[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 6, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 45673-45679]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-18142]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0121; FRL-8701-8]
RIN 2060-AO07
National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants
From the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry for Process
Vents, Storage Vessels, Transfer Operations, and Wastewater; and
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Miscellaneous
Organic Chemical Manufacturing
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; amendments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On November 10, 2003, EPA promulgated national emission
standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for miscellaneous
organic chemical manufacturing. The rule is referred to as the
miscellaneous organic NESHAP or the MON. The MON incorporates by
reference the wastewater tank requirements in the National Emission
Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants From the Synthetic
Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry for Process Vents, Storage
Vessels, Transfer Operations, and Wastewater, which EPA promulgated on
April 24, 1994, and which is referred to as the hazardous organic
NESHAP or the HON. In this action EPA proposes to amend the HON, and
thereby, the MON, by adding an equivalent means of emission limitation
for wastewater tanks. This action also clarifies and corrects technical
inconsistencies that have been discovered in the MON.
DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before September 22,
2008.
Public Hearing. If anyone contacts EPA requesting to speak at a
public hearing by August 18, 2008, a public hearing will be held on
August 21, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2003-0121, by one of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
E-mail: [email protected].
Fax: (202) 566-9744.
Mail: U.S. Postal Service, send comments to: Air and
Radiation Docket and Information Center, EPA, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of
two copies.
Hand Delivery: In person or by courier, deliver your
comments to: Air and Radiation Docket, EPA, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW. Washington, DC 20004. Please include a total
of two copies. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's
normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. We request that a separate copy of
each public comment also be sent to the contact person listed below
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2003-0121. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be confidential
business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information
[[Page 45674]]
about EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at
http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation Docket,
EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the
Air and Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742.
Public Hearing. If you are interested in attending the public
hearing, contact Ms. Janet Eck at (919) 541-7946 to verify that a
hearing will be held. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at
10 a.m. at EPA's Campus located at 109 T.W. Alexander Drive in Research
Triangle Park, NC, or an alternate site nearby. If no one contacts EPA
requesting to speak at a public hearing concerning this rule by August
18, 2008 this hearing will be cancelled without further notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Randy McDonald, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division,
Coatings and Chemicals Group (E143-01), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-5402; fax number: (919)
541-0246; e-mail address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated Entities. Categories and entities
potentially regulated by this action include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of
Category NAICS * regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.................... 3251, 3252, 3253, Producers of
3254, 3255, 3256, specialty organic
and 3259, with chemicals,
several exceptions. explosives, certain
polymers and
resins, and certain
pesticide
intermediates.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* North American Industrial Classification System.
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. To determine whether your facility is regulated by this action,
you should examine the applicability criteria in Sec. 63.2435. If you
have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
World Wide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of the proposed rule is also available on the WWW
through the Technology Transfer Network. Following signature, a copy of
the proposed rule will be posted on the TTN's policy and guidance page
for newly proposed or promulgated rules at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information and technology exchange in various
areas of air pollution control.
Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as
follows:
I. What amendments are we proposing for the HON, 40 CFR part 63,
subpart G?
II. What technical corrections are we proposing for the MON, 40 CFR
part 63, subpart FFFF?
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
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
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
I. What amendments are we proposing for the HON, 40 CFR part 63,
subpart G?
The EPA has received a request from Dow Chemical Company for
approval of an equivalent means emission limitation for wastewater
tanks subject to the MON. The MON incorporates by reference the
wastewater tank requirements of the HON in Sec. 63.2485(d) and Table 7
by requiring compliance with Sec. Sec. 63.132 through 63.148 of the
HON. With one exception, the standards for wastewater tanks in Sec.
63.133(a) of the HON require the owner or operator of an affected
wastewater tank to operate and maintain a fixed roof, an internal
floating roof, or an external floating roof. Under certain
circumstances or as an alternative to these requirements, the owner or
operator may operate and maintain a fixed roof with a closed-vent
system and control device. If a fixed roof with a closed vent system
and control device is used, Sec. 63.133(b) requires that each opening
in the roof be closed. The request and evaluation submitted by Dow
Chemicals is to use a fixed roof with openings under negative pressure
and vapors routed through a closed vent system to a control device as
an equivalent means of emission limitation to the fixed roof vented to
control device.
An owner or operator of an affected source covered by the HON may
request approval to use an equivalent means of emission limitation in
accordance with Sec. 63.133(a)(2)(iv). The determination of
equivalency to the reduction in emissions achieved by the requirements
in Sec. 63.133(a)(2)(i) is based on actual emission tests or
engineering evaluation and evaluated according to Sec. 63.102(b).
Under Sec. 63.102(b), if, in the judgment of the Administrator, an
equivalent means of emission limitation will achieve a reduction in
organic hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions at least equivalent to
the reduction in organic HAP emissions from that source achieved under
any design, equipment,
[[Page 45675]]
work practice, or operational standards in 40 CFR part 63, subpart G,
the Administrator will publish in the Federal Register a notice
permitting the use of the alternative means for purposes of compliance
with that requirement. Any such notice shall be published only after
public notice and an opportunity for a hearing.
Moreover, the proposed work practice is an appropriate standard
under section 112(h) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). Specifically, CAA
section 112(h)(2)(B) provides that a work practice standard can be
issued in lieu of an emission standard where it is ``not feasible to
prescribe or enforce an emission standard.'' CAA section 112(h)(2)(B)
defines the phrase ``not feasible to prescribe or enforce an emission
standard,'' to mean a situation where the Administrator determines that
``the application of measurement methodology to a particular class of
sources is not practicable due to technological and economic
limitations.'' The proposed work practice is consistent with CAA
section 112(h)(2)(B) since applying a measurement methodology to this
class of sources is not technologically feasible due to the number of
openings and possible emissions points. Emissions from fixed roof tanks
are evaporative losses that result from barometric pressure and ambient
temperature changes, as well as filling and emptying operations. The
flow rate of vent emissions from a tank is very low, except during
filling. The concentration of HAP in the vent stream varies with the
degree of saturation of HAP in the tank vapor space. The degree of
saturation depends on such factors as HAP vapor pressure, tank size,
and liquid throughput. Low flow rate and varying concentration make
emission measurement impractical.
We discussed work practice standards for wastewater tanks in the
preamble to the proposed HON rule (57 FR 62641). We stated:
Although considered first, it was determined that a numerical
standard would not be feasible because it would be difficult to
capture and measure emissions from this equipment for the purpose of
evaluating compliance.
We are considering the Dow Chemical Company's request for a
determination of equivalency under Sec. Sec. 63.102(b) and
63.133(a)(2)(iv) since standards for tanks are work practice standards.
Design features of Dow's wastewater tank include a negative pressure
generated from the thermal oxidizer blower to draw the clarifier vent
stream to the thermal oxidizer, an air sweep across the headspace to
minimize accumulation of flammables, and a low pressure water seal
system for the rotating raker arm structure. Dow developed the patented
design to address safety and operational issues inherent in wastewater
treatment tanks. The tank has uniform air inlets around the
circumference of the tank at the roof for evenly distributed air flow
into the clarifier.
When a fixed roof with a closed vent system and control device is
used to comply with the requirements for wastewater tanks, the owner or
operator must meet the requirements in Sec. 63.133(b). Paragraphs
Sec. 63.133(b)(1), (2), and (3) contain requirements for the fixed
roof, the control device, and the closed vent system, respectively.
Paragraph Sec. 63.133(b)(1)(i) requires the fixed roof and all
openings be maintained in accordance with the no detectable emissions
requirements in Sec. 63.148 and paragraph Sec. 63.133(b)(1)(ii)
requires each opening in the fixed roof be maintained in a closed
position. The request and evaluation submitted by Dow Chemicals is to
use a fixed roof with openings under negative pressure and vapors
routed through a closed vent system to a control device as an
equivalent means of emission limitation to the fixed roof vented to
control device. Since the performance of the closed vent system and
control device would be equivalent, Dow's application for equivalency
must demonstrate that the fixed roof with openings under negative
pressure performs at least as well as the fixed roof.
To show equivalency under Sec. Sec. 63.102(b) and
63.133(a)(2)(iv), Dow tested for detectable emissions at the openings
of the fixed roof under negative pressure. Dow obtained flame
ionization detection (FID) readings at these openings and found meter
readings of less than 500 parts per million by volume (ppmv) above
background. These results indicate no detectable emissions according to
Sec. 63.148(d).
Moreover, Dow correctly states that an enclosure with openings
under negative pressure has previously been considered by EPA and is an
accepted control alternative under the NESHAP for the pulp and paper
industry (40 CFR part 63, subpart S) as well as a control requirement
under the Benzene Waste NESHAP (40 CFR part 61, subpart FF).
The Pulp and Paper NESHAP requires pulping equipment systems be
enclosed and vapors be vented to a closed vent system and routed to a
control device. Each enclosure must maintain negative pressure at each
opening. The owner or operator is required to demonstrate initially and
annually that each enclosure opening is maintained at a negative
pressure using an anemometer, smoke tubes, or other acceptable test
method to demonstrate flow into the enclosure opening.
The Benzene Waste NESHAP has provisions for tanks maintained at a
pressure less than atmospheric pressure. The standard requires a fixed-
roof and closed-vent system that routes all vapors from a tank to a
control device. In lieu of maintaining all openings in a closed and
sealed position, the owner or operator may choose to maintain the tank
at a pressure less than atmospheric pressure.
After considering the information in Dow's request and reviewing
prior EPA judgments, we have concluded that Dow has demonstrated that
maintaining a fixed roof with openings under negative pressure achieves
an equivalent emissions reduction compared to maintaining a fixed roof
with no openings as required by Sec. Sec. 63.102(b) and
63.133(a)(2)(iv).
Therefore, we are proposing to amend Sec. 63.133(b) to allow a
fixed roof with openings maintained at negative pressure for owners or
operators complying with Sec. 63.133(a)(2)(i) for a fixed roof and
closed vent system that routes vapors to a control device.
We are also proposing monitoring requirements to accompany the
proposed equivalent means of emission limitation, which demonstrate
that the openings in the enclosure are maintained under negative
pressure throughout the full range of operating conditions, including
periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
II. What technical corrections are we proposing for the MON, 40 CFR
part 63, subpart FFFF?
We are proposing to edit several provisions to clarify our intent.
These proposed changes are described in Table 1 of this preamble.
[[Page 45676]]
Table 1--Technical Clarifications and Corrections to the Mon, 40 CFR
Part 63, Subpart FFFF
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart FFFF Description of proposed correction
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.2450(o)................. We are adding language to clarify
that, if hydrogen halide and
halogen HAP in a vent stream must
be controlled to meet the emission
limits in Table 3 to subpart FFFF
of 40 CFR part 63, then that vent
stream may not be vented to a
flare. This clarifies our intent
that all other vent streams that
contain hydrogen halide and halogen
HAP may be vented to a flare.
Sec. 63.2460(a)................. We are proposing language to clarify
that any combination of emission
limits for batch process vents
(items 1.a, 1.b, and/or 1.c in
Table 2) may be applied to batch
process vents.
Sec. 63.2460(c)(2)(v)........... We are proposing to add language to
clarify that the requirement to
demonstrate that a process
condenser is properly operated
applies only in the case where a
HAP is heated above its boiling
point. This requirement only
applies to HAP in batch process
vents and does not apply to HAP as
an impurity.
Sec. 63.2465(b)................. We are proposing to apply the outlet
concentration limit to controlled
and uncontrolled process vents.
Sec. 63.2470(c)................. For storage tanks we are proposing
to incorporate by reference the
monitoring requirements in Sec.
63.1258(b)(1)(v) for
nonregenerative carbon adsorbers.
Sec. 63.2485(n)(1).............. We are adding neutralization units
to the requirement that wastewater
must be hard-piped between
wastewater treatment tanks and the
activated sludge unit.
Sec. 63.2520(c)(2).............. We are correcting the reference to
paragraph Sec. 63.2460(c)(5), the
referenced paragraph is Sec.
63.2450(k)(6).
Sec. 63.2550(i)................. 1. We are proposing to add a
definition for the term ``bench-
scale process.'' The term will mean
the same as ``bench-scale batch
process,'' as defined in Sec.
63.161.
2. We are proposing to correct the
definition for the term
``miscellaneous organic chemical
manufacturing process'' by removing
extruder as an endpoint for
processes without an extruder.
Table 6 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart We are deleting entry 2 as intended
FFFF. (see 70 FR 73121, December 8,
2005). An entry for new sources is
not necessary.
Table 7 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart We are proposing certain wastewater
FFF. requirements as an alternative for
liquid streams in open systems.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), and is,
therefore, not subject to review under the Executive Order.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The action does not impose any new information collection burden.
The proposed amendments would give owners and operators another
compliance option. Since these changes have the potential to result in
minor reductions in the information collection burden, the Information
Collection Request has not been revised. However, OMB has previously
approved the information collection requirements contained in the
existing regulation at 40 CFR part 63, subpart FFFF under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and
has assigned OMB control number 2060-0533. The OMB control numbers for
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency to
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice
and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure
Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations,
and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's proposed
amendments on small entities, a small entity is defined as: (1) A small
business ranging from up to 500 employees to up to 1,000 employees,
depending on the NAICS code; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that
is a government of a city, county, town, school district, or special
district with a population of less than 50,000; or (3) a small
organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise that is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field. The
maximum number of employees to be considered a small business for each
NAICS code is shown in the preamble to the proposed rule (67 FR 16178).
After considering the economic impacts of this proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In
determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant
economic impact of the rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Thus, 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, or otherwise has a positive economic effect
on all of the small entities subject to the rule.
The proposed amendments include an additional compliance option for
wastewater tanks that provide small entities with greater flexibility
to comply with the standards. We have therefore concluded that this
proposed rule amendments will relieve regulatory burden for all
affected small entities.
We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the
proposed rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues related
to such impacts.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires us to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
[[Page 45677]]
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of
section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable
law. Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other
than the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final rule an
explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before EPA
establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, we
must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government
agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected
small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to
have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and
informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with
the regulatory requirements.
EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any one year. This action clarifies and corrects technical
inconsistencies that have been discovered. Thus, this rule is not
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
EPA has determined that this rule contains no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. These rule amendments clarify and correct technical
inconsistencies, thus, should not affect small governments.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
This proposed rule 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,
as specified in Executive Order 13132. None of the affected facilities
are owned or operated by State or local governments. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed rule
from State and local officials.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed rule does not
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. The
proposed rule amendments provide an owner or operator with an
additional option for complying with the emission limits and other
requirements in the rule. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to
the proposed rule amendments.
EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed rule
from tribal officials.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
as applying to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety
risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the
Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is based
solely on technology performance.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA), Public Law No. 104-113, (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its regulatory activities
unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. VCS are technical standards (e.g. , materials
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business
practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. NTTAA directs
EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency
decides not to use available and applicable VCS.
This proposed rule does not involve technical standards. Therefore,
EPA is not considering the use of any VCS.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because they do not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. The proposed rule amendments do not relax the control
measures on sources regulated by the rule and, therefore, will not
cause emissions increases from these sources.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 31, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part
63 of the Code of the Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as
follows:
PART 63--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
[[Page 45678]]
Subpart G--[Amended]
2. Section 63.133 is amended by adding paragraph (b)(1)(iii) to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.133 Process wastewater provisions--Wastewater tanks.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) If the fixed-roof and closed-vent system is operated such
that a negative pressure is maintained at each opening in the fixed
roof, then paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section does not apply. Under
representative conditions, demonstrate initially and annually that each
opening is maintained at negative pressure as specified in Sec.
63.457(e). For a range of operating conditions, the owner or operator
shall comply with Sec. 63.145(a)(4)(i).
* * * * *
Subpart FFFF--[Amended]
3. Section 63.2450 is amended by revising paragraph (o) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.2450 What are my general requirements for complying with
this subpart?
* * * * *
(o) You may not use a flare to control halogenated vent streams or
hydrogen halide and halogen HAP emissions to comply with Table 3.
* * * * *
4. Section 63.2460 is amended by revising paragraph (a) and the
first sentence in paragraph (c)(2)(v) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.2460 What requirements must I meet for batch process vents?
(a) You must meet each emission limit, or combination thereof, in
Table 2 to this subpart that applies to you, and you must meet each
applicable requirement specified in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this
section.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(v) If a process condenser is used for boiling operations in which
a HAP (not as an impurity) is heated to the boiling point, you must
demonstrate that it is properly operated according to the procedures
specified in Sec. 63.1257(d)(2)(i)(C)(4) and (d)(3)(iii)(B), and the
demonstration must occur only during the boiling operation.* * *
* * * * *
5. Section 63.2465 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.2465 What requirements must I meet for process vents that
emit hydrogen halide and halogen HAP or HAP metals?
* * * * *
(b) If any process vents within the process contain greater than 20
parts per million by volume (ppmv) hydrogen halide or halogen HAP, you
must determine and sum the uncontrolled hydrogen halide and halogen HAP
emissions from each of the process vents within the process using
procedures specified in Sec. 63.1257(d)(2)(i) and (ii).
* * * * *
6. Section 63.2470 is amended by adding new paragraph (c)(3) to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.2470 What requirements must I meet for storage tanks?
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) For nonregenerative carbon adsorbers, you may choose to comply
with the monitoring requirements in Sec. 63.1258(b)(v) in lieu of
Sec. 63.995(c).
* * * * *
7. Section 63.2485 is amended by revising the first sentence in
paragraph (n)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.2485 What requirements must I meet for wastewater streams
and liquid streams in open systems within an MCPU?
* * * * *
(n) * * *
(1) Wastewater must be hard-piped between the equalization unit,
neutralization unit, clarifier, and activated sludge unit.* * *
* * * * *
8. Section 63.2520 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(2) to read
as follows:
Sec. 63.2520 What reports must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) Descriptions of daily or per batch demonstrations to verify
that control devices subject to Sec. 63.2450(k)(6) are operated as
designed.
* * * * *
9. Section 63.2550 is amended in paragraph (i) as follows:
a. Adding a new definition for the term ``Bench-scale process'' in
alphabetical order;
b. Revising paragraph (6) to the definition for ``Miscellaneous
organic chemical manufacturing process''.
Sec. 63.2550 What definitions apply to this subpart?
* * * * *
(i) * * *
Bench-scale process means a batch process (other than a research
and development facility) that is operated on a small scale, such as
one capable of being located on a laboratory bench top. This bench-
scale equipment will typically include reagent feed vessels, a small
reactor and associated product separator, recovery and holding
equipment. These processes are only capable of producing small
quantities of product.
* * * * *
Miscellaneous organic chemical manufacturing process
* * * * *
(6) The end of a process that produces a solid material is either
up to and including the dryer or extruder, or for a polymer production
process without a dryer or extruder, it is up to and including the die
plate or solid-state reactor, except in two cases. If the dryer,
extruder, die plate, or solid-state reactor is followed by an operation
that is designed and operated to remove HAP solvent or residual HAP
monomer from the solid, then the solvent removal operation is the last
step in the process. If the dried solid is diluted or mixed with a HAP-
based solvent, then the solvent removal operation is the last step in
the process.
* * * * *
Table 6 to Subpart FFFF of Part 63--[Amended]
10. Table 6 to subpart FFFF of part 63 is amended by removing entry
2.
Table 7 to Subpart FFFF of Part 63--[Amended]
11. Table 7 to subpart FFFF of part 63 is amended by revising entry
3 to read as follows:
* * * * *
Table 7--To Subpart FFFF of Part 63--Requirements for Wastewater Streams
and Liquid Streams in Open Systems Within an MCPU
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For each . . . You must . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 45679]]
* * * * * * *
3. Liquid streams in an open Comply with the requirements in Sec.
system within an MCPU. 63.149 and the requirements
referenced therein, except as
specified in Sec. 63.2485. You
may comply with the requirements in
Sec. 63.133(b)(1)(ii) for tanks.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. E8-18142 Filed 8-5-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P