[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 107 (Monday, June 3, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27785-27788]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-13825]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[AD-FRL-5512-6]
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for:
Chromium Emissions From Hard and Decorative Chromium Electroplating and
Chromium Anodizing Tanks; Ethylene Oxide Commercial Sterilization and
Fumigation Operations; Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities; and
Secondary Lead Smelting
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action promulgates final action to amend certain sections
of the following promulgated standards: ``National Emission Standards
for Chromium Emissions from Hard and Decorative Chromium Electroplating
and Chromium Anodizing Tanks; Final Rule'' (subpart N); ``National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Ethylene Oxide
Commercial Sterilization and Fumigation Operations'' (subpart O);
``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source
Categories: Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities'' (subpart M);
and ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from
Secondary Lead Smelting'' (subpart X). Today's action amends the Final
Rules' requirement that nonmajor sources (emitting or having the
potential to emit less than 10 tons per year of any hazardous air
pollutant or 25 tons per year of any combination of hazardous air
pollutants) obtain title V operating permits. The action being taken
today will substantially reduce the unnecessary and undue regulatory
burden for States and local agencies, the EPA Regional Offices, and the
industry during a time when all available resources are necessary for
the initial implementation of the title V permit program for major
sources. Sources are still required to meet all applicable emission
control requirements established by the respective maximum achievable
control technology (MACT) standards. The only change from proposal to
promulgation is that the 5-year deferral option, as with the other
rules, is also being provided for nonmajor sources in the secondary
lead smelters (subpart X) source category.
DATES: Effective Date: June 3, 1996.
Judicial Review: Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, judicial
review of national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
(NESHAP) is available only by filing a petition for review in the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days of
today's publication of this final rule. Under section 307(b)(2) of the
Act, the requirements that are the subject of today's notice may not be
challenged later in civil or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to
enforce these requirements.
ADDRESSES: Docket. Docket No. A-88-02, containing the supporting
information for the original subpart N NESHAP and this action, Docket
No. A-88-03, containing the supporting information for the original
subpart O NESHAP, Docket No. A-88-11, containing the supporting
information for the original subpart M NESHAP, and Docket No. A-92-43,
containing the supporting information for the original subpart X
NESHAP, are available for public inspection and copying between 8:00
a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, at the EPA Air and Radiation
Docket and Information Center, Waterside Mall, room M-1500, first
floor, 401 M Street S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460, or by calling (202)
260-7548. These dockets also contain information considered by the EPA
in developing this final rule. A reasonable fee may be charged for
copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Lalit Banker, Emission Standards
Division (MD-13), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711, telephone number (919) 541-5420.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The proposal notice was published in the Federal Register on
December 13, 1995 (60 FR 64002). No public hearing was requested.
Seventeen letters commenting on the proposed rule were received during
the public comment period.
II. Summary
A. Summary of Changes Since Proposal
The proposed rule offered title V permitting authorities the option
to defer permitting of nonmajor sources in the following source
categories: chromium electroplating and chromium anodizing tanks;
ethylene oxide commercial sterilization and fumigation operations; and
perchloroethylene dry cleaning facilities. The rule proposed permitting
nonmajor secondary lead smelters on schedule. In response to public
comments received and additional analyses performed by the EPA, one
change has been made to the rule since proposal. The permitting
authorities will be allowed the option to defer the nonmajor sources in
the secondary lead smelters source category for 5 years from title V
permit requirements similar to the option for nonmajor sources in the
other source categories described in the proposal. Comments were also
received on possible additional permanent exemptions for any of the
source categories for which temporary exemptions were being considered.
Although a majority of the comments supported permanent exemptions for
these nonmajor sources, the EPA has decided not to grant permanent
exemptions to any additional source categories at this time. However,
the EPA will make a decision regarding additional permanent exemptions
by the time the temporary exemptions expire. During the permit deferral
period, the EPA will continue to evaluate the State/local agencies
implementation and enforcement of the standards for nonmajor sources
outside of a title V permit, the likely benefit of permitting such
sources, and the costs and other burdens on such sources associated
with obtaining a title V permit.
B. Significant Comments and Responses
Comments on the proposed rule were received from the industry and
State and local regulatory agencies. Except for one State agency, all
commenters concurred with the EPA option to allow states to defer title
V permit requirements for nonmajor sources. The representative for the
State of Florida disagreed with this recommendation by contending that
permitting the subject nonmajor sources through the use of title V
general permits would not constitute an undue regulatory burden for a
permitting agency, nor would such a mechanism be considered
exceptionally onerous for small
[[Page 27786]]
businesses covered by the section 112 standards. The State of Florida
maintains that a general permit is the most efficient and cost-
effective process by which States can implement emission standard
requirements.
The commenter articulated that the deferral of permitting
requirements for area sources is problematic for the following reasons.
First, the deferral will create unnecessary confusion for affected
sources that will still be subject to the NESHAP requirements. Second,
permits are needed to practically verify emission limitations and work
practices to which a source is subject. Third, the commenter questions
whether the enforcement of NESHAP requirements can be accomplished by
means other than a permit. The commenters experience has been that
small businesses support a general permit that states the applicable
NESHAP requirements. Lastly, the commenter believes that the lack of a
permit requirement will result in unequal enforcement of emission
limitations by individual States or local air pollution control
agencies.
The EPA believes that the rationale described in the proposal for
the temporary exemption option, as well as supportive public comments,
strongly support the deferral of permitting for nonmajor sources;
therefore, the EPA has not made any changes to this option.
Nevertheless, the issues which the above commenter raises will be
examined during the process of determining whether to permit or allow
the exemption of nonmajor sources at the conclusion of the 5 year
deferral. It should be noted that todays action does not preclude any
State/local permitting authority from proceeding to permit the nonmajor
sources discussed in this notice at their discretion during the
deferral period.
Two commenters specifically questioned the EPA's justification in
not allowing the deferral of nonmajor secondary lead smelters. The EPA
had proposed that requiring nonmajor secondary lead smelters to obtain
Part 70 permits without delay would not be impracticable or infeasible
for the State or local permitting authorities involved and would not
unnecessarily burden these companies since, in contrast to the hundreds
or thousands of sources in the four other source categories, there are
only a few secondary lead smelters which are nonmajor sources. The
commenters contend that requiring nonmajor secondary lead smelters to
obtain a title V permit is also unnecessary and could cause undue
burden both to the industry as well as to the State agencies and will
not enhance any environmental benefits.
Upon consideration of these comments and further evaluation, the
EPA believes that the relatively few number of sources in a category is
not an important distinction, and that States should, therefore, also
be allowed to temporarily exempt nonmajor secondary lead smelters from
permitting requirements, along with sources in the other source
categories. This change from proposal is consistent with the EPA's
decision for deferral for the other area source categories. As
explained previously, comments were received on the other nonmajor
source categories requesting an option for permanent permit exemptions.
The EPA will continue to evaluate factors related to this issue and
make a decision regarding permanent exemptions by the time the
temporary exemptions expire. This ongoing evaluation reinforced the
advisability of also providing the opportunity for the deferral of
permits to secondary lead smelters, so that the permit requirements for
all nonmajor sources can be addressed as a package. These nonmajor
sources are still required to comply with the requirements of the
promulgated standard for secondary lead smelters regardless of whether
they will be permitted in the near term. While the EPA disagrees with
the assertion that permitting under title V does not yield an
environmental benefit, the EPA does agree that to require the immediate
permitting of nonmajor secondary lead smelters is unnecessarily
burdensome during the initial years of the title V program.
III. Administrative Requirements
A. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements of the previously
promulgated National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP) were submitted to and approved by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). Today's changes to the NESHAP would not increase the
information collection burden estimates made previously. In fact, they
are expected to reduce the required paperwork by providing the
opportunity for delays for some sources and exemptions for others from
requirements to obtain a title V permit.
B. Executive Order 12866
Under Executive Order 12866, the Agency must determine whether a
regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore subject to OMB
review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
Pursuant to the terms of the Executive Order, the OMB has notified
the EPA that it does not consider this to be a ``significant regulatory
action'' within the meaning of the Executive Order. Therefore, the EPA
did not submit this action to the OMB for review.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires the
EPA to consider potential impacts of regulations on small entities. A
regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA) is required if preliminary
analysis indicates ``a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities''. As explained earlier in this rule, these
amendments would reduce the impacts on small entities (specifically
small businesses) by allowing States to delay some and exempt others
from the requirement to obtain a title V permit.
Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 605(b), I hereby certify
that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
D. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA)
Subtitle E of SBREFA establishes opportunity for Congress to review
and potentially disapprove nonmajor rules promulgated on or after March
29, 1996 or major rules promulgated after March 1, 1996. With limited
exceptions, it provides that no rule promulgated on or after March 29,
1996, may take effect until it is submitted to Congress and the
Comptroller General along with specified supporting documentation.
Different requirements apply to major rules. This rule, which is
nonmajor, is
[[Page 27787]]
being submitted to Congress in accordance with these requirements.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``unfunded
Mandates Act''), (signed into law on March 22, 1995) requires that the
Agency prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed
or final rule that includes a Federal Mandate that may result in
expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 1 year.
Section 203 requires the Agency to establish a plan for obtaining input
from and informing, educating, and advising any small governments that
may be significantly or uniquely affected by the rule.
As explained earlier in this notice, these amendments would reduce
the cost to State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector
by allowing States to delay some and exempt others from the requirement
to obtain a title V permit. Therefore, the EPA has not prepared a
budgetary impact statement for these amendments.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: May 22, 1996.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part
63 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as set forth below:
PART 63--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart N--[Amended]
2. Section 63.340 is amended by revising paragraph (e) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.340 Applicability and designation of sources.
* * * * *
(e)(1) The Administrator has determined, pursuant to the criteria
under section 502(a) of the Act, that an owner or operator of the
following types of operations that are not by themselves major sources
and that are not located at major sources, as defined under 40 CFR
70.2, is permanently exempt from title V permitting requirements for
that operation:
(i) Any decorative chromium electroplating operation or chromium
anodizing operation that uses fume suppressants as an emission
reduction technology; and
(ii) Any decorative chromium electroplating operation that uses a
trivalent chromium bath that incorporates a wetting agent as a bath
ingredient.
(2) An owner or operator of any other affected source subject to
the provisions of this subpart is subject to title V permitting
requirements. These affected sources, if not major or located at major
sources as defined under 40 CFR 70.2, may be deferred by the applicable
title V permitting authority from title V permitting requirements for 5
years after the date on which the EPA first approves a part 70 program
(i.e., until December 9,1999). All sources receiving deferrals shall
submit title V permit applications within 12 months of such date (by
December 9, 2000). All sources receiving deferrals still must meet the
compliance schedule as stated in Sec. 63.343.
3. Section 63.342 is amended by revising the first sentence of
paragraph (c)(2)(i)(B) and introductory text of paragraph (f)(3)(i) to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.342 Standards.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(B) By accepting a Federally-enforceable limit on the maximum
cumulative potential rectifier capacity of a hard chromium
electroplating facility and by maintaining monthly records in
accordance with Sec. 63.346(b)(12) to demonstrate that the limit has
not been exceeded. * * *
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(3) * * *
(i) The owner or operator of an affected source subject to the work
practices of this paragraph (f) shall prepare an operation and
maintenance plan to be implemented no later than the compliance date.
The plan shall be incorporated by reference into the source's title V
permit, if and when a title V permit is required. The plan shall
include the following elements:
* * * * *
Sec. 63.344 [Amended]
4. In Sec. 63.344, paragraphs (e)(3)(v) and (e)(4)(iv) are amended
by revising the word ``less'' to read ``more''.
5. Section 63.347 is amended by revising the introductory text in
paragraph (e)(2) and paragraph (f)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.347 Reporting requirements.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(2) If the State in which the source is located has not been
delegated the authority to implement the rule, each time a notification
of compliance status is required under this part, the owner or operator
of an affected source shall submit to the Administrator a notification
of compliance status, signed by the responsible official (as defined in
Sec. 63.2) who shall certify its accuracy, attesting to whether the
affected source has complied with this subpart. If the State has been
delegated the authority, the notification of compliance status shall be
submitted to the appropriate authority. The notification shall list for
each affected source:
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(1) If the State in which the source is located has not been
delegated the authority to implement the rule, the owner or operator of
an affected source shall report to the Administrator the results of any
performance test conducted as required by Sec. 63.7 or Sec. 63.343(b).
If the State has been delegated the authority, the owner or operator of
an affected source should report performance test results to the
appropriate authority.
* * * * *
6. Table 1 to subpart N of Part 63 is amended by revising the entry
for ``63.5(a)'' to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart N of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to Subpart N
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General provisions reference Applies to subpart N Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * *
*
63.5(a)............................... Yes................................... Except replace the term
``source'' and ``stationary
source'' in Sec. 63.5(a) (1)
and (2) of subpart A with
``affected sources.''
[[Page 27788]]
* * * * * *
*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart O--[Amended]
7. Section 63.360 is amended by revising paragraph (f) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.360 Applicability.
* * * * *
(f) The owner or operator of a source, subject to the provisions of
the title 40, chapter I, part 63 subpart O, using 1 ton (see
definition) is subject to title V permitting requirements. These
affected sources, if not major or located at major sources as defined
under 40 CFR 70.2, may be deferred by the applicable title V permitting
authority from title V permitting requirements for 5 years after the
date on which the EPA first approves a part 70 program (i.e., until
December 9, 1999). All sources receiving deferrals shall submit title V
permit applications within 12 months of such date (by December 9,
2000). All sources receiving deferrals still must meet compliance
schedule as stated in this Sec. 63.360.
* * * * *
Subpart M--[Amended]
8. Section 63.320 is amended by adding paragraph (k) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.320 Applicability.
* * * * *
(k) The owner or operator of any source subject to the provisions
of this subpart M is subject to title V permitting requirements. These
affected sources, if not major or located at major sources as defined
under 40 CFR 70.2, may be deferred by the applicable title V permitting
authority from title V permitting requirements for 5 years after the
date on which the EPA first approves a part 70 program (i.e., until
December 9, 1999). All sources receiving deferrals shall submit title V
permit applications within 12 months of such date (by December 9,
2000). All sources receiving deferrals still must meet compliance
schedule as stated in this Sec. 63.320.
Subpart X--[Amended]
9. Section 63.541 is amended by adding paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.541 Applicability.
* * * * *
(c) The owner or operator of any source subject to the provisions
of this subpart X is subject to title V permitting requirements. These
affected sources, if not major or located at major sources as defined
under 40 CFR 70.2, may be deferred by the applicable title V permitting
authority from title V permitting requirements for 5 years after the
date on which the EPA first approves a part 70 program (i.e., until
December 9, 1999). All sources receiving deferrals shall submit title V
permit applications within 12 months of such date (by December 9,
2000). All sources receiving deferrals still must meet compliance
schedule as stated in Sec. 63.546.
[FR Doc. 96-13825 Filed 6-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
