[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 197 (Wednesday, October 13, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60813-60820]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-22871]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[OGC-2004-0004; FRL-7826-2]
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Coke
Ovens: Pushing, Quenching, and Battery Stacks
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule; amendments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 14, 2003, pursuant to section 112 of the Clean Air
Act (CAA), the EPA issued national emission standards to control
hazardous air pollutants emitted from pushing, quenching, and battery
stacks at new and existing coke oven batteries. This action amends the
parametric operating limits and associated compliance provisions for
capture systems used to control emissions from pushing. This action
also amends the requirements for mobile scrubber cars that capture
emissions which occur during pushing and travel.
DATES: The direct final rule amendments will be effective on January
11, 2005, unless we receive significant adverse comments by November
12, 2004, or by November 29, 2004 if a public hearing is requested. If
such comments are received, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register indicating which provisions will become effective and
which provisions are being withdrawn due to adverse comment. Any
distinct amendment, paragraph, or section of the final amendments for
which we do not receive adverse comment will become effective on
January 11, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. OGC-2004-
0004, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Agency Website: http://www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, EPA's
electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred method
for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
E-mail: [email protected].
Fax: (202) 566-1741.
Mail: Proposed Settlement Agreement in AISI/ACCCI Coke
Oven Environmental Task Force v. U.S. EPA, No. 03-1167 (DC Cir.)
Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of
two copies.
Hand Delivery: Environmental Protection Agency, 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B102, 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. OGC-2004-0004.
The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.epa.gov/edocket, 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 EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e-
mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the Federal regulations.gov websites are
``anonymous access'' systems, 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 EDOCKET or 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.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the EDOCKET index
at http://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other information,
such as copyrighted materials, is not placed on the Internet and will
be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard
copy form at the docket entitled ``Proposed Settlement Agreement in
AISI/ACCCI Coke Oven Environmental Task Force v. U.S. EPA, No. 03-1167
(DC Cir.),'' Docket ID No. OGC-2004-0004, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102,
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: Ms. Lula Melton, Emission Standards
Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (C439-02),
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711,
telephone number (919) 541-2910, fax number (919) 541-3207, e-mail
address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does This Action Apply to Me?
Categories and entities potentially regulated by this action
include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated
Category NAICS code \1\ entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry...................... 331111, 324199... Coke plants and
integrated iron and
steel mills.
Federal government............ ................. Not affected.
[[Page 60814]]
State/local/tribal government. ................. Not affected.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 regulated by this
action. To determine whether your facility would be regulated by this
action, you should examine the applicability criteria in Sec. 63.7281
of the national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
(NESHAP) for coke ovens: Pushing, quenching, and battery stacks. 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.
B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
Do not submit information containing CBI to EPA through EDOCKET,
regulations.gov or e-mail. Send or deliver information identified as
CBI only to the following address: Roberto Morales, OAQPS Document
Control Officer (C404-02), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711,
Attention Docket ID No. OGC-2004-0004. Clearly mark the part or all of
the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in 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 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.
C. Where Can I Get a Copy of This Document and Other Related
Information?
In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
today's final amendments is also available on the Worldwide Web (WWW)
through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following the
Administrator's signature, a copy of the final amendments will be
placed 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. If more information regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN
HELP line at (919) 541-5384.
D. What Are the Judicial Review Requirements?
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial review of the final
amendments is available only by filing a petition for review in the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by December
13, 2004. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an objection to
the final amendments that was raised with reasonable specificity during
the period for public comment can be raised during judicial review.
Moreover, under section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements
established by the final amendments may not be challenged separately in
any civil or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to enforce these
requirements.
E. Why Are We Publishing the Amendments as a Direct Final Rule?
We are publishing the amendments as a direct final rule without
prior proposal because we view the amendments as noncontroversial and
do not anticipate adverse comments. However, in the Proposed Rules
section of this Federal Register, we are publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal for the amendments contained in the
direct final rule in the event that significant adverse comments are
filed. If we receive any significant adverse comments on one or more
distinct amendments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the Federal
Register informing the public which provisions will become effective
and which provisions are being withdrawn due to adverse comment. We
will address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on
the proposed rule (should we decide to issue a final rule). We will not
institute a second comment period on the direct final rule. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time.
F. How Is This Document Organized?
The information presented in this preamble is organized as follows:
II. Background
III. Summary of the Final Amendments
A. What changes are we making as a result of the settlement
agreement?
B. What other changes are we making?
IV. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts
V. 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 and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
J. Congressional Review Act
II. Background
On April 14, 2003 (68 FR 18008), we issued national emission
standards for the control of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from
pushing, quenching, and battery stacks at new and existing coke oven
batteries (40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCC). The NESHAP implements
section 112(d) of the CAA by requiring all major sources to meet HAP
emission standards reflecting application of the maximum achievable
control technology (MACT).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The final rule should not be confused with the MACT
standards for coke oven doors, lids, offtake systems, and charging
which are the subject of special statutory provisions (CAA section
112(d)(8), 112(i)(8)). The EPA adopted MACT standards for those
emission points in 1993 (58 FR 57898, October 27, 1993), and
recently proposed residual risk standards pursuant to CAA section
112(f)(2) for these sources (69 FR 68338, August 9, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After publication of the final rule, the American Iron and Steel
Institute (AISI)/American Coke and Coal Chemicals Institute (ACCCI)
Coke Oven Environmental Task Force (COETF) filed a petition for review
challenging the final standards (AISI/ACCCI Coke Oven Environmental
Task Force v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, no. 03-1167, D.C.
Cir.). The petitioners raised issues concerning:
The provisions requiring owners or operators of coke
plants having a pushing emission control device to install, operate and
maintain devices to monitor daily average fan motor amps, (or
volumetric flow rate at the inlet of the control device and maintain
daily average volumetric flow rate) at or above minimum levels
established during initial performance tests. These provisions are
included in 40 CFR 63.7290, 63.7323(c), 63.7326(a)(4),
[[Page 60815]]
63.7330(d), 63.7331(g) and (h), and 63.7333(d).
The provisions requiring monthly inspections of pressure
sensors, dampers, damper switches and other equipment important to the
performance of the total emissions capture system which also require
that a facility's operation and maintenance plan include requirements
to repair any defect or deficiency in the capture system before the
next scheduled inspection. These provisions are included in 40 CFR
63.7300(c)(1).
The EPA and the petitioners anticipate that certain amendments to
the final rule will resolve COETF's concerns. These amendments are set
out in attachment A to a proposed settlement agreement between EPA and
COETF. In accordance with section 113(g) of the CAA, EPA published a
notice of the proposed settlement agreement (69 FR 31372, June 3, 2004)
and provided a 30-day comment period which ended July 6, 2004. The EPA
received no comments on the proposed settlement agreement. Under the
terms of the proposed settlement agreement, EPA must submit proposed
amendments for publication in the Federal Register within 90 days after
review of public comments received in response to the notice of the
settlement agreement. Within 120 days after the close of the comment
period on the proposal, EPA must submit for publication in the Federal
Register a notice setting forth the Administrator's final decision on
the issues covered by the proposal.
Concurrent with development of the proposed settlement agreement, a
coke manufacturer constructing a new non-recovery plant noticed a gap
in the promulgated rule. The new source is being constructed with a
type of emission control system that is not addressed in the final
rule. Therefore, the source requested EPA to develop an appropriate
emission limit for that control system. In response, we are broadening
the applicability of an existing emissions limit to include the control
system and are adding appropriate implementation and compliance
provisions.
III. Summary of the Final Amendments
A. What Changes Are We Making in Response to the Settlement Agreement?
The petitioners argued that the operating limit in 40 CFR
63.7290(3)(i) of the final rule for capture systems applied to pushing
emissions (which requires the plant to maintain the daily average fan
motor amperage at or above a certain level) was inappropriate for
systems that did not use an electric motor to drive the fan. We agree
with the petitioners because there are a few fans that are not powered
by an electric motor. In response, we are amending the operating limit
in 40 CFR 63.7290(b)(3)(i) to state that the requirement applies to
capture systems that use an electric motor to drive the fan. We are
adding a new operating limit in 40 CFR 63.7290(b)(3)(ii) that is
appropriate for assessing the proper operation of a capture system that
does not use an electric motor to drive the fan. The new operating
limit requires the owner or operator to maintain the daily average
static pressure at the inlet to the control device at an equal or
greater vacuum than the level established during the initial
performance test, or to maintain the daily average fan revolutions per
minute (RPM) at or above the minimum level established during the
initial performance test. We also renumbered the existing operating
limit for the daily average volumetric flow rate in 40 CFR
63.7290(b)(3)(ii) as 40 CFR 63.7290(b)(3).
We also are adding requirements to the final rule for demonstrating
initial and continuous compliance with the new operating limit for
daily average static pressure or fan RPM. To establish the operating
limit, a new procedure in 40 CFR 63.7323(c)(3) requires that the static
pressure at the inlet of the control device or fan RPM during each push
sampled for each particulate matter (PM) test run during the
performance test be measured and recorded. The operating limit for
static pressure is the minimum vacuum recorded during any of the three
runs that meets the emission limit. The operating limit for fan RPM is
the lowest RPM recorded during any of the three runs that meets the
emission limit. To demonstrate initial compliance, a new provision in
40 CFR 63.7326(a)(4) requires that the owner or operator have a record
of the static pressure at the inlet of the control device or fan RPM
measured during the performance test. To demonstrate continuous
compliance, 40 CFR 63.7330(d) requires the owner or operator to monitor
the static pressure or the fan RPM at all times according to the
requirements in 40 CFR 63.7331(i), which requires a device to measure
static pressure at the inlet of the control device or the fan RPM. A
new provision in 40 CFR 63.7333(d) requires the owner or operator to
maintain the daily average static pressure at the inlet to the control
device at an equal or greater vacuum than established during the
initial or subsequent performance test, or to maintain the daily
average fan RPM at or above the minimum level established during the
initial or subsequent performance test. The owner or operator also must
check the static pressure or fan RPM at least every 8 hours to verify
the daily average static pressure at the inlet to the control device,
or the daily average fan RPM, is at or above the required values and to
record the results of each check. We also made conforming amendments in
each of the affected sections to account for changes in the regulatory
citations.
The petitioners also argued that the provision in 40 CFR
63.7300(c)(1), which requires that the operation and maintenance plan
include requirements to repair any defect or deficiency in the capture
system before the next scheduled inspection, is unreasonable. We agree
because there are a few repairs that may require more than 30 days to
complete. Therefore, we are replacing the provision to complete all
repairs within 30 days after the defect or deficiency is found to allow
more time when necessary. If the repairs cannot be completed within 30
days, the owner or operator must estimate the number of days in which
repairs can be completed. We developed provisions for two additional
situations (i.e., one for repairs that can be made within 60 days and
one for repairs that will take longer than 60 days).
If repairs can be completed within 60 days from the date that the
problem is discovered, the owner or operator must submit a written
notice to the permitting authority within 30 days after the date that
the problem is discovered. The notice must contain specific
information, including a description of the defect or deficiency, the
steps needed to correct the problem, the interim steps needed to
mitigate the emissions impact of the defect or deficiency, and an
explanation of why the repairs cannot be completed within 30 days from
the date that the problem is discovered.
If the repairs cannot be completed within 60 days, the owner or
operator must submit a written request to the permitting authority for
an extension of time to complete the repairs. The owner or operator
must submit this request to the permitting authority within 45 days
after the date the defect or deficiency is discovered. The amendments
require that this request include the information required for the
previous notice, along with a detailed proposed schedule for completing
the repairs and a request for approval of the proposed repair schedule.
The permitting authority may consider all relevant factors in deciding
whether to approved or deny the
[[Page 60816]]
request, including feasibility and safety, and may request
modifications to the proposed schedule. If the permitting authority
approves the request, the approved schedule must provide for completion
of repairs as soon as practicable. This new requirement provides
flexibility for unforeseen circumstances but also requires
accountability for making needed repairs.
B. What Other Changes Are We Making?
A new non-recovery coke plant now under construction will use flat
car pushing along with a mobile control system (closed hood capture
system vented to a multicyclone) to control PM emissions during pushing
and travel to the quench tower. There are no test data for the proposed
control system because no such system has been built. Consequently, we
cannot develop an alternative emissions limit. However, the existing
emission limit of 0.04 pound per ton of coke in 40 CFR 63.7290(a)(4),
which applies to mobile scrubber cars that capture emissions during
travel, covers a comparable situation. Therefore, we are changing the
applicability of the limit from ``mobile scrubber car'' to ``mobile
control device.'' Thus, the existing limit will apply to any type of
mobile control device applied to pushing emissions that also captures
emissions during travel at a new or existing coke oven battery.
While the existing rule contains monitoring provisions for
scrubbers, baghouse, and capture systems, it does not include
requirements applicable to multicyclones. Therefore, we have added an
operating limit to the final rule, along with requirements for
demonstrating initial and continuous compliance. Based on information
in EPA's 1998 ``Compliance Assurance Monitoring Technical Guidance
Document'' (available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/cam), we selected
pressure drop as the indicator of proper control device performance.
For multicyclones, control efficiency is a function of inlet velocity,
and changes in velocity result in changes in pressure drop across the
device. If the inlet velocity exceeds a certain level, turbulence
becomes excessive and control efficiency decreases. Therefore, the
operating limit requires the owner or operator to maintain the pressure
drop at or below the level established during the initial performance
test. A continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) is required to
measure and record the pressure drop across the device. We also added
rule provisions for establishing an operating limit; demonstrating
initial compliance; installing, operating, and maintaining the CPMS;
and demonstrating continuous compliance with the parametric operating
limit.
IV. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts
The final rule amendments will have no effect on environmental,
energy, or non-air health impacts because none of the changes affect
the stringency of the existing emission limits. No costs or economic
impacts are associated with the amendments.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the EPA
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and,
therefore, subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order
defines a ``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 entitlement, 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.
It has been determined that this action is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866, and is,
therefore, not subject to OMB review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
The costs of the information collection requirements associated with
the provisions related to the settlement agreement do not increase the
existing burden estimates for the final rule. The OMB has previously
approved the information collection requirements contained in the
existing rule (40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCC) under the provisions of
the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has assigned
OMB control number 2060-0521, EPA ICR number 1995.02. A copy of the
approved Information Collection Request (ICR) may be obtained from
Susan Auby, Collection Strategies Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (2822T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC
20460 or by calling (202) 566-1672.
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR part 63 are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a
regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with the final rule
amendments.
For the purposes of assessing the impacts of today's final
amendments on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small
business having no more than 1,000 employees, as defined by the Small
Business Administration for NAICS codes 331111 and 324199; (2) a
government 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 that is not
dominant in its field.
After considering the economic impacts of today's final amendments
on small entities, the EPA has concluded 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
[[Page 60817]]
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 proposed rule on small
entities'' (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Thus, an agency may conclude 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.
We believe there will be a positive impact on small entities
because the final rule amendments add new compliance provisions to
increase flexibility. These changes are voluntary and do not impose new
costs. We have, therefore, concluded that today's final rule amendments
will relieve regulatory burden for all small entities.
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, the
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 by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100
million or more in any 1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for
which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally
requires the EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of
regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost-
effective, or least-burdensome 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 the 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 the EPA establishes any regulatory requirements
that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including
tribal governments, it 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.
The EPA has determined that the final amendments do 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 to the
private sector in any 1 year. No new costs are attributable to the
final amendments. Thus, the final rule amendments are not subject to
the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. The EPA has also
determined that the final rule amendments contain no regulatory
requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small
governments because they contain no requirements that apply to such
governments or impose obligations upon them. Therefore, the final rule
amendments are not subject to section 203 of the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132 (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.''
The final rule amendments do not have federalism implications. They
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
plants are owned or operated by State governments. Thus, Executive
Order 13132 does not apply to the final rule amendments.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 6, 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.'' The final rule amendments do not have
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175, because
tribal governments do not own or operate any sources subject to the
final rule amendments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to
the final rule amendments.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant,'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the EPA must evaluate the environmental health or safety
effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the planned
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably
feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
We interpret Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has
the potential to influence the regulation. The final rule amendments
are not subject to Executive Order 13045 because the final rule (and
these amendments) are based on technology performance and not on health
or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
These final amendments are not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because they are not a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
As noted in the proposed amendments, Section 112(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
113; 15 U.S.C 272 note) directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus
standards in their regulatory and procurement activities unless to do
so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impracticable. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards
(e.g., material specifications, test methods, sampling procedures,
business practices) developed or adopted by one or more voluntary
consensus bodies. The NTTAA requires EPA to provide Congress, through
the OMB,
[[Page 60818]]
explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
The EPA's compliance with section 112(d) of the NTTAA has been
addressed in the preamble to the existing rule (68 FR 18025, April 14,
2003). The final rule amendments do not involve technical standards.
Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any voluntary consensus
standards.
J. Congressional Review Act
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not
a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The final rule
amendments will be effective on January 11, 2005.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 4, 2004.
Michael O. Leavitt,
Administrator.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63
of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 63--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart CCCCC--[Amended]
0
2. Section 63.7290 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(4), (b)
introductory text, and (b)(3) and by adding new paragraph (b)(4) to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.7290 What emission limitations must I meet for capture
systems and control devices applied to pushing emissions?
(a) * * *
(4) 0.04 lb/ton of coke if a mobile control device that captures
emissions during travel is used.
(b) You must meet each operating limit in paragraphs (b)(1) through
(4) of this section that applies to you for a new or existing coke oven
battery.
* * * * *
(3) For each capture system applied to pushing emissions, you must
maintain the daily average volumetric flow rate at the inlet of the
control device at or above the minimum level established during the
initial performance test; or
(i) For each capture system that uses an electric motor to drive
the fan, you must maintain the daily average fan motor amperes at or
above the minimum level established during the initial performance
test; and
(ii) For each capture system that does not use a fan driven by an
electric motor, you must maintain the daily average static pressure at
the inlet to the control device at an equal or greater vacuum than the
level established during the initial performance test or maintain the
daily average fan revolutions per minute (RPM) at or above the minimum
level established during the initial performance test.
(4) For each multicyclone, you must maintain the daily average
pressure drop at or below the minimum level established during the
initial performance test.
0
3. Section 63.7300 is amended as follows:
0
a. Removing the third (last) sentence in paragraph (c)(1) and adding in
its place a new sentence; and
0
b. Adding new paragraphs (c)(1)(i) and (ii).
Sec. 63.7300 What are my operation and maintenance requirements?
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * * In the event a defect or deficiency is found in the
capture system (during a monthly inspection or between inspections),
you must complete repairs within 30 days after the date that the defect
or deficiency is discovered except as specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i)
and (ii) of this section.
(i) If you determine that the repairs can be completed within 60
days, you must submit a written notice that must be received by the
permitting authority within 30 days after the date that the defect or
deficiency is discovered. Your notice must contain a description of the
defect or deficiency, the steps needed and taken to correct the
problem, the interim steps being taken to mitigate the emissions impact
of the defect or deficiency, and an explanation of why the repairs
cannot be completed within 30 days. You must then complete the repairs
within 60 days after the date that the defect or deficiency is
discovered.
(ii) In those rare instances when repairs cannot be completed
within 60 days, you must submit a written request for extension of time
to complete the repairs. The request must be received by the permitting
authority not more than 45 days after the date that the defect or
deficiency is discovered. The request must contain all of the
information required for the written notice described in paragraph
(c)(1)(i) of this section, along with a detailed proposed schedule for
completing the repairs and a request for approval of the proposed
repair schedule. The permitting authority may consider all relevant
factors in deciding whether to approve or deny the request (including
feasibility and safety). Each approved schedule must provide for
completion of repairs as expeditiously as practicable, and the
permitting authority may request modifications to the proposed schedule
as part of the approval process.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 63.7323 is amended as follows:
0
a. Revising paragraph (c);
0
b. Redesignating paragraph (d) as (e);
0
c. Adding new paragraph (d); and
0
d. Revising newly designated paragraph (e) introductory text and
revising newly designated paragraph (e)(3).
Sec. 63.7323 What procedures must I use to establish operating
limits?
* * * * *
(c) For a capture system applied to pushing emissions from a coke
oven battery, you must establish a site-specific operating limit
according to the procedures in paragraphs (c)(1), (2), or (3) of this
section.
(1) If you elect the operating limit in Sec. 63.7290(b)(3) for
volumetric flow rate, measure and record the total volumetric flow rate
at the inlet of the control device during each push sampled for each
particulate matter test run. Your operating limit is the lowest
volumetric flow rate recorded during any of the three runs that meet
the emission limit.
(2) If you elect the operating limit in Sec. 63.7290(b)(3)(i) for
fan motor amperes, measure and record the fan motor amperes during each
push sampled for each particulate matter test run. Your operating limit
is the lowest fan motor amperes recorded during any of the three runs
that meet the emission limit.
(3) If you elect the operating limit in Sec. 63.7290(b)(3)(ii) for
static pressure or fan RPM, measure and record the static pressure at
the inlet of the control device or fan RPM during each push sampled for
each particulate matter test
[[Page 60819]]
run. Your operating limit for static pressure is the minimum vacuum
recorded during any of the three runs that meets the emission limit.
Your operating limit for fan RPM is the lowest fan RPM recorded during
any of the three runs that meets the emission limit.
(d) For a multicyclone applied to pushing emissions from a coke
oven battery, you must establish a site-specific operating limit for
pressure drop according to the procedures in paragraphs (d)(1) and (2)
of this section.
(1) Using the CPMS required in Sec. 63.7330(f), measure and record
the pressure drop for each particulate matter test run during periods
of pushing. A minimum of one pressure drop measurement must be obtained
for each push.
(2) Compute and record the average pressure drop for each test run.
Your operating limit is the highest average pressure drop value
recorded during any of the three runs that meet the emission limit.
(e) You may change the operating limit for a venturi scrubber,
capture system, or mobile control device that captures emissions during
pushing if you meet the requirements in paragraphs (e)(1) through (3)
of this section.
* * * * *
(3) Establish revised operating limits according to the applicable
procedures in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section.
0
5. Section 63.7326 is amended as follows:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(1)(iii);
0
b. Revising paragraphs (a)(4)(i) and (a)(4)(ii);
0
c. Adding paragraph (a)(4)(iii); and
0
d. Adding paragraph (a)(5).
Sec. 63.7326 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the
emission limitations that apply to me?
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) 0.04 lb/ton of coke if a mobile control device that captures
emissions during travel is used.
* * * * *
(4) * * *
(i) If you elect the operating limit in Sec. 63.7290(b)(3) for
volumetric flow rate, you have a record of the total volumetric flow
rate at the inlet of the control device measured during the performance
test in accordance with Sec. 63.7323(c)(1); or
(ii) If you elect the operating limit in Sec. 63.7290(b)(3)(i) for
fan motor amperes, you have a record of the fan motor amperes during
the performance test in accordance with Sec. 63.7323(c)(2); or
(iii) If you elect the operating limit in Sec. 63.7290(b)(3)(ii)
for static pressure or fan RPM, you have a record of the static
pressure at the inlet of the control device or fan RPM measured during
the performance test in accordance with Sec. 63.7323(c)(3).
(5) For each multicyclone applied to pushing emissions, you have
established an appropriate site-specific operating limit and have a
record of the pressure drop measured during the performance test in
accordance with Sec. 63.7323(d).
* * * * *
0
6. Section 63.7330 is amended by revising paragraphs (d) and (e) and by
adding paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.7330 What are my monitoring requirements?
* * * * *
(d) For each capture system applied to pushing emissions, you must
at all times monitor the volumetric flow rate according to the
requirements in Sec. 63.7331(g), the fan motor amperes according to
the requirements in Sec. 63.7331(h), or the static pressure or the fan
RPM according to the requirements in Sec. 63.7331(i).
(e) For each by-product coke oven battery, you must monitor at all
times the opacity of emissions exiting each stack using a COMS
according to the requirements in Sec. 63.7331(j).
(f) For each multicyclone applied to pushing emissions, you must
monitor at all times the pressure drop using a CPMS according to the
requirements in Sec. 63.7331(k).
0
7. Section 63.7331 is amended as follows:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (g) and (h);
0
b. Redesignating paragraph (i) as (j) and revising newly designated
paragraph (j) introductory text;
0
c. Adding new paragraph (i); and
0
d. Adding new paragraph (k).
Sec. 63.7331 What are the installation, operation, and maintenance
requirements for my monitors?
* * * * *
(g) If you elect the operating limit in Sec. 63.7290(b)(3) for a
capture system applied to pushing emissions, you must install, operate,
and maintain a device to measure the total volumetric flow rate at the
inlet of the control device.
(h) If you elect the operating limit in Sec. 63.7290(b)(3)(i) for
a capture system applied to pushing emissions, you must install,
operate, and maintain a device to measure the fan motor amperes.
(i) If you elect the operating limit in Sec. 63.7290(b)(3)(ii) for
a capture system applied to pushing emissions, you must install,
operate and maintain a device to measure static pressure at the inlet
of the control device or the fan RPM.
(j) For each by-product coke oven battery, you must install,
operate, and maintain a COMS to measure and record the opacity of
emissions exiting each stack according to the requirements in
paragraphs (j)(1) through (5) of this section.
* * * * *
(k) For each multicyclone applied to pushing emissions, you must
install, operate, and maintain CPMS to measure and record the pressure
drop across each multicyclone during each push according to the
requirements in paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section except as
specified in paragraphs (e)(1) through (3) of this section.
0
8. Section 63.7333 is amended as follows:
0
a. Revising paragraph (d);
0
b. Revising paragraph (e)(2); and
0
c. Adding new paragraph (h).
Sec. 63.7333 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission limitations that apply to me?
* * * * *
(d) For each capture system applied to pushing emissions and
subject to the operating limit in Sec. 63.7290(b)(3), you must
demonstrate continuous compliance by meeting the requirements in
paragraph (d)(1), (2), or (3) of this section:
(1) If you elect the operating limit for volumetric flow rate in
Sec. 63.7290(b)(3):
(i) Maintaining the daily average volumetric flow rate at the inlet
of the control device at or above the minimum level established during
the initial or subsequent performance test; and
(ii) Checking the volumetric flow rate at least every 8 hours to
verify the daily average is at or above the minimum level established
during the initial or subsequent performance test and recording the
results of each check.
(2) If you elect the operating limit for fan motor amperes in Sec.
63.7290(b)(3)(i):
(i) Maintaining the daily average fan motor amperages at or above
the minimum level established during the initial or subsequent
performance test; and
(ii) Checking the fan motor amperage at least every 8 hours to
verify the daily average is at or above the minimum level established
during the initial or subsequent performance test and recording the
results of each check.
(3) If you elect the operating limit for static pressure or fan RPM
in Sec. 63.7290(b)(3)(ii):
(i) Maintaining the daily average static pressure at the inlet to
the control device at an equal or greater vacuum
[[Page 60820]]
than established during the initial or subsequent performance test or
the daily average fan RPM at or above the minimum level established
during the initial or subsequent performance test; and
(ii) Checking the static pressure or fan RPM at least every 8 hours
to verify the daily average static pressure at the inlet to the control
device is at an equal or greater vacuum than established during the
initial or subsequent performance test or the daily average fan RPM is
at or above the minimum level established during the initial or
subsequent performance test and recording the results of each check.
(e) * * *
(2) Operating and maintaining a COMS and collecting and reducing
the COMS data according to Sec. 63.7331(j).
* * * * *
(h) For each multicyclone applied to pushing emissions and subject
to the operating limit in Sec. 63.7290(b)(4), you must demonstrate
compliance by meeting the requirements in paragraphs (h)(1) through (3)
of this section.
(1) Maintaining the daily average pressure drop at a level at or
below the level established during the initial or subsequent
performance test.
(2) Operating and maintaining each CPMS according to Sec.
63.7331(k) and recording all information needed to document conformance
with these requirements.
(3) Collecting and reducing monitoring data for pressure drop
according to Sec. 63.7331(e)(1) through (3).
[FR Doc. 04-22871 Filed 10-12-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P