[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 247 (Friday, December 23, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 80314-80318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-32830]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0080; FRL-9610-1]
RIN 2060-AR16
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Area
Source Standards for Prepared Feeds Manufacturing; Amendments
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to revise certain provisions of the area
source national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
(NESHAP) for prepared feeds manufacturing published on January 5, 2010
(final rule). These revisions will clarify the regulatory requirements
for this source category and ensure that those requirements are
consistent with the record. The revisions address the generally
available control technology (GACT) requirements for pelleting
processes at large, existing prepared feeds manufacturing facilities,
specifically removal of the cyclone 95-percent design efficiency
requirement, as well as associated requirements for compliance
demonstration, monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping; clarification
of the requirement that doors be kept closed in areas where materials
containing chromium and manganese are stored, used, or handled; and
clarification of the requirement to install a device at the point of
bulk loadout to minimize emissions. These amendments are not expected
to result in increased emissions or in the imposition of costs beyond
those described in the January 5, 2010, final rule.
DATES: Written comments must be received by January 23, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2008-0080, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov:
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Agency Web site: http://www.epa.gov/oar/docket.html.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments on the EPA Air and
Radiation Docket Web site.
Email: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov. Include Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2008-0080 in the subject line of the message.
Fax: Send comments to (202) 566-9744, Attention Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0080.
Mail: Area Source NESHAP for Prepared Feeds Manufacturing
Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of two copies.
Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, Public Reading Room, EPA
West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2008-0080. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and
[[Page 80315]]
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
http://www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means the EPA will not know
your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body
of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA
without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your email address
will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that
is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If
you submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include
your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and
with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment
due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification,
the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files
should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and
be free of any defects or viruses. For additional instructions on
submitting comments, see Section III of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
Docket: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0080. All documents in the docket are
listed in the Federal Docket Management System index at
www.regulations.gov. 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 form. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, Public
Reading Room, EPA West, 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 Docket is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jan King, Outreach and Information
Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (C404-05),
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.
Telephone number: (919) 541-5665; fax number: (919) 541-0242; email
address: king.jan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information presented in this preamble
is organized as follows:
I. Why is the EPA issuing a proposed rule?
II. Does this action apply to me?
III. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?
A. Submitting CBI
B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments
IV. Where can I get a copy of this document?
V. What amendments are being proposed?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
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 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. Why is the EPA issuing a proposed rule?
This document proposes amendments affecting sources regulated under
the area source national emission standards for hazardous air
pollutants (NESHAP) for prepared feeds manufacturing published on
January 5, 2010 (75 FR 522). Because we view this as a noncontroversial
action and anticipate no adverse comment, we have published a direct
final rule in the ``Rules and Regulations'' section of this Federal
Register revising the generally available control technology (GACT)
standard for pelleting operations at large, existing prepared feeds
manufacturing facilities; clarifying the requirement to keep doors
closed in areas where materials containing chromium and manganese are
stored, used, and handled; and clarifying the requirement that a device
of any type can be used during the bulk loadout process.
If we receive no adverse comment, we will not take further action
on this proposed rule and the direct final rule will become effective
on February 21, 2012 without further notice. If we receive adverse
comment, we will address all public comments in any subsequent final
rule based on this proposed rule. If EPA receives adverse comment by
January 23, 2012 on a distinct provision of this proposed rule, we will
publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal Register indicating which
provisions we are withdrawing. The provisions that are not withdrawn
will become effective on the date set out above, notwithstanding
adverse comment on any other provision.
We do not intend to institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time.
For further information, please see the information provided in the
ADDRESSES section of this document.
II. Does this action apply to me?
Regulated Entities. The regulated categories and entities
potentially affected by the rule include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated
Category NAICS code 1 entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Animal Foods 311119 Animal feeds, prepared
Manufacturing. (except dog and cat),
manufacturing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 North American Industry Classification System.
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. To determine whether your facility is regulated by this action,
you should examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 63.11619,
subpart DDDDDDD (NESHAP for Area Sources: Prepared Feeds
Manufacturing). If you have any questions regarding the applicability
of this action to a particular entity, consult either the state
delegated authority or the EPA regional representative, as listed in 40
CFR 63.13 of subparts A (General Provisions).
[[Page 80316]]
III. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?
A. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to the EPA
through www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (e.g., subject heading, Federal Register date
and page number).
Follow directions. The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
IV. Where can I get a copy of this document?
Electronic Access. In addition to being available in the docket, an
electronic copy of this direct final action will also be available on
the Worldwide Web (WWW) through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN).
Because this is an amendment of regulatory language through rulemaking,
a redline version of the regulatory language has been created and has
been placed in the docket (http://www.regulations.gov, see Docket No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0080) to aid the public's ability to comment on the
regulatory text. Following signature, a copy of this final action will
be posted on the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or
promulgated rules at the following address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information and technology exchange in various
areas of air pollution control.
V. What amendments are being proposed?
On January 5, 2010 (75 FR 522), the EPA promulgated the NESHAP for
area source prepared feeds manufacturing facilities as subpart DDDDDDD
in 40 CFR part 63. Existing affected sources (i.e., construction or
reconstruction of the facility began on or before July 27, 2009) must
comply with the rule by January 5, 2012, while new affected sources
(i.e., construction or reconstruction of the facility began after July
27, 2009) were required to comply by January 5, 2010, or upon startup,
whichever is later.
Today's proposal consists of three revisions and clarifications.
The rule requires that pelleting operations at large prepared feeds
manufacturing facilities (i.e., those facilities with an average daily
feed production level exceeding 50 tons per day) use cyclones. In the
final rule, these cyclones were required to have a 95-percent design
efficiency. This proposal revises this requirement for existing sources
only.\2\ Such sources must use cyclones, and those cyclones must be
operated in accordance with good air pollution control practices and
manufacturer's specifications and operating instructions, if available,
or standard operating procedures must be developed by the facility
owner or operator to ensure proper operation and maintenance of the
cyclone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ We are not changing any requirements for new large, prepared
feeds manufacturing facilities. We have amended the regulatory text
to clarify that the design efficiency requirement and associated
compliance mechanisms, monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping
requirements apply only to new sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the preamble to the final rule, we recognized that the cyclones
employed on pelleting operations at existing, large prepared feeds
manufacturing facilities were generally available and provided
effective Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) emissions control (75 FR 533).
We added the 95-percent design efficiency requirement in the final rule
because we thought, based on limited data from sources that would need
to install cyclones, that a large percentage of existing cyclones at
large facilities already met that design efficiency (75 FR 544). In
assessing the costs of the design efficiency requirement as part of our
GACT analysis, we estimated that few existing sources (approximately 2
percent) did not have cyclones and would need to install them to meet
the requirement (Economic Impact Analysis for the Prepared Feeds
Manufacturing Area Source NESHAP, June 17, 2009, Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2008-0080-0036). We also explained in the final rule that it was not
our intent to force prepared feed manufacturers to replace older, well-
designed, and properly operating cyclones with new high-efficiency
cyclones (75 FR 533). Indeed, we recognized that requiring the
replacement of older, well designed, properly operating cyclones was
not cost effective, because the incremental emission reductions would
be very low and the costs would be high (75 FR 533).
The EPA included in the final rule three different mechanisms by
which a source could demonstrate compliance with the design efficiency
requirement. 40 CFR 63.11621(e)(1)-(3). A source could show compliance
by having either cyclone manufacturer certification/specifications, a
certification by a professional engineer or responsible official, or a
Method 5 performance test that indicates whether PM is being released
from the system (Appendix A to part 60) (which determines the
particulate matter mass rate at the inlet and outlet of the cyclone).
The EPA has recently learned that most existing sources would need to
install new cyclones to provide the required documentation for
demonstrating compliance with the final rule. (Material presented by
prepared feeds industry representatives at the January 25, 2011,
meeting with EPA staff, and Industry Request for Administrative Stay
and Reconsideration--June 10 2011, both of which are located in Docket
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0080). That was not the intent of the final rule,
and this result cannot be reconciled with the GACT analysis underlying
the final rule.
As noted above, we premised the design efficiency requirement in
the final rule for existing sources on the assumption that all but a
few cyclones were meeting that requirement and that only a few sources
would need to install new cyclones. Our cost analysis in the final rule
tracked this assumption. We now recognize that this assumption was
incorrect, and that our regulations, as written, would require many
existing facilities to replace existing cyclones, which is contrary to
our GACT analysis. As explained in the final rule, the replacement of
older, well designed, properly operating cyclones is not cost
[[Page 80317]]
effective (75 FR at 533). We are therefore proposing to revise the
requirement of the final rule for pelleting operations at existing
large, prepared feeds manufacturing facilities (i.e., those facilities
with an average daily feed production level exceeding 50 tons per day)
to require the use of cyclones. We are also proposing that the cyclones
be operated in accordance with good air pollution control practices and
manufacturer's specifications and operating instructions, if available,
or standard operating procedures must be developed by the facility
owner or operator to ensure proper operation and maintenance of the
cyclone. These proposed revisions are wholly consistent with the record
supporting the final rule, including the cost analysis and our
determination that cyclones are generally available for existing
sources and effectively control HAP emissions.
Further, the EPA is proposing to revise the requirements for
demonstration of compliance, monitoring, and the notification,
reporting and recordkeeping requirements for existing sources only,
consistent with the removal of the design efficiency requirement for
those sources. This action proposes to amend the notification of
compliance status requirements such that the cyclone manufacturer's
operating specifications or standard operating procedures developed by
the prepared feeds manufacturer be required as part of the record
instead of one of the cyclone parameters as specified in the final rule
(i.e., inlet flow rate, inlet velocity, pressure drop, or fan amperage
range). The revised annual compliance certification would include all
instances when the cyclone does not operate according to manufacturer
specifications or the standard operating procedures. This would replace
the requirement for existing sources to include in the annual
compliance certification the cyclone parameters listed in the final
rule. We are also proposing to revise the recordkeeping requirements
for existing sources to require the owner or operator to record the
results of weekly visual inspections. This would replace the
requirement in the January 5, 2010, final rule for existing sources to
record the daily inlet flow rate, inlet velocity, pressure drop, or fan
amperage.
This action also clarifies that the requirement to keep doors
closed in areas where materials containing manganese and chromium are
stored, used, or handled does not apply to areas where finished
prepared feeds product is stored in closed containers, since there are
no HAP emissions in these areas. See 40 CFR 63.11621(a)(iii).
Finally, there has been some confusion regarding the type of device
needed to comply with the bulk loadout provision at 40 CFR 63.11621(d).
These proposed amendments would clarify that any type of device may be
used to minimize the distance between the place where bulk loadout
occurs and the vehicle being loaded. The distance may also be minimized
by the design of the loadout process itself (e.g., the loadout arm
positioned directly above the vehicle being loaded).
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
(76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011).
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden above
that required in the original rule. The revisions do not require
additional information collection requirements and may result in an
overall reduction of the information collection burden. Therefore, the
information collection requests are not being amended. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) previously approved the information
collection request (ICR) contained in the existing regulations (subpart
DDDDDDD, 40 CFR part 63) under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB control
number 2060-0635 (ICR 2354.02). The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 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
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-
profit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of this rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administration's regulations found at 13 CFR
121.201; (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; and (3) a small organization that is
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated
and is not dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of this action on small
entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This final
rule will not impose any requirements on small entities. This action
does not impose any additional costs over those in the final rule
published on January 5, 2010 (75 FR 522). In fact, the clarifications
contained in this action are expected to reduce costs for some small
businesses that would otherwise have installed control equipment, but
that would not be required to do so as a result of these amendments.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This action contains no Federal mandate under the provisions of
title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C.
1531-1538 for state, local, or tribal governments, or the private
sector. This action imposes no enforceable duty on state, local, or
tribal governments, or the private sector. Therefore, this action is
not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
This action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203
of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action imposes
no obligations upon them.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This direct final 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. This direct final
rule does not impose any requirements on state and local governments.
Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.
[[Page 80318]]
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This direct
final rule imposes no requirements on tribal governments. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets EO 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 Order
has the potential to influence the regulation. This action is not
subject to EO 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 action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355,
May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12886.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (''NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities, unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law
or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. NTTAA directs the EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, the
EPA did not consider the use of any voluntary consensus standards.
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.
The EPA has determined that this direct final rule will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the
environment. This direct final rule makes revisions and clarifications
to the rule and should not result in increased emissions beyond those
described in the final rule.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Particulate matter, Air pollution
control, Hazardous substances, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: December 15, 2011.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2011-32830 Filed 12-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P