of NSPS for
Petroleum Refineries (40 CFR part 60,
subpart Ja). After seeking, receiving and
addressing public comments, the EPA
published final amendments on
December 1, 2015.
The December 1, 2015, final
amendments included requirements in
Refinery MACT 1 for process vents
designated as ‘‘maintenance vents.’’
Maintenance vents are those whose use
is needed only during startup,
shutdown, maintenance or inspection of
equipment where the equipment is
emptied, depressurized, degassed or
placed into service. The December 1,
2015, final amendments require that the
hydrocarbon content of the vapor in the
equipment served by the maintenance
vent to be less than or equal to 10
percent of the lower explosive limit
(LEL) prior to venting to the
atmosphere. The December 1, 2015,
final rule also provides specific
allowances for situations when the 10
percent LEL cannot be demonstrated or
is technically infeasible. After
promulgation of the rule, we learned
that there was confusion regarding the
interpretation of the dates provided in
Table 11 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart CC.
We intended the compliance date for
maintenance vents located at sources
constructed on or before June 30, 2014,
to be the next qualifying maintenance
activity occurring after February 1, 2016
(the effective date of the December 1,
2015, final amendments).
Additionally, the December 1, 2015,
final amendments included alternative
standards for startup and shutdown
events for FCCU and SRU in Refinery
MACT 2. For FCCU, the final
amendments included two options for
demonstrating compliance with the
particulate matter (PM) limit (as a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:54 Jul 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
surrogate for metal hazardous air
pollutants [HAP]) during periods of
startup, shutdown, or hot standby in
§ 63.1564(a)(5). These options are:
Meeting the emission limit(s) that apply
during normal operations or meeting a
minimum cyclone face velocity limit.
Similarly, two options were provided
for demonstrating compliance with the
carbon monoxide (CO) limit for FCCU
(as a surrogate for organic HAP) during
periods of startup and shutdown in
§ 63.1565(a)(5). These options include:
Meeting the emission limit(s) that apply
during normal operations or meeting an
excess oxygen limit in the exhaust from
the catalyst regenerator. For SRU, three
compliance options were provided to
demonstrate compliance during periods
of startup and shutdown in
§ 63.1568(a)(4). These are: Meeting the
emission limit(s) that apply during
normal operations, sending purge gases
to a flare that meets certain operating
requirements, or sending purge gases to
a thermal oxidizer or incinerator that
meets specific temperature and excess
oxygen requirements. For owners or
operators electing to comply with the
alternative limits for startup, shutdown,
or hot standby for FCCU (e.g., minimum
cyclone face velocity option for PM;
excess oxygen limit for the catalyst
regenerator exhaust for CO) or for
startup or shutdown for SRU (e.g.,
sending purge gases to a thermal
oxidizer or incinerator meeting
temperature and excess oxygen
requirements), the compliance date
established in the final amendments
was February 1, 2016 (the effective date
of the December 1, 2015, RTR final
amendments).
Since the promulgation of the
December 1, 2015, final amendments,
the EPA received new information that
the compliance dates for the
maintenance vents and alternative
startup/shutdown standards for FCCU
and SRU pose safety concerns. This
information indicated that the
compliance dates do not allow sufficient
time to complete the management of
change process including evaluating the
change, forming an internal team to
accomplish the change, engineering the
change which could include developing
new set points, installing new controls
or alarms, conducting risk assessments,
updating associated plans and
procedures, providing training,
performing pre-startup safety reviews,
and implementing the change as
required by other regulatory programs.
Further, the information indicated that
in some cases refinery owners or
operators may need to install additional
control equipment to meet the new
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
requirements. On January 19, 2016, the
EPA received a petition for
reconsideration from the American
Petroleum Institute (API) and the
American Fuel and Petrochemical
Manufacturers (AFPM) formally
requesting that EPA reconsider these
issues.
On February 9, 2016, the EPA
published proposed revisions to the
December 1, 2015, final amendments.
Specifically, the proposal included a
revision to the compliance date in 40
CFR part 63 subpart CC for the
requirements for maintenance vents
which apply during periods of startup,
shutdown, maintenance or inspection
for sources constructed or reconstructed
on or before June 30, 2014. The proposal
also included a revision to the
compliance dates in 40 CFR part 63
subpart UUU for the use of the
alternative standards for FCCU and SRU
which apply during startup and
shutdown and for FCCU during hot
standby for sources constructed or
reconstructed on or before June 30,
2014. Finally, the proposed rule
provided technical corrections and
clarifications to the NESHAP and NSPS
Ja.
The proposal provided a 45-day
comment period ending on March 25,
2016. The EPA received comments on
the proposed revisions from refiners,
trade associations, a state environmental
and health department, environmental
groups, and private citizens. This final
rule provides a discussion of the final
revisions, including changes in response
to comments on the February 9, 2016,
proposal, as well as a summary of the
significant comments received and
responses. This action fully responds to
the January 19, 2016, petition for
reconsideration submitted by API and
AFPM.
III. Final Revisions to Compliance
Dates and Technical Corrections in the
NSPS and NESHAP for Petroleum
Refineries and Revisions on the
February 9, 2016, Proposal
In the February 9, 2016 proposal, we
proposed to require owners and
operators of sources that were
constructed or reconstructed on or
before June 30, 2014, to comply with the
requirements for maintenance vents
during startup, shutdown, maintenance
and inspection; the requirements for
FCCU during startup, shutdown and hot
standby; and the requirements for SRU
during startup and shutdown no later
than 18 months after the effective date
of the December 1, 2015, rule (i.e., no
later than August 1, 2017). We are
finalizing these amendments as
proposed.
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
13JYR1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
We also proposed to make clarifying
revisions to Table 11 in 40 CFR part 63,
subpart CC to more clearly delineate the
compliance dates for the various
provisions in subpart CC and to reflect
the compliance date proposed for the
maintenance vent provisions. We are
finalizing these amendments as
proposed with minor clarifications.
Relative to the amendments made to
Table 11 in subpart CC, we received a
comment that the compliance dates for
storage vessels in the proposed revisions
to Table 11 do not reflect the use of the
overlap provisions in § 63.640(n). The
overlap provisions in § 63.640(n) allow
Group 1 and 2 storage vessels to comply
with other regulations (e.g., 40 CFR part
60, subpart Kb) as a means of
demonstrating compliance with the
standards in Refinery MACT 1.
Compliance with the overlap provisions
is in lieu of complying with the storage
vessel provisions in Refinery MACT 1.
We acknowledge that Table 11 does not
directly reference the overlap provisions
included in § 63.640(n). We are
clarifying in Table 11 that owners or
operators of affected storage vessels
must transition to comply with the
provisions in § 63.660 ‘‘. . . or, if
applicable, § 63.640(n) . . .’’ on or
before April 29, 2016.
We also proposed a number of
technical and clarifying revisions to
other portions of the regulations. These
amendments are listed below and are
being finalized as proposed with minor
revision as noted in Items 3 and 9.
Finally, we are making two additional
revisions, as described following the
numbered paragraphs below. One
change is to correct an error we
identified and the other is in response
to a comment we received during the
comment period.
1. Revising the first sentence in
§ 60.102a(f)(1)(i) to incorporate the
pollutant of concern, sulfur dioxide
(SO2), directly into the regulatory text
rather than inside a parenthesis within
the sentence;
2. Making a grammatical correction to
the closed blowdown system definition
in § 63.641 by adding an ‘‘a’’ before the
phrase, ‘‘. . . process vessel to a control
device or back into the process.’’;
3. Replacing the term ‘‘relief valve’’
and ‘‘valve’’ with ‘‘pressure relief
device’’ and ‘‘device’’ in the force
majeure event definition in §§ 63.641
and 63.670(o)(1)(ii)(B), respectively. We
received a comment that the term
‘‘valve’’ should be replaced with the
term ‘‘device’’ in § 63.670(o)(1)(vi) for
consistency and are finalizing this
change;
4. Expanding the list of exceptions for
equipment leak requirements in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:54 Jul 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 63.648(a) to ensure that the intent of
the rulemaking is clear, that pressure
relief devices subject to the
requirements in either 40 CFR part 60,
subpart VV or part 63, subpart H and the
requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart
CC are to comply with the requirements
in § 63.648(j)(1) and (2), instead of the
pressure relief device requirements in
40 CFR part 60, subpart VV and 40 CFR
part 63, subpart H;
5. Editing the reporting and
recordkeeping requirements related to
fenceline monitoring contained in
§ 63.655(h)(8) to provide clarity that
compliance reports are due 45 days after
the end of each reporting period. The
term ‘‘periodic’’ in the context of the
report for fenceline monitoring has been
removed to avoid confusion concerning
the due dates of other periodic reports
contained in 40 CFR part 63, subpart CC
such as those specified in § 63.655(g);
6. Editing the siting requirements for
passive monitors near known sources of
volatile organic compounds (VOC)
contained in § 63.658(c)(1) to clarify that
a monitor should be placed on the
shoreline adjacent to the dock for
marine vessel loading operations by
removing the phrase ‘‘that are located
offshore’’;
7. Revising the catalytic reforming
unit (CRU) pressure limit exclusion
provision in 40 CFR 63.1566(a)(4) to
specify that refiners have 3 years to
comply with the requirements to meet
emission limitations in Tables 15 and 16
if they actively purge or depressurize at
vessel pressures of 5 pounds per square
inch gage (psig) or less;
8. Revising the entry for item 1 in
Table 2 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart UUU
to clarify that refineries have 18 months
to comply with the 20-percent opacity
operating limit for units subject to
Refinery NSPS subpart J or units
electing to comply with Refinery NSPS
subpart J provisions;
9. Removing the reference to
§ 60.102a(b)(1) in § 63.1564(a)(1)(iv).
Additionally, in response to a comment,
we are removing the phrase ‘‘of this
Chapter’’ from this same provision for
consistency.
10. Making a typographical correction
to the reference to § 63.1566(a)(5)(iii) in
40 CFR part 63, subpart UUU, Table 3,
Item 12 to correctly reference
§ 63.1564(a)(5)(ii); and
11. Making an editorial correction to
add the word ‘‘and’’ in place of a
semicolon in 40 CFR part 63, subpart
UUU, Table 5, Item 2.
In reviewing the rule requirements,
we noted that the last sentence of the
introductory paragraph in
§ 63.1564(a)(1) refers to ‘‘. . . the four
options in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45235
(vi) of this section.’’ There are six
options in these paragraphs, and thus
we are finalizing an amendment to
revise § 63.1564(a)(1) to accurately
describe these paragraphs by replacing
the word ‘‘four’’ with ‘‘six.’’
As discussed in more detail in Section
IV of this preamble, in response to a
comment, we are finalizing an
amendment to item (5) in the definition
of miscellaneous process vent to clarify
that in situ sampling systems will be
excluded from the definition until
February 1, 2016. After this date, these
sampling systems will be considered
miscellaneous process vents. Systems
which are determined to be Group 1
miscellaneous process vents will need
to comply with applicable provisions no
later January 30, 2019.
IV. Summary of Comments and
Responses
This section summarizes substantive
comments received on the February
2016 proposal. We received some
comments suggesting rule revisions for
requirements in the December 2015 rule
for which we did not propose a revision
in the February 2016 proposal. These
comments were not specifically
summarized or addressed because they
are beyond the scope of the
amendments and we did not open those
provisions for public comment. The
Agency may elect to consider the issues
raised by those comments in the context
of a future rulemaking action.
A. Compliance Date Amendments
Comment 1: Two commenters
expressed support for the proposal to
revise the compliance dates for the
maintenance vent provisions during
periods of startup, shutdown,
maintenance and inspection in 40 CFR
part 63, subpart CC, for the alternative
standards for startup, shutdown and hot
standby for FCCU in 40 CFR part 63,
subpart UUU and the alternative
standards for startup and shutdown for
SRU in subpart UUU. These
commenters agreed that additional time
is needed to install controls and/or
comply with management of change
requirements in applicable process
safety management (PSM) and risk
management program (RMP)
requirements. Commenters asserted that
refineries need this time to fully
perform applicability determinations,
complete the procurement process to
acquire consultant services to assist
with these applicability determinations,
modify internal procedures, perform
training and implement control/
equipment/operational changes as
needed.
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
13JYR1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
45236
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
One commenter further explained that
they also interpreted statements in the
December 1, 2015, preamble to the final
rule (80 FR at 75186) as EPA’s intent to
provide 18 months for compliance with
the provisions in §§ 63.1564 and
63.1565 including the associated
monitoring, recordkeeping and
reporting requirements. The commenter
points out that the regulatory provisions
in 63.1564 (a)(2) and in Table 2 of
subpart UUU do not reflect this intent
and that these provisions should be
revised to reflect an August 1, 2017,
compliance date. The commenter
specifically requested that EPA clarify
the regulatory language to provide an
August 2017 compliance date for
monitoring requirements for FCCU
controls, such as bag leak detectors,
total power and the secondary current
operating limits for electrostatic
precipitators (ESP), and daily checks of
the air or water pressure to the spray
nozzles on jet ejector-type wet scrubbers
or other types of wet scrubbers
equipped with atomizing spray nozzles.
The commenter further explained that
pursuant to § 63.1572(c)(1)–(5), the
compliance time for continuous
parameter monitoring systems (CPMS)
specifications in Table 41, when
coupled with the revisions to
monitoring requirements contained in
§ 63.1572(d), is inadequate (the
commenter believes these requirements
are effective within 60 days of the
effective date of the Refinery Sector
Rule) given that refineries would have
to perform an assessment of each CPMS
as well an assessment of potential
equipment and operational changes.
Response 1: We appreciate the
support for the proposed revisions. We
disagree, however, with the comment
indicating a belief that we also intended
to provide 18 months for refineries to
comply with the FCCU provisions in
§§ 63.1564 and 63.1565, including the
associated monitoring, recordkeeping
and reporting requirements.
Sections 63.1564 and 63.1565 refer to
NSPS Ja requirements, which are not
new requirements for some sources
pursuant to the December 2015 final
amendments. In the preamble to the
December 2015 final amendments, we
stated (80 FR 75186): ‘‘As proposed, we
are providing 18 months after the
effective date of the final rule to conduct
required performance tests and comply
with any revised [emphasis added]
operating limits for FCCU.’’ We did not
consider the pre-existing NSPS
requirements referred to in §§ 63.1564
and 63.1565 to be ‘‘revised operating
limits’’ for sources subject to NSPS Ja.
We note that an 18-month compliance
period for these NSPS Ja requirements is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:54 Jul 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
not supported because the proposed and
final MACT operating limits are
identical to the NSPS Ja operating limits
which already apply to these affected
sources. For refinery sources subject to
the December 2015 final amendments
and that are non-NSPS Ja sources,
Tables 1 through 14 to 40 CFR part 63,
subpart UUU clearly provide an 18month compliance period for refineries
to transition from the existing
requirements to the revised operating
limits.
With regard to the revised FCCU
monitoring requirements in
§ 63.1572(d), as discussed in the
Response to Comment document for the
December 1, 2015, final rule (Docket
Item No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0682–
0802), we amended the alternative
monitoring approach to require daily
inspections of the air or water supply
lines with the understanding that no
new monitoring equipment is needed to
complete these inspections. Therefore,
we proposed and then finalized these
alternative requirements to apply
immediately on the effective date of the
rule.
With regard to the compliance time
for CPMS, the commenter is mistaken
that the regulations provide a 60-day
compliance period. Section
63.1572(c)(1) provides an 18-month
transition period to the new CPMS
quality assurance (QA) requirements in
Table 41. When establishing this
compliance date, we estimated that the
time to perform these evaluations,
request vendor quotes, if necessary to
upgrade or replace existing monitors,
and install the new/upgraded
equipment would require about 12 to 18
months. Thus, in the promulgating the
final rule, the Agency considered the
types of concerns raised by the
commenter and provided an 18-month
transition period.
We note that pursuant to the
provisions in § 63.6(i), which are
generally applicable, refinery owners or
operators may seek compliance
extensions on a case-by-case basis if
necessary.
Comment 2: One commenter stated
that by extending the compliance dates
for the provisions addressed in the
proposal, the EPA has extended the
amount of time for illegal exemptions
for periods of startup, shutdown and
malfunction. The commenter also
asserted that substituting the general
duty requirements as the continuous
emissions limit during the period
between the promulgation and effective
date is not consistent with the CAA as
it requires that section 112 standards
apply at all times, and general duty
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
requirements do not meet the
requirements of CAA section 112.
The commenter also maintained that
the CAA requires that air toxics
standards should be effective upon
promulgation, and provides that
existing sources should comply as
expeditiously as practicable. The
commenter argued that the EPA has not
demonstrated in the record how 18
months is as ‘‘expeditiously as
practicable,’’ and therefore the
extension of the compliance period is
arbitrary and unlawful. The commenter
continued that the reasons given for the
extension were in part based on a
potential need to install controls, but
the EPA did not provide an independent
analysis demonstrating that there is an
actual need for new controls. Further,
the commenter asserted that this
scenario could be addressed on a caseby-case basis by the provisions in
§ 63.6(i) rather than as a blanket
exemption for all sources. The
commenter also stated that the other
reason given for the extension,
compliance with the RMP and the
Occupational Safety and Health
Administration’s (OSHA) PSM, does not
justify an extension for compliance with
the air toxics program. The commenter
also stated that the timing for removing
these SSM exemptions has been delayed
for approximately 8 years (since the
2008 Sierra Club ruling) due to
rulemaking processes and delays, and
that further delay is unwarranted.
Finally, the commenter stated that the
EPA did not provide emissions data to
support their statements in the preamble
that the emission impacts from
extending the compliance deadlines
will have ‘‘an insignificant effect on
emissions reductions.’’
Response 2: We share the
commenter’s desire to implement the
new Refinery Sector Rule provisions as
quickly as possible. However, we have
determined that it is infeasible to
immediately comply with certain
provisions of the December 1, 2015,
final rule, and it is, therefore, necessary
to provide the additional compliance
time. Based on the information that we
now have, we concluded that facilities
require additional time to comply with
certain provisions in the final rule in
order to allow facilities to install the
appropriate monitoring equipment,
change procedures, and, if necessary,
add or modify emission control
equipment.
We disagree with the commenters that
we substituted the general duty
requirement for the requirements for
which we are establishing an 18-month
compliance period. Rather, we
discussed the general duty provision to
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
13JYR1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
emphasize that although compliance
with the relevant amendments would be
delayed for a period of time, these
sources remain obligated to comply
with good air pollution control practices
as specified in the general duty
requirements. We were not suggesting
that the ‘‘general duty’’ requirement is
sufficient to meet CAA section 112 for
the regulated sources at issue in this
rule.
We disagree with the commenter that
the compliance period is not supported
and is therefore arbitrary. The process
equipment associated with maintenance
vents, FCCU and SRU, are subject to the
requirements of the RMP regulation in
40 CFR part 68 and the OSHA PSM
standard in 29 CFR part 1910.
Therefore, any operational or procedural
changes resulting from meeting the
applicable standards must follow the
management of change procedures in
the respective regulatory programs, as
codified in § 68.75 and § 1910.119(l). As
part of the management of change
process, the EPA expects that facilities
will have to perform an upfront
assessment to determine what changes
are required to meet the maintenance
vent requirements and alternative
standards for FCCU and SRU during
periods of startup and shutdown. Based
on the new information we received
after these regulatory requirements were
promulgated, we anticipate that refinery
owners or operators will have to adjust
or install new instrumentation
including alarms, closed drain headers,
equipment blowdown drums, and other
new or revised equipment and controls
in order to comply with the new startup
and shutdown provisions. Where these
types of projects are necessary, it is
likely facilities will have to hire a
contractor to assist with the project and
complete the procurement process.
Additionally, we expect that facilities
will have to perform risk assessments
and review and revise standard
operating procedures, as necessary.
Further, the management of change
provisions also require that employees
who are involved in operating a process,
and maintenance and contract
employees whose job tasks are affected
by the change, must be trained prior to
start up of the affected process. Finally,
facilities are required to conduct prestartup safety reviews and obtain
authorization to fully implement and
startup the modified process and/or
equipment.
We disagree that compliance
obligations with EPA’s RMP and
OSHA’s PSM cannot be considered in
determining the appropriate compliance
period to the extent those obligations
can be met consistent with the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:54 Jul 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
compliance period mandated by CAA
section 112. In the present case, the
compliance period of 18 months is well
within the maximum 3-year compliance
period allowed by CAA section 112(i).
When considering an appropriate
compliance timeframe, it is important to
consider the time it takes to safely
transition to new operating procedures.
If an explosion or fire occurs due to
inadequate planning and evaluation of
new procedures, the amount of toxics
released to the atmosphere could dwarf
the emission reductions anticipated
from the new startup and shutdown
requirements. Such an event could
cause harm to refinery personnel and
unnecessarily expose the neighboring
community to releases of toxic
emissions. Therefore, we believe it is
reasonable to consider other applicable
regulatory compliance obligations for
these programs when establishing
compliance dates for CAA section 112
requirements.
While we understand the
commenter’s concerns that the
regulatory changes did not occur as
quickly as they would have hoped, we
cannot ignore feasibility and
compliance with health and safety
requirements, as discussed above, in
determining an appropriate compliance
timeframe. The ‘‘delay’’ in establishing
these requirements does not somehow
make it technically feasible to
immediately comply with these new
standards. Even with the 18-month
timeframe being finalized today, sources
must still begin the planning and
evaluation process immediately to meet
the compliance date.
We agree with the commenters that
another statutory mechanism for
addressing compliance issues such as
the ones addressed here would be to
rely on facility-specific requests
pursuant to § 63.6(i). However, when a
significant number of extension requests
are anticipated, we consider it
reasonable and more efficient to provide
the additional compliance time within
the rule. Providing the compliance time
in the rule reduces both industry and
Agency burden associated with
developing and evaluating waivers on a
case-by-case basis. It also reduces the
uncertainty that facilities face when a
regulatory compliance date is
approaching and a request for an
extension has not yet been addressed by
the Agency. Moreover, in the current
case, the compliance period established
in the December 1, 2015 rule was only
a few months after the publication of the
rule and that time period was generally
not sufficient for a case-by-case
extension process.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45237
We believe that the later compliance
date will have an insignificant effect on
a refinery’s overall emissions. The
maintenance vent provisions apply only
to vent emissions associated with taking
equipment out of service for
maintenance or repair. While there may
be a number of pieces of equipment
taken out of service over a given year,
many facility owners or operators
already have standard procedures for
de-inventorying equipment. While these
procedures may not specifically meet
the final rule requirements (for example,
they may depressure to atmosphere
once the vessel is below 5 psig, but may
not measure the lower explosive limit
even though it could be monitored), the
general equipment de-inventory
procedures will typically limit
emissions to the atmosphere. For the
startup and shutdown operating limit
alternatives for FCCU and SRU, these
equipment may be shut down only once
every 2 to 5 years. Therefore, we expect
very few of these events to occur during
the revised compliance period so there
are limited opportunities for these
emissions and limited opportunities for
emissions reductions. We note that
when we finalized the FCCU
requirements, we did not project any
emissions reductions associated with
these requirements. This is partly due to
the limited frequency of occurrence and
partly due to uncertainties in the
existing practices used by facilities to
reduce these emissions. While we
developed these requirements to ensure
these sources had emission limitations
that applied at all times, the decision
was not based on a quantitative estimate
of the emission reduction that would be
achieved by these requirements. In
general, we believe the emissions from
these emission points to be relatively
small compared to the refinery’s total
HAP emissions so that the emissions
reduction achieved by the new
requirements would be small. Therefore,
we expect that the modification to the
compliance dates in this final rule will
not significantly impact a refinery’s
emissions.
Comment 3: One commenter stated
that the references in the proposed rule
to the procedures for requesting
compliance extensions through § 63.6(i)
are problematic for state regulators and
industry. Facilities that have to install
new controls or otherwise invest in
capital projects in order to comply with
the new maintenance vent requirements
or alternative standards for FCCU and
SRU may not have ample time to submit
such requests. Instead of requiring
compliance by August 2017, the
commenter suggested that the EPA
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
13JYR1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
45238
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
finalize a compliance date 6 months
after promulgation of the final rule. This
would allow sources an opportunity to
use the provisions in § 63.6(i) as
determined appropriate on a case-bycase basis by the delegated authority.
Finally, the commenter suggested that,
in the future, the EPA should
promulgate standards with compliance
dates at least 120 days after
promulgation and that the EPA should
issue a stay of the requirements if
similar situations requiring compliance
date extensions should arise.
Response 3: As explained in the
previous response, a compliance date of
August 1, 2017, is consistent with CAA
section 112(i)(3). And, because
numerous facilities will likely need
additional time beyond the current
compliance date, it is reasonable to rely
on that provision instead of setting a
shorter compliance period and relying
on the case-by-case extension provisions
of CAA section 112 and § 63.6(i).
Furthermore, for the reasons provided
in the previous response, we do not
believe that a 6-month compliance
period as requested by this commenter
reflects the actual time it will take for
most facilities to comply with these
provisions. The request that we provide
a minimum of 120 days for compliance
in future rulemakings goes beyond the
scope of this rulemaking. Compliance
periods for future regulations will be
addressed in the context of the relevant
proposed and final rules.
Comment 4: One commenter
requested that an 18-month extension to
the compliance date be provided to
allow for compliance with the general
duty requirements for maintenance
vents. The commenter stated that prior
to the December 1, 2015 final
amendments, designated maintenance
vents were not considered ‘‘affected
facilities,’’ and, therefore, were not
subject to the general duty provisions.
The commenter argued that facilities
will need to perform applicability
determinations for vents on refinery
processes, update procedures, perform
training, and go through the OSHA
management of change process to assess
the implications of the general duty
clause on applicable vents, and thus
sources need time to do so.
Response 4: We did not propose any
change to the general duty requirement
for ‘‘maintenance vents.’’ Rather, we
proposed a revision to the compliance
date for startup, shutdown, maintenance
and inspection for maintenance vents.
Although we noted that the general duty
provision applies prior to the proposed
revised compliance date, we did not
propose to modify the compliance
obligation for meeting the general duty
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:54 Jul 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
requirement. Therefore, we believe that
this comment goes beyond the scope of
this rulemaking. However, we note that
we consider it standard practice for any
operating facility to use good air
pollution control practices regardless of
the emission source and whether or not
that source is specifically regulated by
the MACT standard; thus, additional
time to meet such a requirement would
not be warranted.
Comment 5: One commenter stated
that the EPA should extend the
compliance dates for the monitoring
requirements for bypass lines of
miscellaneous process vents in
§ 63.644(c). The commenter asserted
that the February 1, 2016 API/AFPM
supplemental petition provides a list of
reasons why such an extension is
needed and that EPA could rely on the
same justification as that for the
compliance date extension being
granted for the startup, shutdown,
maintenance and inspection
requirements for maintenance vents in
§ 63.643(c). The commenter noted that
the API/AFPM petition explains that
items previously excluded from the
monitoring requirements in § 63.644(c),
such as high point bleeds, analyzer
vents, open-ended valves or lines, and
pressure relief valves are no longer
excluded under the December 2015 final
rule, and, thus, would now be required
to install flow indicators or employ carseal or lock-and-key type valves. The
API/AFPM petition also explains that
since onstream analyzer vents (in situ
sampling systems) are excluded from
the definition of miscellaneous process
vents through January 30, 2019, but not
specifically excluded from the bypass
line monitoring provisions, some local
agencies may interpret that the bypass
line provisions apply to analyzer vents
and would require analyzer vents to be
in compliance during the additional
period between the February 1, 2016,
effective date of the rule and January 30,
2019.
Response 5: As part of the December
1, 2015, final rule, the EPA removed
provisions from § 63.644(c) that
excluded high point bleeds, analyzer
vents, open-ended valves or lines, and
pressure relief valves from the bypass
line provisions in § 63.644(c)(1) and (2).
Low leg drains and equipment subject to
§ 63.648 continue to be excluded from
the bypass line provisions in
§ 63.644(c). Because open-ended valves
or lines and pressure relief valves
(devices) are equipment subject to
§ 63.648, they remain subject to the
bypass line exclusion. In addition, high
point bleeds are open-ended valves or
lines and would also be equipment
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
subject to § 63.648, and thus, subject to
the bypass line exclusion.
We removed analyzer vents from the
list of items excluded from the bypass
line provisions because we consider
analyzer vents to be miscellaneous
process vents consistent with our
amendments to item (5) in the list of
exclusions from the definition of
miscellaneous process vents in § 63.641.
We recognize that based on the wording
of item (5), some may interpret that,
prior to January 30, 2019, these analyzer
vents could be construed to be bypass
lines. This is not our intent. We
consider analyzer vents to be
miscellaneous process vents as they
routinely or continuously vent gases to
the atmosphere. We included the
January 30, 2019, date to establish the
date at which these analyzer vents must
comply with the miscellaneous process
vent standards.
It was not our intent that analyzer
vents would be considered bypass lines
between the February 1, 2016, effective
date of the rule and the January 30,
2019, compliance date provided in item
(5) of the list of exclusions from the
definition of miscellaneous process
vents. While we consider it unlikely
that local agencies would interpret the
Refinery final amendments to require
bypass line monitoring for analyzer
vents, we understand the commenter’s
concern. To clarify these requirements
consistent with our original intent, we
are amending item (5) in the definition
of miscellaneous process vent to
exclude ‘‘In situ sampling systems
(onstream analyzers)’’ until February 1,
2016. After this date, these sampling
systems will be included in the
definition of miscellaneous process
vents and sampling systems determined
to be Group 1 miscellaneous process
vents must comply with the
requirements in §§ 63.643 and 63.644 no
later than January 30, 2019.
Comment 6: One commenter
requested that EPA provide an 18month compliance period, rather than
the 150 days provided, for existing
storage tanks to transition from
complying with the requirements in
§ 63.646 to the storage vessel
requirements in § 63.660, which were
established in the December 2015 final
rule. The storage vessel provisions in
§ 63.660 require that new or existing
Group 1 storage vessels comply with the
requirements in subpart WW or subpart
SS of 40 CFR part 63. The commenter
stated that sources will need time to
assess whether their existing storage
tanks meet the ‘‘Group 1 Storage Tank’’
definition finalized in § 63.641 as part of
the RTR rulemaking, and, if so, to assess
whether existing controls will need to
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
13JYR1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
be updated to meet the subpart WW
requirements contained in § 63.660.
Should such control upgrades be
required, the commenter asserted that
additional time will be needed to design
and install the equipment, complete
management of change process and
provide operator training. The
commenter also stated that subpart WW
imposes additional inspection and
recordkeeping requirements which will
require additional time for further
operator training. A second commenter
provided similar comments, stating that
inadequate time had been given to
assess applicability and upgrade tank
controls (if needed) for existing Group 1
storage vessels. Finally, a comment was
received stating that Table 11 appears to
require compliance with § 63.660 and is
in conflict with the overlap provisions
in § 63.640(n). The overlap provisions in
§ 63.640(n) allow Group 1 and 2 storage
vessels to comply with other regulations
(e.g., 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb) as a
means of demonstrating compliance
with the standards in Refinery MACT 1.
Compliance with the overlap provisions
is made in lieu of complying with the
storage vessel provisions in § 63.660 of
Refinery MACT 1.
Response 6: While Table 11 was
completely re-printed in the proposed
amendments, we did not propose to
revise the compliance dates for storage
vessels or to address storage vessels in
any way as part of the proposed rule;
thus, this comment is considered out of
scope. We note that this small
population of tanks was specifically
provided additional time to install the
required controls as specified in
§ 63.660(d) and the commenters did not
provide specific information on why
additional time is required. Section
63.6(i) provides a mechanism to request
additional time for the limited number
of tanks within this small population of
tanks that may need additional time.
With respect to the comment that
subpart WW imposes additional
inspection and recordkeeping
requirements, the required inspections
are infrequent (generally once a year to
once every 5 or 10 years) and we
disagree that existing compliance
provisions do not provide sufficient
time for owners or operators to
‘‘upgrade,’’ if necessary, their inspection
procedures.
We agree with the commenter that
Table 11 does appear to require all
storage vessels to transition to comply
with § 63.660 in conflict with the
overlap provisions in § 63.640(n), which
allow compliance with 40 CFR part 60,
subpart Kb as a means to comply with
the amended Refinery MACT 1 storage
vessel requirements. Therefore, we are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:54 Jul 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
revising the relevant language in Table
11 to clarify that owners or operators of
affected storage vessels must transition
to comply with the provisions in
§ 63.660 ‘‘. . . or, if applicable,
§ 63.640(n) . . .’’ on or before April 29,
2016.
B. Technical and Editorial Corrections
Comment 1: One commenter
questioned the revisions to Items (4)(i)
and (4)(ii) in Table 11 of 40 CFR part 63,
subpart CC as they apply to existing
sources constructed or reconstructed
before July 14, 1994. For such sources,
the commenter stated that these
revisions appear to retroactively impose
compliance dates of August 18, 1998,
for paragraphs that were added or
amended after August 18, 1998. The
commenter provided examples of the
references to requirements in
§ 63.648(j)(1) and (2) and § 63.644 which
should have an effective date of
February 1, 2016. The commenter
further stated that Table 11 is not all
inclusive and omits many compliance
dates of sections in subpart CC,
including those revised during the
amendment process and provided
examples. The commenter asserted that
these omissions make the table
incomplete and contribute to overall
confusion, and, therefore, requested that
the table be deleted and compliance
dates be incorporated directly into the
regulatory text.
Response 1: The commenter is
mistaken that § 63.648(j)(1) and (2) are
new requirements. In the December
2015 final rule, EPA incorporated
requirements from 60.482–4 of 40 CFR
part 60, subpart VV (which was
previously referenced in 63.648(a) of 40
CFR part 63, subpart CC) directly into
§ 63.648(j)(1) and (2). Section 63.644
was amended and these final revisions
provide additional clarification on the
compliance date for analyzer vents, as
described in Response No. 5. Therefore,
Table 11 neither changed the
requirement nor changed the applicable
compliance date.
Table 11 is not intended to reflect
every requirement and compliance date.
Rather, for requirements not identified
in Table 11, as in those cited by the
commenter, the compliance date is the
effective date of the rule, February 1,
2016, or is specified in the appropriate
section.
Comment 2: One commenter
requested that the use of the term
‘‘pressure relief device’’ or ‘‘device’’ be
used in § 63.670(o)(1)(vi), similar to the
edits proposed in § 63.641 and
§ 63.670(o)(1)(ii)(B). The commenter
also requested that the EPA provide a
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45239
definition of the term ‘‘pressure relief
device’’ in § 63.641.
Response 2: We agree that
§ 63.670(o)(1)(vi) should use the term
‘‘pressure relief device’’ consistent with
the edits proposed to § 63.641 and
§ 63.670(o)(1)(ii)(B), and we are
amending this paragraph as suggested.
The request that EPA add a definition
of ‘‘pressure relief device’’ is outside the
scope of the current rulemaking.
Comment 3: One commenter
requested that the proposed revision to
§ 63.1564(a)(1)(iv) also remove the
words ‘‘of this chapter’’ for consistency
with other options referencing subpart
UUU alternatives.
Response 3: We agree with the
commenter that the phrase ‘‘of this
chapter’’ should be removed. This
referred to the reference to
§ 60.102a(b)(1), which we proposed to
remove and are removing in this final
rule. In reviewing this comment, we
also noted that the last sentence of the
introductory paragraph in
§ 63.1564(a)(1) refers to ‘‘. . . the four
options in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through
(vi) of this section.’’ To address this
clerical error, we are also revising the
last sentence in § 63.1564(a)(1) to
replace the word ‘‘four’’ with the word
‘‘six.’’
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Additional information about these
statutes and Executive Orders can be
found at https://www2.epa.gov/lawsregulations//laws-and-executive-orders.
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 Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose any new
information collection burden under the
PRA. OMB has previously approved the
information collection activities
contained in the existing regulations at
40 CFR part 63, subparts CC and UUU
and has assigned OMB control numbers
2060–0340 and 2060–0554. The
finalized amendments are revisions to
compliance dates, clarifications, and
technical corrections that do not affect
the estimated burden of the existing
rule. Therefore, we have not revised the
information collection request for the
existing rule.
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
13JYR1
45240
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
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. In making this
determination, the impact of concern is
any significant adverse economic
impact on small entities. An agency may
certify that a rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities if
the rule relieves regulatory burden, has
no net burden, or otherwise has a
positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. The action
consists of revisions to compliance
dates, clarifications, and technical
corrections which do not change the
expected economic impact analysis
performed for the existing rule. We
have, therefore, concluded that this
action will have no net regulatory
burden for all directly regulated small
entities.
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.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13175. It will not have substantial
direct effect on tribal governments, on
the relationship between the federal
government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the federal
government and Indian tribes, as
specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not
apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 because it is not
economically significant as defined in
Executive Order 12866, and because the
EPA does not believe the environmental
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:54 Jul 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
health or safety risks addressed by this
action present a disproportionate risk to
children. The final amendments serve to
revise compliance dates and make
technical clarifications and corrections.
We expect the additional compliance
time will have an insignificant effect on
emission reductions as many refiners
already have measures in place due to
state and other federal requirements to
minimize emissions during these
periods. Further, these periods are
relatively infrequent and are usually of
short duration. Therefore, these
amendments should not appreciably
increase risk for any populations.
Further, this action will allow more
time for refiners to implement
procedures to safely start up and shut
down equipment which should
minimize safety risks for all
populations.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211 because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
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 that this action does
not have disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority populations, lowincome populations, or indigenous
peoples, as specified in Executive Order
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The finalized amendments serve to
revise compliance dates and make
technical clarifications and corrections.
We expect the additional compliance
time will have an insignificant effect on
emission reductions as many refiners
already have measures in place due to
state and other federal requirements to
minimize emissions during these
periods. Further, these periods are
relatively infrequent and are usually of
short duration. Therefore, the finalized
amendments should not appreciably
increase risk for any populations.
Further, this action will allow more
time for refiners to implement
procedures to safely start up and shut
down equipment which should
minimize safety risks for all
populations.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and
the EPA will submit a rule report to
each House of Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United
States. This is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 60
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: July 1, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR parts 60
and 63 as follows:
PART 60—STANDARDS OF
PERFORMANCE FOR NEW
STATIONARY SOURCES
1. The authority citation for part 60
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart Ja—Standards of Performance
for Petroleum Refineries for Which
Construction, Reconstruction, or
Modification Commenced After May 14,
2007
2. Section 60.102a is amended by
revising the first sentence of paragraph
(f)(1)(i) to read as follows:
■
§ 60.102a
Emissions limitations.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) For a sulfur recovery plant with an
oxidation control system or a reduction
control system followed by incineration,
the owner or operator shall not
discharge or cause the discharge of any
gases containing SO2 into the
atmosphere in excess of the emission
limit calculated using Equation 1 of this
section. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
13JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
PART 63—NATIONAL EMISSION
STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR
POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE
CATEGORIES
3. The authority citation for part 63
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart CC—National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
From Petroleum Refineries
4. Section 63.641 is amended by
revising the definitions of ‘‘Closed
blowdown system’’, ‘‘Force majeure
event’’ and paragraph (5) of the
definition ‘‘Miscellaneous process vent’’
to read as follows:
■
§ 63.641
Definitions.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
Closed blowdown system means a
system used for depressuring process
vessels that is not open to the
atmosphere and is configured of piping,
ductwork, connections, accumulators/
knockout drums, and, if necessary, flow
inducing devices that transport gas or
vapor from a process vessel to a control
device or back into the process.
*
*
*
*
*
Force majeure event means a release
of HAP, either directly to the
atmosphere from a pressure relief device
or discharged via a flare, that is
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the
Administrator to result from an event
beyond the refinery owner or operator’s
control, such as natural disasters; acts of
war or terrorism; loss of a utility
external to the refinery (e.g., external
power curtailment), excluding power
curtailment due to an interruptible
service agreement; and fire or explosion
originating at a near or adjoining facility
outside of the refinery that impacts the
refinery’s ability to operate.
*
*
*
*
*
Miscellaneous process vent * * *
(5) In situ sampling systems (onstream
analyzers) until February 1, 2016. After
this date, these sampling systems will
be included in the definition of
miscellaneous process vents and
sampling systems determined to be
Group 1 miscellaneous process vents
must comply with the requirements in
§§ 63.643 and 63.644 no later than
January 30, 2019;
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. Section 63.643 is amended by
revising paragraph (c) introductory text
and adding paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
§ 63.643 Miscellaneous process vent
provisions.
*
*
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
*
12:54 Jul 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
(c) An owner or operator may
designate a process vent as a
maintenance vent if the vent is only
used as a result of startup, shutdown,
maintenance, or inspection of
equipment where equipment is emptied,
depressurized, degassed or placed into
service. The owner or operator does not
need to designate a maintenance vent as
a Group 1 or Group 2 miscellaneous
process vent. The owner of operator
must comply with the applicable
requirements in paragraphs (c)(1)
through (3) of this section for each
maintenance vent according to the
compliance dates specified in table 11
of this subpart, unless an extension is
requested in accordance with the
provisions in § 63.6(i).
*
*
*
*
*
(d) After February 1, 2016 and prior
to the date of compliance with the
maintenance vent provisions in
paragraph (c) of this section, the owner
or operator must comply with the
requirements in § 63.642(n) for each
maintenance venting event and
maintain records necessary to
demonstrate compliance with the
requirements in § 63.642(n) including, if
appropriate, records of existing standard
site procedures used to deinventory
equipment for safety purposes.
■ 6. Section 63.648 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) introductory text
as follows:
§ 63.648
Equipment leak standards.
(a) Each owner or operator of an
existing source subject to the provisions
of this subpart shall comply with the
provisions of 40 CFR part 60, subpart
VV, and paragraph (b) of this section
except as provided in paragraphs (a)(1)
and (2), (c) through (i), and (j)(1) and (2)
of this section. Each owner or operator
of a new source subject to the provisions
of this subpart shall comply with
subpart H of this part except as
provided in paragraphs (c) through (i)
and (j)(1) and (2) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 7. Section 63.655 is amended by
revising paragraph (h)(8) introductory
text to read as follows:
§ 63.655 Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) * * *
(8) For fenceline monitoring systems
subject to § 63.658, within 45 calendar
days after the end of each reporting
period, each owner or operator shall
submit the following information to the
EPA’s Compliance and Emissions Data
Reporting Interface (CEDRI). (CEDRI can
be accessed through the EPA’s Central
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45241
Data Exchange (CDX) (https://
cdx.epa.gov/). The owner or operator
need not transmit these data prior to
obtaining 12 months of data.
*
*
*
*
*
8. Section 63.658 is amended by
revising paragraph (c)(1) to read as
follows:
■
§ 63.658
Fenceline monitoring provisions.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) As it pertains to this subpart,
known sources of VOCs, as used in
Section 8.2.1.3 in Method 325A of
appendix A of this part for siting
passive monitors, means a wastewater
treatment unit, process unit, or any
emission source requiring control
according to the requirements of this
subpart, including marine vessel
loading operations. For marine vessel
loading operations, one passive monitor
should be sited on the shoreline
adjacent to the dock.
*
*
*
*
*
9. Section 63.670 is amended by
revising paragraphs (o)(1)(ii)(B) and
(o)(1)(vi) to read as follows:
■
§ 63.670 Requirements for flare control
devices.
*
*
*
*
*
(o) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) Implementation of prevention
measures listed for pressure relief
devices in § 63.648(j)(5) for each
pressure relief device that can discharge
to the flare.
*
*
*
*
*
(vi) For each pressure relief device
vented to the flare identified in
paragraph (o)(1)(iv) of this section,
provide a detailed description of each
pressure release device, including type
of relief device (rupture disc, valve type)
diameter of the relief device opening,
set pressure of the relief device and
listing of the prevention measures
implemented. This information may be
maintained in an electronic database onsite and does not need to be submitted
as part of the flare management plan
unless requested to do so by the
Administrator.
*
*
*
*
*
10. The appendix to subpart CC is
amended by revising table 11 to read as
follows:
■
Appendix to Subpart CC of Part 63—
Tables
*
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
*
*
13JYR1
*
*
45242
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 11—COMPLIANCE DATES AND REQUIREMENTS
If the construction/
reconstruction date
is . . .
Then the owner or operator must
comply with . . .
And the owner or operator must
achieve compliance . . .
Except as provided in . . .
(1) After June 30,
2014.
(i) Requirements for new sources in
§§ 63.643(a) and (b); 63.644,
63.645, and 63.647; 63.648(a)
through (i) and (j)(1) and (2); 63.649
through 63.651; and 63.654 through
63.656.
(ii) Requirements for new sources in
§§ 63.642(n),
63.643(c),
63.648(j)(3), (6) and (7); and 63.657
through 63.660.
(i) Requirements for new sources in
§§ 63.643(a) and (b); 63.644,
63.645, and 63.647; 63.648(a)
through (i) and (j)(1) and (2); and
63.649 through 63.651, 63.655 and
63.656.
(ii) Requirements for new sources in
§ 63.654.
(iii) Requirements for new sources in
either § 63.646 or § 63.660 or, if applicable, § 63.640(n).
Upon initial startup ..............................
§ 63.640(k), (l) and (m).
Upon initial startup or February 1,
2016, whichever is later.
§ 63.640(k), (l) and (m).
Upon initial startup ..............................
§ 63.640(k), (l) and (m).
§ 63.640(k), (l) and (m).
sources
Upon initial startup or October 28,
2009, whichever is later.
Upon initial startup, but you must transition to comply with only the requirements in § 63.660 or, if applicable, § 63.640(n) on or before April
29, 2016.
On or before August 1, 2017 ..............
sources
(2) After September 4,
2007 but on or before June 30, 2014.
(iv) Requirements for existing
in § 63.643(c).
(v) Requirements for existing
in § 63.658.
(vi) Requirements for existing
in § 63.648 (j)(3), (6) and
§ 63.657.
(vii) Requirements in § 63.642
(3) After July 14, 1994
but on or before
September 4, 2007.
and
(m)
and
(m)
and
On or before January 30, 2018 ...........
§§ 63.640(k), (l) and
63.643(d).
§ 63.640(k), (l) and (m).
sources
(7) and
On or before January 30, 2019 ...........
§ 63.640(k), (l) and (m).
(n) .......
Upon initial startup
2016, whichever is
Upon initial startup
1995, whichever is
and
(m)
and
(m)
and
On or before January 30, 2018 ...........
§§ 63.640(k), (l) and
63.643(d).
§ 63.640(k), (l) and (m).
On or before January 30, 2019 ...........
§ 63.640(k), (l) and (m).
(i) Requirements for new sources in
§§ 63.643(a) and (b); 63.644,
63.645, and 63.647; 63.648(a)
through (i) and (j)(1) and (2); and
63.649 through 63.651, 63.655 and
63.656.
(ii) Requirements for existing sources
in § 63.654.
(iii) Requirements for new sources in
either § 63.646 or § 63.660 or, if applicable, § 63.640(n).
(iv) Requirements for existing sources
in § 63.643(c).
(v) Requirements for existing sources
in § 63.658.
(vi) Requirements for existing sources
in §§ 63.648(j)(3), (6) and (7) and
63.657.
(vii) Requirements in § 63.642(n) ........
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
(4) On or before July
14, 1994.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
(i) Requirements for existing sources
in §§ 63.648(a) through (i) and (j)(1)
and (2); and 63.649, 63.655 and
63.656.
(ii) Either the requirements for existing
sources in §§ 63.643(a) and (b);
63.644, 63.645, 63.647, 63.650 and
63.651; and item (4)(v) of this table.
OR
The requirements in §§ 63.652 and
63.653.
(iii) Requirements for existing sources
in either § 63.646 or § 63.660 or, if
applicable, § 63.640(n).
12:54 Jul 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00018
or February 1,
later.
or August 18,
later.
§§ 63.640(k),
63.660(d).
(l)
§ 63.640(k), (l) and (m).
On or before October 29, 2012 ...........
§ 63.640(k), (l) and (m).
Upon initial startup, but you must transition to comply with only the requirements in § 63.660 or, if applicable, § 63.640(n) on or before April
29, 2016.
On or before August 1, 2017 ..............
§§ 63.640(k),
63.660(d).
Upon initial startup or February 1,
2016, whichever is later.
(A) On or before August 18, 1998 ......
(A) On or before August 18, 1998 ......
On or before August 18, 1998, but
you must transition to comply with
only the requirements in § 63.660
or, if applicable, § 63.640(n) on or
before April 29, 2016.
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
(l)
(1) § 63.640(k), (l) and (m). (2)
§ 63.6(c)(5) or unless an extension
has been granted by the Administrator as provided in § 63.6(i).
(1) § 63.640(k), (l) and (m). (2)
§ 63.6(c)(5) or unless an extension
has been granted by the Administrator as provided in § 63.6(i).
§§ 63.640(k),
63.660(d).
13JYR1
(l)
and
(m)
and
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
45243
TABLE 11—COMPLIANCE DATES AND REQUIREMENTS—Continued
If the construction/
reconstruction date
is . . .
*
*
*
And the owner or operator must
achieve compliance . . .
Except as provided in . . .
(iv) Requirements for existing sources
in § 63.654.
(v) Requirements for existing sources
in § 63.643(c).
(vi) Requirements for existing sources
in § 63.658.
(vii) Requirements for existing sources
in §§ 63.648(j)(3), (6) and (7) and
63.657.
(viii) Requirements in § 63.642 (n) ......
*
Then the owner or operator must
comply with . . .
On or before October 29, 2012 ...........
§ 63.640(k), (l) and (m).
On or before August 1, 2017 ..............
On or before January 30, 2018 ...........
§§ 63.640(k), (l) and
63.643(d).
§ 63.640(k), (l) and (m).
On or before January 30, 2019 ...........
§ 63.640(k), (l) and (m).
*
Subpart UUU—National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic
Cracking Units, Catalytic Reforming
Units, and Sulfur Recovery Units
11. Section 63.1563 is amended by:
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (2)
and (b);
■ b. Redesignating paragraphs (d) and
(e) as paragraphs (e) and (f),
respectively;
■ c. Adding new paragraph (d); and
■ d. Revising newly redesignated
paragraph (e) introductory text.
The revisions and additions to read as
follows:
■
■
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 63.1563 When do I have to comply with
this subpart?
(a) * * *
(1) If you startup your affected source
before April 11, 2002, then you must
comply with the emission limitations
and work practice standards for new
and reconstructed sources in this
subpart no later than April 11, 2002
except as provided in paragraph (d) of
this section.
(2) If you startup your affected source
after April 11, 2002, you must comply
with the emission limitations and work
practice standards for new and
reconstructed sources in this subpart
upon startup of your affected source
except as provided in paragraph (d) of
this section.
(b) If you have an existing affected
source, you must comply with the
emission limitations and work practice
standards for existing affected sources
in this subpart by no later than April 11,
2005 except as specified in paragraphs
(c) and (d) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) You must comply with the
applicable requirements in
§§ 63.1564(a)(5), 63.1565(a)(5) and
63.1568(a)(4) as specified in paragraph
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:54 Jul 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 63.1564 What are my requirements for
metal HAP emissions from catalytic
cracking units?
(a) * * *
(1) Except as provided in paragraph
(a)(5) of this section, meet each emission
limitation in Table 1 of this subpart that
applies to you. If your catalytic cracking
unit is subject to the NSPS for PM in
§ 60.102 of this chapter or is subject to
§ 60.102a(b)(1) of this chapter, you must
meet the emission limitations for NSPS
units. If your catalytic cracking unit is
not subject to the NSPS for PM, you can
choose from the six options in
Frm 00019
and
Upon initial startup or February 1,
2016, whichever is later.
(d)(1) or (2) of this section, as
applicable.
(1) For sources which commenced
construction or reconstruction before
June 30, 2014, you must comply with
the applicable requirements in
§§ 63.1564(a)(5), 63.1565(a)(5) and
63.1568(a)(4) on or before August 1,
2017 unless an extension is requested
and approved in accordance with the
provisions in § 63.6(i). After February 1,
2016 and prior to the date of compliance
with the provisions in §§ 63.1564(a)(5),
63.1565(a)(5) and 63.1568(a)(4), you
must comply with the requirements in
§ 63.1570(c) and (d).
(2) For sources which commenced
construction or reconstruction on or
after June 30, 2014, you must comply
with the applicable requirements in
§§ 63.1564(a)(5), 63.1565(a)(5) and
63.1568(a)(4) on or before February 1,
2016 or upon startup, whichever is later.
(e) If you have an area source that
increases its emissions or its potential to
emit such that it becomes a major source
of HAP, the requirements in paragraphs
(e)(1) and (2) of this section apply.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 12. Section 63.1564 is amended by
revising paragraphs (a)(1) introductory
text, (a)(1)(iv), (a)(5) introductory text
and (c)(5) introductory text to read as
follows:
PO 00000
(m)
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (vi) of this
section:
*
*
*
*
*
(iv) You can elect to comply with the
PM per coke burn-off emission limit
(Option 2);
*
*
*
*
*
(5) On or before the date specified in
§ 63.1563(d), you must comply with one
of the two options in paragraphs (a)(5)(i)
and (ii) of this section during periods of
startup, shutdown and hot standby:
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(5) If you elect to comply with the
alternative limit in paragraph (a)(5)(ii) of
this section during periods of startup,
shutdown and hot standby, demonstrate
continuous compliance on or before the
date specified in § 63.1563(d) by:
*
*
*
*
*
■ 13. Section 63.1565 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(5) introductory
text to read as follows:
§ 63.1565 What are my requirements for
organic HAP emissions from catalytic
cracking units?
(a) * * *
(5) On or before the date specified in
§ 63.1563(d), you must comply with one
of the two options in paragraphs (a)(5)(i)
and (ii) of this section during periods of
startup, shutdown and hot standby:
*
*
*
*
*
■ 14. Section 63.1566 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(4) to read as
follows:
§ 63.1566 What are my requirements for
organic HAP emissions from catalytic
reforming units?
(a) * * *
(4) The emission limitations in Tables
15 and 16 of this subpart do not apply
to emissions from process vents during
passive depressuring when the reactor
vent pressure is 5 pounds per square
inch gauge (psig) or less or during active
depressuring or purging prior to January
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
13JYR1
45244
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
30, 2019, when the reactor vent pressure
is 5 psig or less. On and after January
30, 2019, the emission limitations in
Tables 15 and 16 of this subpart do
apply to emissions from process vents
during active purging operations (when
nitrogen or other purge gas is actively
introduced to the reactor vessel) or
active depressuring (using a vacuum
pump, ejector system, or similar device)
regardless of the reactor vent pressure.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 15. Section 63.1568 is amended by
revising paragraph (a)(4) introductory
text to read as follows:
(4) On or before the date specified in
§ 63.1563(d), you must comply with one
of the three options in paragraphs
(a)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section
during periods of startup and shutdown.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 63.1568 What are my requirements for
organic HAP emissions from sulfur
recovery units?
■
16. Table 2 to subpart UUU of part 63
is amended by revising the entry for
item 1 to read as follows:
(a) * * *
TABLE 2 TO SUBPART UUU OF PART 63—OPERATING LIMITS FOR METAL HAP EMISSIONS FROM CATALYTIC CRACKING
UNITS
For each new or existing
catalytic cracking unit . . .
For this type of continuous
monitoring system . . .
For this type of
control device
. . .
1. Subject to the NSPS for PM
in 40 CFR 60.102 and not
elect § 60.100(e).
Continuous opacity monitoring
system.
Any .................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
You shall meet this operating limit . . .
On and after August 1, 2017, maintain the 3-hour rolling average opacity of emissions from your catalyst regenerator
vent no higher than 20 percent.
*
*
*
*
17. Table 3 to subpart UUU of part 63
is amended by revising the entry for
item 12 to read as follows:
■
TABLE 3 TO SUBPART UUU OF PART 63—CONTINUOUS MONITORING SYSTEMS FOR METAL HAP EMISSIONS FROM
CATALYTIC CRACKING UNITS
If you use this type of control device for your vent
. . .
For each new or existing catalytic cracking unit . . .
*
*
*
12. Electing to comply with the operating limits in
§ 63.1564(a)(5)(ii) during periods of startup, shutdown,
or hot standby.
1 If
*
*
Any .....................................
You shall install, operate, and maintain a . . .
*
*
*
Continuous parameter monitoring system to measure
and record the gas flow rate exiting the catalyst regenerator.1
applicable, you can use the alternative in § 63.1573(a)(1) instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system for gas flow rate.
*
*
*
*
18. Table 5 to subpart UUU of part 63
is amended by revising the entry for
item 2 to read as follows:
■
TABLE 5 TO SUBPART UUU OF PART 63—INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH METAL HAP EMISSION LIMITS FOR CATALYTIC
CRACKING UNITS
For the following emission limit
. . .
*
*
2. Subject to NSPS for PM in 40
CFR 60.102a(b)(1)(i); or in
§ 60.102
and
electing
§ 60.100(e) and electing to meet
the PM per coke burn-off limit.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
For each new and existing catalytic
cracking unit catalyst regenerator
vent . . .
*
*
*
*
*
PM emissions must not exceed 1.0 You have already conducted a performance test to demonstrate initial
g/kg (1.0 lb PM/1,000 lb) of coke
compliance with the NSPS and the measured PM emission rate is
burn-off.
less than or equal to 1.0 g/kg (1.0 lb/1,000 lb) of coke burn-off in
the catalyst regenerator. As part of the Notification of Compliance
Status, you must certify that your vent meets the PM limit. You are
not required to do another performance test to demonstrate initial
compliance. As part of your Notification of Compliance Status, you
certify that your BLD; CO2, O2, or CO monitor; or continuous opacity monitoring system meets the requirements in § 63.1572.
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
12:54 Jul 12, 2016
*
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
You have demonstrated initial compliance if . . .
*
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
*
13JYR1
*
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 134 / Wednesday, July 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
[FR Doc. 2016–16451 Filed 7–12–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 160225143–6583–02]
RIN 0648–BF61
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of
Mexico, and South Atlantic; SnapperGrouper Fishery Off the Southern
Atlantic States; Regulatory
Amendment 25
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
NMFS issues regulations to
implement Regulatory Amendment 25
for the Fishery Management Plan (FMP)
for the Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the
South Atlantic Region (Regulatory
Amendment 25) as prepared and
submitted by the South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council (Council). This
final rule revises the commercial and
recreational annual catch limits (ACLs),
the commercial trip limit, and the
recreational bag limit for blueline
tilefish. Additionally, this final rule
revises the black sea bass recreational
bag limit and the commercial and
recreational fishing years for yellowtail
snapper. The purpose of this final rule
for blueline tilefish is to increase the
optimum yield (OY) and ACLs based on
a revised acceptable biological catch
(ABC) recommendation from the
Council’s Scientific and Statistical
Committee (SSC). The purpose of this
final rule is also to achieve OY for black
sea bass, and adjust the fishing year for
yellowtail snapper to better protect
these species and allow for increased
economic benefits to fishers.
DATES: This rule is effective August 12,
2016, except for the amendments to
§ 622.187(b)(2), § 622.191(a)(10), and
§ 622.193(z) that are effective July 13,
2016.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of
Regulatory Amendment 25, which
includes an environmental assessment,
a Regulatory Flexibility Act analysis,
and a regulatory impact review may be
obtained from www.regulations.gov or
the Southeast Regional Office (SERO)
Web site at https://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/
sustainable_fisheries/s_atl/sg/2015/reg_
am25/.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
12:54 Jul 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
Mary Janine Vara, NMFS SERO,
telephone: 727–824–5305, or email:
mary.vara@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
snapper-grouper fishery of the South
Atlantic Region is managed under the
FMP and includes blueline tilefish,
black sea bass, and yellowtail snapper.
The FMP was prepared by the Council
and is implemented by NMFS through
regulations at 50 CFR part 622 under the
authority of the Magnuson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management
Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act).
On June 1, 2016, NMFS published a
proposed rule for Regulatory
Amendment 25 and requested public
comment (81 FR 34944). The proposed
rule and Regulatory Amendment 25
outline the rationale for the actions
contained in this final rule. A summary
of the actions implemented by
Regulatory Amendment 25 and this
final rule is provided below.
Management Measures Contained in
This Final Rule
This final rule revises the commercial
and recreational ACLs, commercial trip
limit, and recreational bag limit for
blueline tilefish; revises the recreational
bag limit for black sea bass; and revises
the fishing year for the yellowtail
snapper commercial and recreational
sectors. All ABC and ACL weights in
this final rule are expressed in round
weight.
Blueline Tilefish ACLs
This final rule revises the commercial
and recreational ACLs for blueline
tilefish. The current commercial ACLs
are 26,766 lb (12,141 kg) for 2016,
35,785 lb (16,232 kg) for 2017, and
44,048 lb (19,980 kg) for 2018 and
subsequent fishing years. The current
recreational ACLs are 26,691 lb (12,107
kg) for 2016, 35,685 lb (16,186 kg) for
2017, and 43,925 lb (19,924 kg) for 2018
and subsequent fishing years. These
ACLs were implemented through the
final rule to implement Amendment 32
to the FMP (80 FR 16583, March 30,
2015). This final rule increases both the
commercial and recreational ACLs for
blueline tilefish in the exclusive
economic zone (EEZ) of the South
Atlantic. The commercial ACL will be
set at 87,521 lb (39,699 kg) and the
recreational ACL will be set at 87,277 lb
(39,588 kg).
In Regulatory Amendment 25, the
Council is revising the blueline tilefish
total ACL (combined commercial and
recreational ACL) based on a new ABC
recommendation from the Council’s
SSC. The SSC provided their blueline
tilefish ABC recommendation to set the
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45245
ABC at the equilibrium yield at 75
percent of the fishing mortality that
produces the maximum sustainable
yield (224,100 lb (101,650 kg)). The
Council accepted the SSC’s ABC
recommendation and determined that
this revised ABC is sufficient to prevent
the overfishing of blueline tilefish.
The Council is also revising the total
ACL to increase the buffer between the
blueline tilefish ABC and ACL from 2
percent to 22 percent. The increase in
the buffer is to account for management
uncertainty, such as increased blueline
tilefish landings north of the Council’s
area of jurisdiction. In Amendment 32,
the Council set the total blueline tilefish
ACL for the South Atlantic at 98 percent
of the recommended ABC for the entire
Atlantic region to account for
management uncertainty because the
stock assessment was coast-wide and
the Council was aware that landings of
blueline tilefish occurred north of North
Carolina. In Regulatory Amendment 25,
the Council set the total ACL at 78
percent of the ABC. This decision is
based on a comparison of the landings
between the South Atlantic and Greater
Atlantic Regions (Maine through
Virginia), which indicate that 22 percent
of the landings from 2011–2014 are from
the Greater Atlantic Region.
Blueline Tilefish Commercial Trip Limit
The current commercial trip limit for
blueline tilefish is 100 lb (45 kg), gutted
weight; 112 lb (51 kg), round weight,
and was implemented in Amendment
32. The Council selected that trip limit
as a way to slow the commercial harvest
of blueline tilefish, potentially lengthen
the commercial fishing season, and
reduce the risk of the commercial ACL
being exceeded. This final rule increases
the blueline tilefish commercial trip
limit to 300 lb (136 kg) gutted weight;
336 lb (152 kg), round weight. The
Council decided that an appropriate
response to the increase in ABC and
total ACL is to increase the commercial
trip limit. The increase in the
commercial trip limit will increase the
socioeconomic benefits to commercial
fishermen. In addition, the increase in
the commercial trip limit is not
expected to result in an in-season
closure of blueline tilefish.
Blueline Tilefish and Black Sea Bass
Recreational Bag Limits
This final rule revises the recreational
bag limits for both blueline tilefish and
black sea bass. The current blueline
tilefish bag limit is one fish per vessel
per day for the months of May through
August and is part of the aggregate bag
limit for grouper and tilefish. There is
no recreational retention of blueline
E:\FR\FM\13JYR1.SGM
13JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 134 (Wednesday, July 13, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45232-45245]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-16451]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 60 and 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0682; FRL-9948-92-OAR]
RIN 2016-AS83
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant
Emissions: Petroleum Refinery Sector Amendments
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action amends the National Emissions Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Petroleum Refineries in three
respects. First, this action adjusts the compliance date for regulatory
requirements that apply at maintenance vents during periods of startup,
shutdown, maintenance or inspection for sources constructed or
reconstructed on or before June 30, 2014. Second, this action amends
the compliance dates for the regulatory requirements that apply during
startup, shutdown, or hot standby for fluid catalytic cracking units
(FCCU) and startup and shutdown for sulfur recovery units (SRU)
constructed or reconstructed on or before June 30, 2014. Finally, this
action finalizes technical corrections and clarifications to the NESHAP
and the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Petroleum
Refineries. These amendments are being finalized in response to new
information submitted after these regulatory requirements were
promulgated as part of the residual risk and technology review (RTR)
rulemaking, which was published on December 1, 2015. This action will
have an insignificant effect on emissions reductions and costs.
DATES: This final rule is effective on July 13, 2016.
ADDRESSES: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0682. All
documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov
Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is not
publicly available, e.g., confidential business information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
[[Page 45233]]
available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Brenda Shine, Sector Policies and
Programs Division, Refining and Chemicals Group (E143-01), Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919)
541-3608; email address: shine.brenda@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Preamble Acronyms and Abbreviations. We use multiple acronyms and
terms in this preamble. While this list may not be exhaustive, to ease
the reading of this preamble and for reference purposes, the EPA
defines the following terms and acronyms here:
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI confidential business information
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
COMS continuous opacity monitoring system
CPMS continuous parameter monitoring system
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ESP electrostatic precipitator
FCCU fluid catalytic cracking unit
HAP hazardous air pollutants
LEL lower explosive limit
NESHAP national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants
NSPS new source performance standards
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
PSM Process Safety Management
QA quality assurance
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RMP Risk Management Plan
RSR Refinery Sector Rule
RTR residual risk and technology review
SRU sulfur recovery unit
TTN Technology Transfer Network
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Organization of This Document. The information in this preamble is
organized as follows:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
C. Judicial Review and Administrative Reconsideration
II. Background Information
III. Final Revisions to Compliance Dates and Technical Corrections
in the NSPS and NESHAP for Petroleum Refineries and Revisions on the
February 9, 2016 Proposal
IV. Summary of Comments and Responses
A. Compliance Date Amendments
B. Technical and Editorial Corrections
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Orders 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 (NTTAA)
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated
by this action are shown in Table 1 of this preamble.
Table 1--Industrial Source Categories Affected by This Final Action
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NESHAP and source category NAICS \a\ Code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petroleum Refining Industry............................ 324110
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System.
Table 1 of this preamble is not intended to be exhaustive, but
rather to provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by the final action for the source categories listed. To
determine whether your facility is affected, you should examine the
applicability criteria in the appropriate NESHAP or NSPS. If you have
any questions regarding the applicability of any aspect of these NESHAP
or NSPS, please contact the appropriate person listed in the preceding
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble.
B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this final action will also be available on the Internet through the
Technology Transfer Network (TTN) Web site, a forum for information and
technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control.
Following signature by the EPA Administrator, the EPA will post a copy
of this final action at https://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/petref.html.
Following publication in the Federal Register, the EPA will post the
Federal Register version and key technical documents at this same Web
site.
C. Judicial Review and Administrative Reconsideration
Under Clean Air Act (CAA) section 307(b)(1), judicial review of
this final action is available only by filing a petition for review in
the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
by September 12, 2016. Under CAA section 307(b)(2), the requirements
established by this final rule may not be challenged separately in any
civil or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to enforce the
requirements.
Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further provides that ``[o]nly an
objection to a rule or procedure which was raised with reasonable
specificity during the period for public comment (including any public
hearing) may be raised during judicial review.'' This section also
provides a mechanism for the EPA to reconsider the rule ``[i]f the
person raising an objection can demonstrate to the Administrator that
it was impracticable to raise such objection within [the period for
public comment] or if the grounds for such objection arose after the
period for public comment (but within the time specified for judicial
review) and if such objection is of central relevance to the outcome of
the rule.'' Any person seeking to make such a demonstration should
submit a Petition for Reconsideration to the Office of the
Administrator, U.S. EPA, Room 3000, EPA WJC North Building, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, with a copy to the person
listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, and
the Associate General Counsel for the Air and Radiation Law Office,
Office of General Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), U.S. EPA, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460.
II. Background Information
The EPA promulgated NESHAP pursuant to the CAA sections 112(d)(2)
and (3) for petroleum refineries located at major sources in three
separate rules. These standards are also referred to as maximum
achievable control technology (MACT) standards. The first rule was
promulgated on August 18, 1995, in 40 CFR part 63, subpart CC (also
referred to as Refinery MACT 1) and regulates miscellaneous process
vents, storage vessels, wastewater,
[[Page 45234]]
equipment leaks, gasoline loading racks, marine tank vessel loading,
and heat exchange systems. The second rule was promulgated on April 11,
2002, in 40 CFR part 63, subpart UUU (also referred to as Refinery MACT
2) and regulates process vents on catalytic cracking units (CCU,
including FCCU), catalytic reforming units, and SRU. Finally, on
October 28, 2009, the EPA promulgated amendments to Refinery MACT 1 to
include MACT standards for heat exchange systems, which were not
originally addressed in Refinery MACT 1. This same rulemaking included
updating cross-references to the General Provisions in 40 CFR part 63.
The EPA completed an RTR of Refinery MACT 1 and 2, publishing
proposed amendments on June 30, 2014. These proposed amendments also
included technical corrections and clarifications raised in a 2008
industry petition for reconsideration of NSPS for Petroleum Refineries
(40 CFR part 60, subpart Ja). After seeking, receiving and addressing
public comments, the EPA published final amendments on December 1,
2015.
The December 1, 2015, final amendments included requirements in
Refinery MACT 1 for process vents designated as ``maintenance vents.''
Maintenance vents are those whose use is needed only during startup,
shutdown, maintenance or inspection of equipment where the equipment is
emptied, depressurized, degassed or placed into service. The December
1, 2015, final amendments require that the hydrocarbon content of the
vapor in the equipment served by the maintenance vent to be less than
or equal to 10 percent of the lower explosive limit (LEL) prior to
venting to the atmosphere. The December 1, 2015, final rule also
provides specific allowances for situations when the 10 percent LEL
cannot be demonstrated or is technically infeasible. After promulgation
of the rule, we learned that there was confusion regarding the
interpretation of the dates provided in Table 11 of 40 CFR part 63,
subpart CC. We intended the compliance date for maintenance vents
located at sources constructed on or before June 30, 2014, to be the
next qualifying maintenance activity occurring after February 1, 2016
(the effective date of the December 1, 2015, final amendments).
Additionally, the December 1, 2015, final amendments included
alternative standards for startup and shutdown events for FCCU and SRU
in Refinery MACT 2. For FCCU, the final amendments included two options
for demonstrating compliance with the particulate matter (PM) limit (as
a surrogate for metal hazardous air pollutants [HAP]) during periods of
startup, shutdown, or hot standby in Sec. 63.1564(a)(5). These options
are: Meeting the emission limit(s) that apply during normal operations
or meeting a minimum cyclone face velocity limit. Similarly, two
options were provided for demonstrating compliance with the carbon
monoxide (CO) limit for FCCU (as a surrogate for organic HAP) during
periods of startup and shutdown in Sec. 63.1565(a)(5). These options
include: Meeting the emission limit(s) that apply during normal
operations or meeting an excess oxygen limit in the exhaust from the
catalyst regenerator. For SRU, three compliance options were provided
to demonstrate compliance during periods of startup and shutdown in
Sec. 63.1568(a)(4). These are: Meeting the emission limit(s) that
apply during normal operations, sending purge gases to a flare that
meets certain operating requirements, or sending purge gases to a
thermal oxidizer or incinerator that meets specific temperature and
excess oxygen requirements. For owners or operators electing to comply
with the alternative limits for startup, shutdown, or hot standby for
FCCU (e.g., minimum cyclone face velocity option for PM; excess oxygen
limit for the catalyst regenerator exhaust for CO) or for startup or
shutdown for SRU (e.g., sending purge gases to a thermal oxidizer or
incinerator meeting temperature and excess oxygen requirements), the
compliance date established in the final amendments was February 1,
2016 (the effective date of the December 1, 2015, RTR final
amendments).
Since the promulgation of the December 1, 2015, final amendments,
the EPA received new information that the compliance dates for the
maintenance vents and alternative startup/shutdown standards for FCCU
and SRU pose safety concerns. This information indicated that the
compliance dates do not allow sufficient time to complete the
management of change process including evaluating the change, forming
an internal team to accomplish the change, engineering the change which
could include developing new set points, installing new controls or
alarms, conducting risk assessments, updating associated plans and
procedures, providing training, performing pre-startup safety reviews,
and implementing the change as required by other regulatory programs.
Further, the information indicated that in some cases refinery owners
or operators may need to install additional control equipment to meet
the new requirements. On January 19, 2016, the EPA received a petition
for reconsideration from the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the
American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) formally
requesting that EPA reconsider these issues.
On February 9, 2016, the EPA published proposed revisions to the
December 1, 2015, final amendments. Specifically, the proposal included
a revision to the compliance date in 40 CFR part 63 subpart CC for the
requirements for maintenance vents which apply during periods of
startup, shutdown, maintenance or inspection for sources constructed or
reconstructed on or before June 30, 2014. The proposal also included a
revision to the compliance dates in 40 CFR part 63 subpart UUU for the
use of the alternative standards for FCCU and SRU which apply during
startup and shutdown and for FCCU during hot standby for sources
constructed or reconstructed on or before June 30, 2014. Finally, the
proposed rule provided technical corrections and clarifications to the
NESHAP and NSPS Ja.
The proposal provided a 45-day comment period ending on March 25,
2016. The EPA received comments on the proposed revisions from
refiners, trade associations, a state environmental and health
department, environmental groups, and private citizens. This final rule
provides a discussion of the final revisions, including changes in
response to comments on the February 9, 2016, proposal, as well as a
summary of the significant comments received and responses. This action
fully responds to the January 19, 2016, petition for reconsideration
submitted by API and AFPM.
III. Final Revisions to Compliance Dates and Technical Corrections in
the NSPS and NESHAP for Petroleum Refineries and Revisions on the
February 9, 2016, Proposal
In the February 9, 2016 proposal, we proposed to require owners and
operators of sources that were constructed or reconstructed on or
before June 30, 2014, to comply with the requirements for maintenance
vents during startup, shutdown, maintenance and inspection; the
requirements for FCCU during startup, shutdown and hot standby; and the
requirements for SRU during startup and shutdown no later than 18
months after the effective date of the December 1, 2015, rule (i.e., no
later than August 1, 2017). We are finalizing these amendments as
proposed.
[[Page 45235]]
We also proposed to make clarifying revisions to Table 11 in 40 CFR
part 63, subpart CC to more clearly delineate the compliance dates for
the various provisions in subpart CC and to reflect the compliance date
proposed for the maintenance vent provisions. We are finalizing these
amendments as proposed with minor clarifications. Relative to the
amendments made to Table 11 in subpart CC, we received a comment that
the compliance dates for storage vessels in the proposed revisions to
Table 11 do not reflect the use of the overlap provisions in Sec.
63.640(n). The overlap provisions in Sec. 63.640(n) allow Group 1 and
2 storage vessels to comply with other regulations (e.g., 40 CFR part
60, subpart Kb) as a means of demonstrating compliance with the
standards in Refinery MACT 1. Compliance with the overlap provisions is
in lieu of complying with the storage vessel provisions in Refinery
MACT 1. We acknowledge that Table 11 does not directly reference the
overlap provisions included in Sec. 63.640(n). We are clarifying in
Table 11 that owners or operators of affected storage vessels must
transition to comply with the provisions in Sec. 63.660 ``. . . or, if
applicable, Sec. 63.640(n) . . .'' on or before April 29, 2016.
We also proposed a number of technical and clarifying revisions to
other portions of the regulations. These amendments are listed below
and are being finalized as proposed with minor revision as noted in
Items 3 and 9. Finally, we are making two additional revisions, as
described following the numbered paragraphs below. One change is to
correct an error we identified and the other is in response to a
comment we received during the comment period.
1. Revising the first sentence in Sec. 60.102a(f)(1)(i) to
incorporate the pollutant of concern, sulfur dioxide (SO2),
directly into the regulatory text rather than inside a parenthesis
within the sentence;
2. Making a grammatical correction to the closed blowdown system
definition in Sec. 63.641 by adding an ``a'' before the phrase, ``. .
. process vessel to a control device or back into the process.'';
3. Replacing the term ``relief valve'' and ``valve'' with
``pressure relief device'' and ``device'' in the force majeure event
definition in Sec. Sec. 63.641 and 63.670(o)(1)(ii)(B), respectively.
We received a comment that the term ``valve'' should be replaced with
the term ``device'' in Sec. 63.670(o)(1)(vi) for consistency and are
finalizing this change;
4. Expanding the list of exceptions for equipment leak requirements
in Sec. 63.648(a) to ensure that the intent of the rulemaking is
clear, that pressure relief devices subject to the requirements in
either 40 CFR part 60, subpart VV or part 63, subpart H and the
requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart CC are to comply with the
requirements in Sec. 63.648(j)(1) and (2), instead of the pressure
relief device requirements in 40 CFR part 60, subpart VV and 40 CFR
part 63, subpart H;
5. Editing the reporting and recordkeeping requirements related to
fenceline monitoring contained in Sec. 63.655(h)(8) to provide clarity
that compliance reports are due 45 days after the end of each reporting
period. The term ``periodic'' in the context of the report for
fenceline monitoring has been removed to avoid confusion concerning the
due dates of other periodic reports contained in 40 CFR part 63,
subpart CC such as those specified in Sec. 63.655(g);
6. Editing the siting requirements for passive monitors near known
sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC) contained in Sec.
63.658(c)(1) to clarify that a monitor should be placed on the
shoreline adjacent to the dock for marine vessel loading operations by
removing the phrase ``that are located offshore'';
7. Revising the catalytic reforming unit (CRU) pressure limit
exclusion provision in 40 CFR 63.1566(a)(4) to specify that refiners
have 3 years to comply with the requirements to meet emission
limitations in Tables 15 and 16 if they actively purge or depressurize
at vessel pressures of 5 pounds per square inch gage (psig) or less;
8. Revising the entry for item 1 in Table 2 of 40 CFR part 63,
subpart UUU to clarify that refineries have 18 months to comply with
the 20-percent opacity operating limit for units subject to Refinery
NSPS subpart J or units electing to comply with Refinery NSPS subpart J
provisions;
9. Removing the reference to Sec. 60.102a(b)(1) in Sec.
63.1564(a)(1)(iv). Additionally, in response to a comment, we are
removing the phrase ``of this Chapter'' from this same provision for
consistency.
10. Making a typographical correction to the reference to Sec.
63.1566(a)(5)(iii) in 40 CFR part 63, subpart UUU, Table 3, Item 12 to
correctly reference Sec. 63.1564(a)(5)(ii); and
11. Making an editorial correction to add the word ``and'' in place
of a semicolon in 40 CFR part 63, subpart UUU, Table 5, Item 2.
In reviewing the rule requirements, we noted that the last sentence
of the introductory paragraph in Sec. 63.1564(a)(1) refers to ``. . .
the four options in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (vi) of this
section.'' There are six options in these paragraphs, and thus we are
finalizing an amendment to revise Sec. 63.1564(a)(1) to accurately
describe these paragraphs by replacing the word ``four'' with ``six.''
As discussed in more detail in Section IV of this preamble, in
response to a comment, we are finalizing an amendment to item (5) in
the definition of miscellaneous process vent to clarify that in situ
sampling systems will be excluded from the definition until February 1,
2016. After this date, these sampling systems will be considered
miscellaneous process vents. Systems which are determined to be Group 1
miscellaneous process vents will need to comply with applicable
provisions no later January 30, 2019.
IV. Summary of Comments and Responses
This section summarizes substantive comments received on the
February 2016 proposal. We received some comments suggesting rule
revisions for requirements in the December 2015 rule for which we did
not propose a revision in the February 2016 proposal. These comments
were not specifically summarized or addressed because they are beyond
the scope of the amendments and we did not open those provisions for
public comment. The Agency may elect to consider the issues raised by
those comments in the context of a future rulemaking action.
A. Compliance Date Amendments
Comment 1: Two commenters expressed support for the proposal to
revise the compliance dates for the maintenance vent provisions during
periods of startup, shutdown, maintenance and inspection in 40 CFR part
63, subpart CC, for the alternative standards for startup, shutdown and
hot standby for FCCU in 40 CFR part 63, subpart UUU and the alternative
standards for startup and shutdown for SRU in subpart UUU. These
commenters agreed that additional time is needed to install controls
and/or comply with management of change requirements in applicable
process safety management (PSM) and risk management program (RMP)
requirements. Commenters asserted that refineries need this time to
fully perform applicability determinations, complete the procurement
process to acquire consultant services to assist with these
applicability determinations, modify internal procedures, perform
training and implement control/equipment/operational changes as needed.
[[Page 45236]]
One commenter further explained that they also interpreted
statements in the December 1, 2015, preamble to the final rule (80 FR
at 75186) as EPA's intent to provide 18 months for compliance with the
provisions in Sec. Sec. 63.1564 and 63.1565 including the associated
monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements. The commenter
points out that the regulatory provisions in 63.1564 (a)(2) and in
Table 2 of subpart UUU do not reflect this intent and that these
provisions should be revised to reflect an August 1, 2017, compliance
date. The commenter specifically requested that EPA clarify the
regulatory language to provide an August 2017 compliance date for
monitoring requirements for FCCU controls, such as bag leak detectors,
total power and the secondary current operating limits for
electrostatic precipitators (ESP), and daily checks of the air or water
pressure to the spray nozzles on jet ejector-type wet scrubbers or
other types of wet scrubbers equipped with atomizing spray nozzles.
The commenter further explained that pursuant to Sec.
63.1572(c)(1)-(5), the compliance time for continuous parameter
monitoring systems (CPMS) specifications in Table 41, when coupled with
the revisions to monitoring requirements contained in Sec. 63.1572(d),
is inadequate (the commenter believes these requirements are effective
within 60 days of the effective date of the Refinery Sector Rule) given
that refineries would have to perform an assessment of each CPMS as
well an assessment of potential equipment and operational changes.
Response 1: We appreciate the support for the proposed revisions.
We disagree, however, with the comment indicating a belief that we also
intended to provide 18 months for refineries to comply with the FCCU
provisions in Sec. Sec. 63.1564 and 63.1565, including the associated
monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
Sections 63.1564 and 63.1565 refer to NSPS Ja requirements, which
are not new requirements for some sources pursuant to the December 2015
final amendments. In the preamble to the December 2015 final
amendments, we stated (80 FR 75186): ``As proposed, we are providing 18
months after the effective date of the final rule to conduct required
performance tests and comply with any revised [emphasis added]
operating limits for FCCU.'' We did not consider the pre-existing NSPS
requirements referred to in Sec. Sec. 63.1564 and 63.1565 to be
``revised operating limits'' for sources subject to NSPS Ja. We note
that an 18-month compliance period for these NSPS Ja requirements is
not supported because the proposed and final MACT operating limits are
identical to the NSPS Ja operating limits which already apply to these
affected sources. For refinery sources subject to the December 2015
final amendments and that are non-NSPS Ja sources, Tables 1 through 14
to 40 CFR part 63, subpart UUU clearly provide an 18-month compliance
period for refineries to transition from the existing requirements to
the revised operating limits.
With regard to the revised FCCU monitoring requirements in Sec.
63.1572(d), as discussed in the Response to Comment document for the
December 1, 2015, final rule (Docket Item No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0682-
0802), we amended the alternative monitoring approach to require daily
inspections of the air or water supply lines with the understanding
that no new monitoring equipment is needed to complete these
inspections. Therefore, we proposed and then finalized these
alternative requirements to apply immediately on the effective date of
the rule.
With regard to the compliance time for CPMS, the commenter is
mistaken that the regulations provide a 60-day compliance period.
Section 63.1572(c)(1) provides an 18-month transition period to the new
CPMS quality assurance (QA) requirements in Table 41. When establishing
this compliance date, we estimated that the time to perform these
evaluations, request vendor quotes, if necessary to upgrade or replace
existing monitors, and install the new/upgraded equipment would require
about 12 to 18 months. Thus, in the promulgating the final rule, the
Agency considered the types of concerns raised by the commenter and
provided an 18-month transition period.
We note that pursuant to the provisions in Sec. 63.6(i), which are
generally applicable, refinery owners or operators may seek compliance
extensions on a case-by-case basis if necessary.
Comment 2: One commenter stated that by extending the compliance
dates for the provisions addressed in the proposal, the EPA has
extended the amount of time for illegal exemptions for periods of
startup, shutdown and malfunction. The commenter also asserted that
substituting the general duty requirements as the continuous emissions
limit during the period between the promulgation and effective date is
not consistent with the CAA as it requires that section 112 standards
apply at all times, and general duty requirements do not meet the
requirements of CAA section 112.
The commenter also maintained that the CAA requires that air toxics
standards should be effective upon promulgation, and provides that
existing sources should comply as expeditiously as practicable. The
commenter argued that the EPA has not demonstrated in the record how 18
months is as ``expeditiously as practicable,'' and therefore the
extension of the compliance period is arbitrary and unlawful. The
commenter continued that the reasons given for the extension were in
part based on a potential need to install controls, but the EPA did not
provide an independent analysis demonstrating that there is an actual
need for new controls. Further, the commenter asserted that this
scenario could be addressed on a case-by-case basis by the provisions
in Sec. 63.6(i) rather than as a blanket exemption for all sources.
The commenter also stated that the other reason given for the
extension, compliance with the RMP and the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration's (OSHA) PSM, does not justify an extension for
compliance with the air toxics program. The commenter also stated that
the timing for removing these SSM exemptions has been delayed for
approximately 8 years (since the 2008 Sierra Club ruling) due to
rulemaking processes and delays, and that further delay is unwarranted.
Finally, the commenter stated that the EPA did not provide
emissions data to support their statements in the preamble that the
emission impacts from extending the compliance deadlines will have ``an
insignificant effect on emissions reductions.''
Response 2: We share the commenter's desire to implement the new
Refinery Sector Rule provisions as quickly as possible. However, we
have determined that it is infeasible to immediately comply with
certain provisions of the December 1, 2015, final rule, and it is,
therefore, necessary to provide the additional compliance time. Based
on the information that we now have, we concluded that facilities
require additional time to comply with certain provisions in the final
rule in order to allow facilities to install the appropriate monitoring
equipment, change procedures, and, if necessary, add or modify emission
control equipment.
We disagree with the commenters that we substituted the general
duty requirement for the requirements for which we are establishing an
18-month compliance period. Rather, we discussed the general duty
provision to
[[Page 45237]]
emphasize that although compliance with the relevant amendments would
be delayed for a period of time, these sources remain obligated to
comply with good air pollution control practices as specified in the
general duty requirements. We were not suggesting that the ``general
duty'' requirement is sufficient to meet CAA section 112 for the
regulated sources at issue in this rule.
We disagree with the commenter that the compliance period is not
supported and is therefore arbitrary. The process equipment associated
with maintenance vents, FCCU and SRU, are subject to the requirements
of the RMP regulation in 40 CFR part 68 and the OSHA PSM standard in 29
CFR part 1910. Therefore, any operational or procedural changes
resulting from meeting the applicable standards must follow the
management of change procedures in the respective regulatory programs,
as codified in Sec. 68.75 and Sec. 1910.119(l). As part of the
management of change process, the EPA expects that facilities will have
to perform an upfront assessment to determine what changes are required
to meet the maintenance vent requirements and alternative standards for
FCCU and SRU during periods of startup and shutdown. Based on the new
information we received after these regulatory requirements were
promulgated, we anticipate that refinery owners or operators will have
to adjust or install new instrumentation including alarms, closed drain
headers, equipment blowdown drums, and other new or revised equipment
and controls in order to comply with the new startup and shutdown
provisions. Where these types of projects are necessary, it is likely
facilities will have to hire a contractor to assist with the project
and complete the procurement process. Additionally, we expect that
facilities will have to perform risk assessments and review and revise
standard operating procedures, as necessary. Further, the management of
change provisions also require that employees who are involved in
operating a process, and maintenance and contract employees whose job
tasks are affected by the change, must be trained prior to start up of
the affected process. Finally, facilities are required to conduct pre-
startup safety reviews and obtain authorization to fully implement and
startup the modified process and/or equipment.
We disagree that compliance obligations with EPA's RMP and OSHA's
PSM cannot be considered in determining the appropriate compliance
period to the extent those obligations can be met consistent with the
compliance period mandated by CAA section 112. In the present case, the
compliance period of 18 months is well within the maximum 3-year
compliance period allowed by CAA section 112(i). When considering an
appropriate compliance timeframe, it is important to consider the time
it takes to safely transition to new operating procedures. If an
explosion or fire occurs due to inadequate planning and evaluation of
new procedures, the amount of toxics released to the atmosphere could
dwarf the emission reductions anticipated from the new startup and
shutdown requirements. Such an event could cause harm to refinery
personnel and unnecessarily expose the neighboring community to
releases of toxic emissions. Therefore, we believe it is reasonable to
consider other applicable regulatory compliance obligations for these
programs when establishing compliance dates for CAA section 112
requirements.
While we understand the commenter's concerns that the regulatory
changes did not occur as quickly as they would have hoped, we cannot
ignore feasibility and compliance with health and safety requirements,
as discussed above, in determining an appropriate compliance timeframe.
The ``delay'' in establishing these requirements does not somehow make
it technically feasible to immediately comply with these new standards.
Even with the 18-month timeframe being finalized today, sources must
still begin the planning and evaluation process immediately to meet the
compliance date.
We agree with the commenters that another statutory mechanism for
addressing compliance issues such as the ones addressed here would be
to rely on facility-specific requests pursuant to Sec. 63.6(i).
However, when a significant number of extension requests are
anticipated, we consider it reasonable and more efficient to provide
the additional compliance time within the rule. Providing the
compliance time in the rule reduces both industry and Agency burden
associated with developing and evaluating waivers on a case-by-case
basis. It also reduces the uncertainty that facilities face when a
regulatory compliance date is approaching and a request for an
extension has not yet been addressed by the Agency. Moreover, in the
current case, the compliance period established in the December 1, 2015
rule was only a few months after the publication of the rule and that
time period was generally not sufficient for a case-by-case extension
process.
We believe that the later compliance date will have an
insignificant effect on a refinery's overall emissions. The maintenance
vent provisions apply only to vent emissions associated with taking
equipment out of service for maintenance or repair. While there may be
a number of pieces of equipment taken out of service over a given year,
many facility owners or operators already have standard procedures for
de-inventorying equipment. While these procedures may not specifically
meet the final rule requirements (for example, they may depressure to
atmosphere once the vessel is below 5 psig, but may not measure the
lower explosive limit even though it could be monitored), the general
equipment de-inventory procedures will typically limit emissions to the
atmosphere. For the startup and shutdown operating limit alternatives
for FCCU and SRU, these equipment may be shut down only once every 2 to
5 years. Therefore, we expect very few of these events to occur during
the revised compliance period so there are limited opportunities for
these emissions and limited opportunities for emissions reductions. We
note that when we finalized the FCCU requirements, we did not project
any emissions reductions associated with these requirements. This is
partly due to the limited frequency of occurrence and partly due to
uncertainties in the existing practices used by facilities to reduce
these emissions. While we developed these requirements to ensure these
sources had emission limitations that applied at all times, the
decision was not based on a quantitative estimate of the emission
reduction that would be achieved by these requirements. In general, we
believe the emissions from these emission points to be relatively small
compared to the refinery's total HAP emissions so that the emissions
reduction achieved by the new requirements would be small. Therefore,
we expect that the modification to the compliance dates in this final
rule will not significantly impact a refinery's emissions.
Comment 3: One commenter stated that the references in the proposed
rule to the procedures for requesting compliance extensions through
Sec. 63.6(i) are problematic for state regulators and industry.
Facilities that have to install new controls or otherwise invest in
capital projects in order to comply with the new maintenance vent
requirements or alternative standards for FCCU and SRU may not have
ample time to submit such requests. Instead of requiring compliance by
August 2017, the commenter suggested that the EPA
[[Page 45238]]
finalize a compliance date 6 months after promulgation of the final
rule. This would allow sources an opportunity to use the provisions in
Sec. 63.6(i) as determined appropriate on a case-by-case basis by the
delegated authority. Finally, the commenter suggested that, in the
future, the EPA should promulgate standards with compliance dates at
least 120 days after promulgation and that the EPA should issue a stay
of the requirements if similar situations requiring compliance date
extensions should arise.
Response 3: As explained in the previous response, a compliance
date of August 1, 2017, is consistent with CAA section 112(i)(3). And,
because numerous facilities will likely need additional time beyond the
current compliance date, it is reasonable to rely on that provision
instead of setting a shorter compliance period and relying on the case-
by-case extension provisions of CAA section 112 and Sec. 63.6(i).
Furthermore, for the reasons provided in the previous response, we do
not believe that a 6-month compliance period as requested by this
commenter reflects the actual time it will take for most facilities to
comply with these provisions. The request that we provide a minimum of
120 days for compliance in future rulemakings goes beyond the scope of
this rulemaking. Compliance periods for future regulations will be
addressed in the context of the relevant proposed and final rules.
Comment 4: One commenter requested that an 18-month extension to
the compliance date be provided to allow for compliance with the
general duty requirements for maintenance vents. The commenter stated
that prior to the December 1, 2015 final amendments, designated
maintenance vents were not considered ``affected facilities,'' and,
therefore, were not subject to the general duty provisions. The
commenter argued that facilities will need to perform applicability
determinations for vents on refinery processes, update procedures,
perform training, and go through the OSHA management of change process
to assess the implications of the general duty clause on applicable
vents, and thus sources need time to do so.
Response 4: We did not propose any change to the general duty
requirement for ``maintenance vents.'' Rather, we proposed a revision
to the compliance date for startup, shutdown, maintenance and
inspection for maintenance vents. Although we noted that the general
duty provision applies prior to the proposed revised compliance date,
we did not propose to modify the compliance obligation for meeting the
general duty requirement. Therefore, we believe that this comment goes
beyond the scope of this rulemaking. However, we note that we consider
it standard practice for any operating facility to use good air
pollution control practices regardless of the emission source and
whether or not that source is specifically regulated by the MACT
standard; thus, additional time to meet such a requirement would not be
warranted.
Comment 5: One commenter stated that the EPA should extend the
compliance dates for the monitoring requirements for bypass lines of
miscellaneous process vents in Sec. 63.644(c). The commenter asserted
that the February 1, 2016 API/AFPM supplemental petition provides a
list of reasons why such an extension is needed and that EPA could rely
on the same justification as that for the compliance date extension
being granted for the startup, shutdown, maintenance and inspection
requirements for maintenance vents in Sec. 63.643(c). The commenter
noted that the API/AFPM petition explains that items previously
excluded from the monitoring requirements in Sec. 63.644(c), such as
high point bleeds, analyzer vents, open-ended valves or lines, and
pressure relief valves are no longer excluded under the December 2015
final rule, and, thus, would now be required to install flow indicators
or employ car-seal or lock-and-key type valves. The API/AFPM petition
also explains that since onstream analyzer vents (in situ sampling
systems) are excluded from the definition of miscellaneous process
vents through January 30, 2019, but not specifically excluded from the
bypass line monitoring provisions, some local agencies may interpret
that the bypass line provisions apply to analyzer vents and would
require analyzer vents to be in compliance during the additional period
between the February 1, 2016, effective date of the rule and January
30, 2019.
Response 5: As part of the December 1, 2015, final rule, the EPA
removed provisions from Sec. 63.644(c) that excluded high point
bleeds, analyzer vents, open-ended valves or lines, and pressure relief
valves from the bypass line provisions in Sec. 63.644(c)(1) and (2).
Low leg drains and equipment subject to Sec. 63.648 continue to be
excluded from the bypass line provisions in Sec. 63.644(c). Because
open-ended valves or lines and pressure relief valves (devices) are
equipment subject to Sec. 63.648, they remain subject to the bypass
line exclusion. In addition, high point bleeds are open-ended valves or
lines and would also be equipment subject to Sec. 63.648, and thus,
subject to the bypass line exclusion.
We removed analyzer vents from the list of items excluded from the
bypass line provisions because we consider analyzer vents to be
miscellaneous process vents consistent with our amendments to item (5)
in the list of exclusions from the definition of miscellaneous process
vents in Sec. 63.641. We recognize that based on the wording of item
(5), some may interpret that, prior to January 30, 2019, these analyzer
vents could be construed to be bypass lines. This is not our intent. We
consider analyzer vents to be miscellaneous process vents as they
routinely or continuously vent gases to the atmosphere. We included the
January 30, 2019, date to establish the date at which these analyzer
vents must comply with the miscellaneous process vent standards.
It was not our intent that analyzer vents would be considered
bypass lines between the February 1, 2016, effective date of the rule
and the January 30, 2019, compliance date provided in item (5) of the
list of exclusions from the definition of miscellaneous process vents.
While we consider it unlikely that local agencies would interpret the
Refinery final amendments to require bypass line monitoring for
analyzer vents, we understand the commenter's concern. To clarify these
requirements consistent with our original intent, we are amending item
(5) in the definition of miscellaneous process vent to exclude ``In
situ sampling systems (onstream analyzers)'' until February 1, 2016.
After this date, these sampling systems will be included in the
definition of miscellaneous process vents and sampling systems
determined to be Group 1 miscellaneous process vents must comply with
the requirements in Sec. Sec. 63.643 and 63.644 no later than January
30, 2019.
Comment 6: One commenter requested that EPA provide an 18-month
compliance period, rather than the 150 days provided, for existing
storage tanks to transition from complying with the requirements in
Sec. 63.646 to the storage vessel requirements in Sec. 63.660, which
were established in the December 2015 final rule. The storage vessel
provisions in Sec. 63.660 require that new or existing Group 1 storage
vessels comply with the requirements in subpart WW or subpart SS of 40
CFR part 63. The commenter stated that sources will need time to assess
whether their existing storage tanks meet the ``Group 1 Storage Tank''
definition finalized in Sec. 63.641 as part of the RTR rulemaking,
and, if so, to assess whether existing controls will need to
[[Page 45239]]
be updated to meet the subpart WW requirements contained in Sec.
63.660. Should such control upgrades be required, the commenter
asserted that additional time will be needed to design and install the
equipment, complete management of change process and provide operator
training. The commenter also stated that subpart WW imposes additional
inspection and recordkeeping requirements which will require additional
time for further operator training. A second commenter provided similar
comments, stating that inadequate time had been given to assess
applicability and upgrade tank controls (if needed) for existing Group
1 storage vessels. Finally, a comment was received stating that Table
11 appears to require compliance with Sec. 63.660 and is in conflict
with the overlap provisions in Sec. 63.640(n). The overlap provisions
in Sec. 63.640(n) allow Group 1 and 2 storage vessels to comply with
other regulations (e.g., 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb) as a means of
demonstrating compliance with the standards in Refinery MACT 1.
Compliance with the overlap provisions is made in lieu of complying
with the storage vessel provisions in Sec. 63.660 of Refinery MACT 1.
Response 6: While Table 11 was completely re-printed in the
proposed amendments, we did not propose to revise the compliance dates
for storage vessels or to address storage vessels in any way as part of
the proposed rule; thus, this comment is considered out of scope. We
note that this small population of tanks was specifically provided
additional time to install the required controls as specified in Sec.
63.660(d) and the commenters did not provide specific information on
why additional time is required. Section 63.6(i) provides a mechanism
to request additional time for the limited number of tanks within this
small population of tanks that may need additional time.
With respect to the comment that subpart WW imposes additional
inspection and recordkeeping requirements, the required inspections are
infrequent (generally once a year to once every 5 or 10 years) and we
disagree that existing compliance provisions do not provide sufficient
time for owners or operators to ``upgrade,'' if necessary, their
inspection procedures.
We agree with the commenter that Table 11 does appear to require
all storage vessels to transition to comply with Sec. 63.660 in
conflict with the overlap provisions in Sec. 63.640(n), which allow
compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb as a means to comply with
the amended Refinery MACT 1 storage vessel requirements. Therefore, we
are revising the relevant language in Table 11 to clarify that owners
or operators of affected storage vessels must transition to comply with
the provisions in Sec. 63.660 ``. . . or, if applicable, Sec.
63.640(n) . . .'' on or before April 29, 2016.
B. Technical and Editorial Corrections
Comment 1: One commenter questioned the revisions to Items (4)(i)
and (4)(ii) in Table 11 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart CC as they apply to
existing sources constructed or reconstructed before July 14, 1994. For
such sources, the commenter stated that these revisions appear to
retroactively impose compliance dates of August 18, 1998, for
paragraphs that were added or amended after August 18, 1998. The
commenter provided examples of the references to requirements in Sec.
63.648(j)(1) and (2) and Sec. 63.644 which should have an effective
date of February 1, 2016. The commenter further stated that Table 11 is
not all inclusive and omits many compliance dates of sections in
subpart CC, including those revised during the amendment process and
provided examples. The commenter asserted that these omissions make the
table incomplete and contribute to overall confusion, and, therefore,
requested that the table be deleted and compliance dates be
incorporated directly into the regulatory text.
Response 1: The commenter is mistaken that Sec. 63.648(j)(1) and
(2) are new requirements. In the December 2015 final rule, EPA
incorporated requirements from 60.482-4 of 40 CFR part 60, subpart VV
(which was previously referenced in 63.648(a) of 40 CFR part 63,
subpart CC) directly into Sec. 63.648(j)(1) and (2). Section 63.644
was amended and these final revisions provide additional clarification
on the compliance date for analyzer vents, as described in Response No.
5. Therefore, Table 11 neither changed the requirement nor changed the
applicable compliance date.
Table 11 is not intended to reflect every requirement and
compliance date. Rather, for requirements not identified in Table 11,
as in those cited by the commenter, the compliance date is the
effective date of the rule, February 1, 2016, or is specified in the
appropriate section.
Comment 2: One commenter requested that the use of the term
``pressure relief device'' or ``device'' be used in Sec.
63.670(o)(1)(vi), similar to the edits proposed in Sec. 63.641 and
Sec. 63.670(o)(1)(ii)(B). The commenter also requested that the EPA
provide a definition of the term ``pressure relief device'' in Sec.
63.641.
Response 2: We agree that Sec. 63.670(o)(1)(vi) should use the
term ``pressure relief device'' consistent with the edits proposed to
Sec. 63.641 and Sec. 63.670(o)(1)(ii)(B), and we are amending this
paragraph as suggested.
The request that EPA add a definition of ``pressure relief device''
is outside the scope of the current rulemaking.
Comment 3: One commenter requested that the proposed revision to
Sec. 63.1564(a)(1)(iv) also remove the words ``of this chapter'' for
consistency with other options referencing subpart UUU alternatives.
Response 3: We agree with the commenter that the phrase ``of this
chapter'' should be removed. This referred to the reference to Sec.
60.102a(b)(1), which we proposed to remove and are removing in this
final rule. In reviewing this comment, we also noted that the last
sentence of the introductory paragraph in Sec. 63.1564(a)(1) refers to
``. . . the four options in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (vi) of this
section.'' To address this clerical error, we are also revising the
last sentence in Sec. 63.1564(a)(1) to replace the word ``four'' with
the word ``six.''
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations//laws-and-executive-orders.
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 Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the PRA. OMB has previously approved the information collection
activities contained in the existing regulations at 40 CFR part 63,
subparts CC and UUU and has assigned OMB control numbers 2060-0340 and
2060-0554. The finalized amendments are revisions to compliance dates,
clarifications, and technical corrections that do not affect the
estimated burden of the existing rule. Therefore, we have not revised
the information collection request for the existing rule.
[[Page 45240]]
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. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no
net burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. The action consists of revisions to
compliance dates, clarifications, and technical corrections which do
not change the expected economic impact analysis performed for the
existing rule. We have, therefore, concluded that this action will have
no net regulatory burden for all directly regulated small entities.
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. It will not have substantial direct effect on
tribal governments, on the relationship between the federal government
and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the federal government and Indian tribes, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to
this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to
children. The final amendments serve to revise compliance dates and
make technical clarifications and corrections. We expect the additional
compliance time will have an insignificant effect on emission
reductions as many refiners already have measures in place due to state
and other federal requirements to minimize emissions during these
periods. Further, these periods are relatively infrequent and are
usually of short duration. Therefore, these amendments should not
appreciably increase risk for any populations. Further, this action
will allow more time for refiners to implement procedures to safely
start up and shut down equipment which should minimize safety risks for
all populations.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
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 that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations, or indigenous peoples, as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The
finalized amendments serve to revise compliance dates and make
technical clarifications and corrections. We expect the additional
compliance time will have an insignificant effect on emission
reductions as many refiners already have measures in place due to state
and other federal requirements to minimize emissions during these
periods. Further, these periods are relatively infrequent and are
usually of short duration. Therefore, the finalized amendments should
not appreciably increase risk for any populations. Further, this action
will allow more time for refiners to implement procedures to safely
start up and shut down equipment which should minimize safety risks for
all populations.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. This is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 60
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 1, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR parts
60 and 63 as follows:
PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES
0
1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart Ja--Standards of Performance for Petroleum Refineries for
Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced After
May 14, 2007
0
2. Section 60.102a is amended by revising the first sentence of
paragraph (f)(1)(i) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.102a Emissions limitations.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) For a sulfur recovery plant with an oxidation control system or
a reduction control system followed by incineration, the owner or
operator shall not discharge or cause the discharge of any gases
containing SO2 into the atmosphere in excess of the emission
limit calculated using Equation 1 of this section. * * *
* * * * *
[[Page 45241]]
PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES
0
3. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart CC--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants From Petroleum Refineries
0
4. Section 63.641 is amended by revising the definitions of ``Closed
blowdown system'', ``Force majeure event'' and paragraph (5) of the
definition ``Miscellaneous process vent'' to read as follows:
Sec. 63.641 Definitions.
* * * * *
Closed blowdown system means a system used for depressuring process
vessels that is not open to the atmosphere and is configured of piping,
ductwork, connections, accumulators/knockout drums, and, if necessary,
flow inducing devices that transport gas or vapor from a process vessel
to a control device or back into the process.
* * * * *
Force majeure event means a release of HAP, either directly to the
atmosphere from a pressure relief device or discharged via a flare,
that is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Administrator to result
from an event beyond the refinery owner or operator's control, such as
natural disasters; acts of war or terrorism; loss of a utility external
to the refinery (e.g., external power curtailment), excluding power
curtailment due to an interruptible service agreement; and fire or
explosion originating at a near or adjoining facility outside of the
refinery that impacts the refinery's ability to operate.
* * * * *
Miscellaneous process vent * * *
(5) In situ sampling systems (onstream analyzers) until February 1,
2016. After this date, these sampling systems will be included in the
definition of miscellaneous process vents and sampling systems
determined to be Group 1 miscellaneous process vents must comply with
the requirements in Sec. Sec. 63.643 and 63.644 no later than January
30, 2019;
* * * * *
0
5. Section 63.643 is amended by revising paragraph (c) introductory
text and adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.643 Miscellaneous process vent provisions.
* * * * *
(c) An owner or operator may designate a process vent as a
maintenance vent if the vent is only used as a result of startup,
shutdown, maintenance, or inspection of equipment where equipment is
emptied, depressurized, degassed or placed into service. The owner or
operator does not need to designate a maintenance vent as a Group 1 or
Group 2 miscellaneous process vent. The owner of operator must comply
with the applicable requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of
this section for each maintenance vent according to the compliance
dates specified in table 11 of this subpart, unless an extension is
requested in accordance with the provisions in Sec. 63.6(i).
* * * * *
(d) After February 1, 2016 and prior to the date of compliance with
the maintenance vent provisions in paragraph (c) of this section, the
owner or operator must comply with the requirements in Sec. 63.642(n)
for each maintenance venting event and maintain records necessary to
demonstrate compliance with the requirements in Sec. 63.642(n)
including, if appropriate, records of existing standard site procedures
used to deinventory equipment for safety purposes.
0
6. Section 63.648 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory
text as follows:
Sec. 63.648 Equipment leak standards.
(a) Each owner or operator of an existing source subject to the
provisions of this subpart shall comply with the provisions of 40 CFR
part 60, subpart VV, and paragraph (b) of this section except as
provided in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2), (c) through (i), and (j)(1) and
(2) of this section. Each owner or operator of a new source subject to
the provisions of this subpart shall comply with subpart H of this part
except as provided in paragraphs (c) through (i) and (j)(1) and (2) of
this section.
* * * * *
0
7. Section 63.655 is amended by revising paragraph (h)(8) introductory
text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.655 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(8) For fenceline monitoring systems subject to Sec. 63.658,
within 45 calendar days after the end of each reporting period, each
owner or operator shall submit the following information to the EPA's
Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI). (CEDRI can
be accessed through the EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) (https://cdx.epa.gov/). The owner or operator need not transmit these data prior
to obtaining 12 months of data.
* * * * *
0
8. Section 63.658 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(1) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.658 Fenceline monitoring provisions.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) As it pertains to this subpart, known sources of VOCs, as used
in Section 8.2.1.3 in Method 325A of appendix A of this part for siting
passive monitors, means a wastewater treatment unit, process unit, or
any emission source requiring control according to the requirements of
this subpart, including marine vessel loading operations. For marine
vessel loading operations, one passive monitor should be sited on the
shoreline adjacent to the dock.
* * * * *
0
9. Section 63.670 is amended by revising paragraphs (o)(1)(ii)(B) and
(o)(1)(vi) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.670 Requirements for flare control devices.
* * * * *
(o) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) Implementation of prevention measures listed for pressure
relief devices in Sec. 63.648(j)(5) for each pressure relief device
that can discharge to the flare.
* * * * *
(vi) For each pressure relief device vented to the flare identified
in paragraph (o)(1)(iv) of this section, provide a detailed description
of each pressure release device, including type of relief device
(rupture disc, valve type) diameter of the relief device opening, set
pressure of the relief device and listing of the prevention measures
implemented. This information may be maintained in an electronic
database on-site and does not need to be submitted as part of the flare
management plan unless requested to do so by the Administrator.
* * * * *
0
10. The appendix to subpart CC is amended by revising table 11 to read
as follows:
Appendix to Subpart CC of Part 63--Tables
* * * * *
[[Page 45242]]
Table 11--Compliance Dates and Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then the owner or And the owner or
If the construction/ reconstruction operator must comply operator must achieve Except as provided in .
date is . . . with . . . compliance . . . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) After June 30, 2014............ (i) Requirements for new Upon initial startup.... Sec. 63.640(k), (l)
sources in Sec. Sec. and (m).
63.643(a) and (b);
63.644, 63.645, and
63.647; 63.648(a)
through (i) and (j)(1)
and (2); 63.649 through
63.651; and 63.654
through 63.656.
(ii) Requirements for Upon initial startup or Sec. 63.640(k), (l)
new sources in Sec. February 1, 2016, and (m).
Sec. 63.642(n), whichever is later.
63.643(c),
63.648(j)(3), (6) and
(7); and 63.657 through
63.660.
(2) After September 4, 2007 but on (i) Requirements for new Upon initial startup.... Sec. 63.640(k), (l)
or before June 30, 2014. sources in Sec. Sec. and (m).
63.643(a) and (b);
63.644, 63.645, and
63.647; 63.648(a)
through (i) and (j)(1)
and (2); and 63.649
through 63.651, 63.655
and 63.656.
(ii) Requirements for Upon initial startup or Sec. 63.640(k), (l)
new sources in Sec. October 28, 2009, and (m).
63.654. whichever is later.
(iii) Requirements for Upon initial startup, Sec. Sec. 63.640(k),
new sources in either but you must transition (l) and (m) and
Sec. 63.646 or Sec. to comply with only the 63.660(d).
63.660 or, if requirements in Sec.
applicable, Sec. 63.660 or, if
63.640(n). applicable, Sec.
63.640(n) on or before
April 29, 2016.
(iv) Requirements for On or before August 1, Sec. Sec. 63.640(k),
existing sources in 2017. (l) and (m) and
Sec. 63.643(c). 63.643(d).
(v) Requirements for On or before January 30, Sec. 63.640(k), (l)
existing sources in 2018. and (m).
Sec. 63.658.
(vi) Requirements for On or before January 30, Sec. 63.640(k), (l)
existing sources in 2019. and (m).
Sec. 63.648 (j)(3),
(6) and (7) and Sec.
63.657.
(vii) Requirements in Upon initial startup or
Sec. 63.642 (n). February 1, 2016,
whichever is later.
(3) After July 14, 1994 but on or (i) Requirements for new Upon initial startup or Sec. 63.640(k), (l)
before September 4, 2007. sources in Sec. Sec. August 18, 1995, and (m).
63.643(a) and (b); whichever is later.
63.644, 63.645, and
63.647; 63.648(a)
through (i) and (j)(1)
and (2); and 63.649
through 63.651, 63.655
and 63.656.
(ii) Requirements for On or before October 29, Sec. 63.640(k), (l)
existing sources in 2012. and (m).
Sec. 63.654.
(iii) Requirements for Upon initial startup, Sec. Sec. 63.640(k),
new sources in either but you must transition (l) and (m) and
Sec. 63.646 or Sec. to comply with only the 63.660(d).
63.660 or, if requirements in Sec.
applicable, Sec. 63.660 or, if
63.640(n). applicable, Sec.
63.640(n) on or before
April 29, 2016.
(iv) Requirements for On or before August 1, Sec. Sec. 63.640(k),
existing sources in 2017. (l) and (m) and
Sec. 63.643(c). 63.643(d).
(v) Requirements for On or before January 30, Sec. 63.640(k), (l)
existing sources in 2018. and (m).
Sec. 63.658.
(vi) Requirements for On or before January 30, Sec. 63.640(k), (l)
existing sources in 2019. and (m).
Sec. Sec.
63.648(j)(3), (6) and
(7) and 63.657.
(vii) Requirements in Upon initial startup or
Sec. 63.642(n). February 1, 2016,
whichever is later.
(4) On or before July 14, 1994..... (i) Requirements for (A) On or before August (1) Sec. 63.640(k),
existing sources in 18, 1998. (l) and (m). (2) Sec.
Sec. Sec. 63.648(a) 63.6(c)(5) or unless
through (i) and (j)(1) an extension has been
and (2); and 63.649, granted by the
63.655 and 63.656. Administrator as
provided in Sec.
63.6(i).
(ii) Either the (A) On or before August (1) Sec. 63.640(k),
requirements for 18, 1998. (l) and (m). (2) Sec.
existing sources in 63.6(c)(5) or unless
Sec. Sec. 63.643(a) an extension has been
and (b); 63.644, granted by the
63.645, 63.647, 63.650 Administrator as
and 63.651; and item provided in Sec.
(4)(v) of this table. 63.6(i).
OR......................
The requirements in Sec.
Sec. 63.652 and
63.653.
(iii) Requirements for On or before August 18, Sec. Sec. 63.640(k),
existing sources in 1998, but you must (l) and (m) and
either Sec. 63.646 or transition to comply 63.660(d).
Sec. 63.660 or, if with only the
applicable, Sec. requirements in Sec.
63.640(n). 63.660 or, if
applicable, Sec.
63.640(n) on or before
April 29, 2016.
[[Page 45243]]
(iv) Requirements for On or before October 29, Sec. 63.640(k), (l)
existing sources in 2012. and (m).
Sec. 63.654.
(v) Requirements for On or before August 1, Sec. Sec. 63.640(k),
existing sources in 2017. (l) and (m) and
Sec. 63.643(c). 63.643(d).
(vi) Requirements for On or before January 30, Sec. 63.640(k), (l)
existing sources in 2018. and (m).
Sec. 63.658.
(vii) Requirements for On or before January 30, Sec. 63.640(k), (l)
existing sources in 2019. and (m).
Sec. Sec.
63.648(j)(3), (6) and
(7) and 63.657.
(viii) Requirements in Upon initial startup or
Sec. 63.642 (n). February 1, 2016,
whichever is later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Subpart UUU--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic Cracking Units,
Catalytic Reforming Units, and Sulfur Recovery Units
0
11. Section 63.1563 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) and (b);
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (d) and (e) as paragraphs (e) and (f),
respectively;
0
c. Adding new paragraph (d); and
0
d. Revising newly redesignated paragraph (e) introductory text.
The revisions and additions to read as follows:
Sec. 63.1563 When do I have to comply with this subpart?
(a) * * *
(1) If you startup your affected source before April 11, 2002, then
you must comply with the emission limitations and work practice
standards for new and reconstructed sources in this subpart no later
than April 11, 2002 except as provided in paragraph (d) of this
section.
(2) If you startup your affected source after April 11, 2002, you
must comply with the emission limitations and work practice standards
for new and reconstructed sources in this subpart upon startup of your
affected source except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section.
(b) If you have an existing affected source, you must comply with
the emission limitations and work practice standards for existing
affected sources in this subpart by no later than April 11, 2005 except
as specified in paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section.
* * * * *
(d) You must comply with the applicable requirements in Sec. Sec.
63.1564(a)(5), 63.1565(a)(5) and 63.1568(a)(4) as specified in
paragraph (d)(1) or (2) of this section, as applicable.
(1) For sources which commenced construction or reconstruction
before June 30, 2014, you must comply with the applicable requirements
in Sec. Sec. 63.1564(a)(5), 63.1565(a)(5) and 63.1568(a)(4) on or
before August 1, 2017 unless an extension is requested and approved in
accordance with the provisions in Sec. 63.6(i). After February 1, 2016
and prior to the date of compliance with the provisions in Sec. Sec.
63.1564(a)(5), 63.1565(a)(5) and 63.1568(a)(4), you must comply with
the requirements in Sec. 63.1570(c) and (d).
(2) For sources which commenced construction or reconstruction on
or after June 30, 2014, you must comply with the applicable
requirements in Sec. Sec. 63.1564(a)(5), 63.1565(a)(5) and
63.1568(a)(4) on or before February 1, 2016 or upon startup, whichever
is later.
(e) If you have an area source that increases its emissions or its
potential to emit such that it becomes a major source of HAP, the
requirements in paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) of this section apply.
* * * * *
0
12. Section 63.1564 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1)
introductory text, (a)(1)(iv), (a)(5) introductory text and (c)(5)
introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.1564 What are my requirements for metal HAP emissions from
catalytic cracking units?
(a) * * *
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(5) of this section, meet
each emission limitation in Table 1 of this subpart that applies to
you. If your catalytic cracking unit is subject to the NSPS for PM in
Sec. 60.102 of this chapter or is subject to Sec. 60.102a(b)(1) of
this chapter, you must meet the emission limitations for NSPS units. If
your catalytic cracking unit is not subject to the NSPS for PM, you can
choose from the six options in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (vi) of
this section:
* * * * *
(iv) You can elect to comply with the PM per coke burn-off emission
limit (Option 2);
* * * * *
(5) On or before the date specified in Sec. 63.1563(d), you must
comply with one of the two options in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) and (ii) of
this section during periods of startup, shutdown and hot standby:
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(5) If you elect to comply with the alternative limit in paragraph
(a)(5)(ii) of this section during periods of startup, shutdown and hot
standby, demonstrate continuous compliance on or before the date
specified in Sec. 63.1563(d) by:
* * * * *
0
13. Section 63.1565 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(5)
introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.1565 What are my requirements for organic HAP emissions from
catalytic cracking units?
(a) * * *
(5) On or before the date specified in Sec. 63.1563(d), you must
comply with one of the two options in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) and (ii) of
this section during periods of startup, shutdown and hot standby:
* * * * *
0
14. Section 63.1566 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.1566 What are my requirements for organic HAP emissions from
catalytic reforming units?
(a) * * *
(4) The emission limitations in Tables 15 and 16 of this subpart do
not apply to emissions from process vents during passive depressuring
when the reactor vent pressure is 5 pounds per square inch gauge (psig)
or less or during active depressuring or purging prior to January
[[Page 45244]]
30, 2019, when the reactor vent pressure is 5 psig or less. On and
after January 30, 2019, the emission limitations in Tables 15 and 16 of
this subpart do apply to emissions from process vents during active
purging operations (when nitrogen or other purge gas is actively
introduced to the reactor vessel) or active depressuring (using a
vacuum pump, ejector system, or similar device) regardless of the
reactor vent pressure.
* * * * *
0
15. Section 63.1568 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)
introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.1568 What are my requirements for organic HAP emissions from
sulfur recovery units?
(a) * * *
(4) On or before the date specified in Sec. 63.1563(d), you must
comply with one of the three options in paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through
(iii) of this section during periods of startup and shutdown.
* * * * *
0
16. Table 2 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising the entry
for item 1 to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart UUU of Part 63--Operating Limits for Metal HAP Emissions From Catalytic Cracking Units
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For this type of
For each new or existing catalytic continuous monitoring For this type of You shall meet this
cracking unit . . . system . . . control device . . . operating limit . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Subject to the NSPS for PM in 40 Continuous opacity Any................... On and after August 1,
CFR 60.102 and not elect Sec. monitoring system. 2017, maintain the 3-hour
60.100(e). rolling average opacity of
emissions from your
catalyst regenerator vent
no higher than 20 percent.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
0
17. Table 3 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising the entry
for item 12 to read as follows:
Table 3 to Subpart UUU of Part 63--Continuous Monitoring Systems for
Metal HAP Emissions From Catalytic Cracking Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you use this
For each new or existing type of control You shall install,
catalytic cracking unit . . . device for your operate, and maintain
vent . . . a . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
12. Electing to comply with Any.............. Continuous parameter
the operating limits in Sec. monitoring system to
63.1564(a)(5)(ii) during measure and record
periods of startup, shutdown, the gas flow rate
or hot standby. exiting the catalyst
regenerator.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ If applicable, you can use the alternative in Sec. 63.1573(a)(1)
instead of a continuous parameter monitoring system for gas flow rate.
* * * * *
0
18. Table 5 to subpart UUU of part 63 is amended by revising the entry
for item 2 to read as follows:
Table 5 to Subpart UUU of Part 63--Initial Compliance With Metal HAP
Emission Limits for Catalytic Cracking Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For each new and existing For the following
catalytic cracking unit emission limit . You have demonstrated
catalyst regenerator vent . . . . initial compliance if
. . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
2. Subject to NSPS for PM in PM emissions must You have already
40 CFR 60.102a(b)(1)(i); or not exceed 1.0 g/ conducted a
in Sec. 60.102 and electing kg (1.0 lb PM/ performance test to
Sec. 60.100(e) and electing 1,000 lb) of demonstrate initial
to meet the PM per coke burn- coke burn-off. compliance with the
off limit. NSPS and the
measured PM emission
rate is less than or
equal to 1.0 g/kg
(1.0 lb/1,000 lb) of
coke burn-off in the
catalyst
regenerator. As part
of the Notification
of Compliance
Status, you must
certify that your
vent meets the PM
limit. You are not
required to do
another performance
test to demonstrate
initial compliance.
As part of your
Notification of
Compliance Status,
you certify that
your BLD; CO2, O2,
or CO monitor; or
continuous opacity
monitoring system
meets the
requirements in Sec.
63.1572.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 45245]]
[FR Doc. 2016-16451 Filed 7-12-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P