[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 96 (Wednesday, May 18, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31234-31236]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11749]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0290 and EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0291; FRL-9946-63-OAR]
NESHAP for Brick and Structural Clay Products Manufacturing; and
NESHAP for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of action denying in part and granting in part petitions
for reconsideration.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action provides notice that the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator, Gina McCarthy, denied in part
and granted in part petitions for reconsideration of the final National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Brick and
Structural Clay Products (BSCP) Manufacturing and the final NESHAP for
Clay Ceramics Manufacturing published in the Federal Register on
October 26, 2015.
DATES: This action is effective on May 18, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sharon Nizich, Minerals and
[[Page 31235]]
Manufacturing Group, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D243-04),
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711;
telephone number: (919) 541-2825; email address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?
This Federal Register notice, the petitions for reconsideration,
and the letters and accompanying enclosures addressing the petitions
for reconsideration are available in the dockets the EPA established
under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0291 for BSCP Manufacturing and
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0290 for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing.
All documents in the dockets are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information 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 available either
electronically through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566-1744 and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742.
This Federal Register document, the petitions for reconsideration, and
the letters with the accompanying enclosure addressing the petitions
can also be found on the EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg.
II. Judicial Review
Section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) indicates which
Federal Courts of Appeals have venue for petitions for review of final
EPA actions. This section provides, in part, that the petitions for
review must be filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit if: (i) The agency action consists of ``nationally
applicable regulations promulgated, or final action taken, by the
Administrator,'' or (ii) such actions are locally or regionally
applicable, if ``such action is based on a determination of nationwide
scope or effect and if in taking such action the Administrator finds
and publishes that such action is based on such a determination.''
The EPA has determined that its denial of the petitions for
reconsideration is nationally applicable for purposes of CAA section
307(b)(1) because the actions directly affect the BSCP Manufacturing
NESHAP and Clay Ceramics Manufacturing NESHAP, which are nationally
applicable regulations. Thus, any petitions for review of the letters
and enclosures denying the petitions for reconsideration described in
this document must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit by July 18, 2016.
To the extent that EPA is granting the petitions for
reconsideration with respect to certain issues, such grant is not final
agency action, but only begins an agency process to consider whether
the rule should be revised. If EPA in the future takes final agency
action to revise the rule, notice of such action will be published in
the Federal Register and judicial review will be available at that
time.
III. Description of Action
The initial NESHAP for BSCP Manufacturing and initial NESHAP for
Clay Ceramics Manufacturing were published in the Federal Register on
May 16, 2003 (68 FR 26690), and codified at 40 CFR part 63, subparts
JJJJJ and KKKKK, respectively, pursuant to section 112 of the CAA.
Those standards were challenged and subsequently vacated by the United
States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 2007.
See Sierra Club v. EPA, 479 F.3d 875, 876 (D.C. Cir. 2007). Following
the 2007 vacatur of the 2003 rule, the EPA collected additional data
and information to support new standards for the BSCP and clay ceramics
industries. This information is contained in the dockets for both
rules, which are available at http://www.regulations.gov. On December
18, 2014, the EPA proposed new NESHAP for BSCP Manufacturing and for
Clay Ceramics Manufacturing (79 FR 75622). The EPA received additional
data and comments during the public comment period. These data and
comments were considered and analyzed and, where appropriate, revisions
to the two NESHAP were made. The NESHAP for BSCP Manufacturing and
NESHAP for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing were finalized on October 26,
2015 (80 FR 65470).
On December 23, 2015, Kohler Company submitted a petition for
reconsideration of the final rule for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing (80
FR 65470). In support of its petition, Kohler Company claimed that: (1)
The final rule introduced new stack temperature monitoring requirements
for demonstrating compliance with the dioxin/furan emission limits
without an opportunity for comment by the petitioner; (2) the EPA
failed to adequately respond to the petitioner's public comments
regarding visible emissions monitoring in the response to comments and
final rule; (3) the EPA should reconsider its exclusion of emissions
averaging from the final rule as a compliance option for clay ceramics
manufacturing; (4) the EPA should reconsider its improper use of
scrubber emissions data from the petitioner's South Carolina Kiln 10
for determining the maximum achievable control technology (MACT) floor;
(5) the EPA should reconsider the frequency of onerous and unnecessary
visual inspection requirements for system ductwork and control device
equipment for water curtain spray booths; and (6) the EPA should
clarify the testing threshold for cooling stacks to be tested to limit
it to those stacks with an oxygen content at or below 20.4 percent.
Also on December 23, 2015, the Brick Industry Association (BIA)
submitted a petition for reconsideration of the final rule for BSCP
Manufacturing (80 FR 65470). In support of its petition, the BIA
claimed that: (1) The EPA failed to give notice that it would change
its method for calculating the existing source MACT floor for emissions
of non-mercury (Hg) hazardous air pollutant (HAP) metals; (2) the EPA
incorrectly used tests conducted below capacity in its revised MACT
floor approach; (3) the EPA failed to give notice that it would include
a variability calculation in its determination of the MACT floor for Hg
or how it would make this variability calculation; (4) it was
impracticable for the petitioner to request a variability factor for
non-Hg metal emission limits for the final rule; and (5) the EPA failed
to give notice that it would include opacity as a compliance method for
the non-Hg HAP metals standard.
On December 24, 2015, the Tile Council of North America, Inc.
(TCNA) and its members submitted a petition for reconsideration of the
final rule for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing (80 FR 65470). In support of
its petition, the TCNA claimed that: (1) In promulgating the final
rule, the EPA relied on legal positions/rationales for regulating
ceramic tile that were advanced for the first time in the preamble to
the final rule; (2) for the final rule, the EPA introduced for the
first time the technical rationale that Method 23 field
[[Page 31236]]
blank spike recoveries self-validate the dioxin/furan emissions data
used to set dioxin/furan standards; and (3) the EPA failed to respond
to public comments regarding the cost of the final rule to those
sources that the EPA postulates might at some time in the future become
subject to the rule.
Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA sets forth the criteria for
reconsideration. That section states 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. If the person raising an objection can
demonstrate to the Administrator that it was impractical to raise such
objection within such time 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, the Administrator shall convene a proceeding for
reconsideration of the rule and provide the same procedural rights as
would have been afforded had the information been available at the time
the rule was proposed.''
The EPA has carefully considered the petitions and supporting
information. In separate letters to the petitioners, the EPA
Administrator, Gina McCarthy, denied in part and granted in part the
Kohler Company petition, denied the BIA and TCNA petitions, and
explained the reasons for the denials. These letters and the
accompanying enclosures are available in the dockets for this action.
IV. Conclusion
For the reasons discussed in the letters and accompanying enclosure
to the petitioners, the petitions to reconsider the final NESHAP for
BSCP Manufacturing and final NESHAP for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing are
denied in part and granted in part.
Dated: May 12, 2016.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-11749 Filed 5-17-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P