[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 1 (Wednesday, January 3, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 26-43]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-22413]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0238; FRL-8264-1]
RIN 2060-AM16
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
Source Categories From Oil and Natural Gas Production Facilities
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action promulgates national emission standards for
hazardous air pollutants to regulate hazardous air pollutant emissions
from oil and natural gas production facilities that are area sources.
The final national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants for
major sources was promulgated on June 17, 1999, but final action with
respect to area sources was deferred. Oil and natural gas production is
identified in the Urban Air Toxics Strategy as an area source category
for regulation under section 112(c)(3) of the Clean Air Act because of
benzene emissions from triethylene glycol dehydration units located at
such facilities. This final rule also amends a general provision in the
regulation to allow the use of an ASTM standard as an alternative test
method to EPA Method 18 in the National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants From Oil and Natural Gas Production
Facilities.
DATES: This final rule is effective on January 3, 2007. The
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in these
rules is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of January
3, 2007.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0238. All documents in the docket are listed either
on the www.regulations.gov Web site or in the legacy docket, A-94-04.
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
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation Docket,
EPA West, Room B-102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The
Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air
and Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742. Note: The EPA Docket Center
suffered damage due to flooding during the last week of June 2006. The
Docket Center is continuing to operate. However, during the cleanup,
there will be temporary changes to Docket Center telephone numbers,
addresses, and hours of operation for people who wish to make hand
deliveries or visit the Public Reading Room to view documents. Consult
EPA's Federal Register notice at 71 FR 38147 (July 5, 2006) or the EPA
Web site at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm for current
information on docket operations, locations, and telephone numbers. The
Docket Center's mailing address for U.S. mail and the procedure for
submitting comments to www.regulations.gov are not affected by the
flooding and will remain the same.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Nizich, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division, Coatings
and Chemicals Group (E143-01), Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-3078; fax
number: (919) 541-0246; e-mail address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated Entities. Entities potentially
affected by this final rule include, but are not limited to, the
following:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated
Category NAICS Code* entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.................. 211111, 211112 Condensate tank batteries,
glycol dehydration units,
and natural gas
processing plants.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* 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 40 CFR part
63, subpart HH, National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants From Oil and Natural Gas Production Facilities. 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.
Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of this final rule is also
[[Page 27]]
available on the Worldwide Web (WWW) through the Technology Transfer
Network (TTN). Following the Administrator's signature, a copy of this
final rule will be posted on the TTN's policy and guidance page for
newly proposed or promulgated rules at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/.
The TTN provides information and technology exchange in various areas
of air pollution control.
Judicial Review. Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), judicial review of this final rule is available by filing a
petition for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit by March 5, 2007. Only those objections to
this final rule that were raised with reasonable specificity during the
period for public comment may be raised during judicial review. Under
section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements that are the subject of
this final rule may not be challenged later in civil or criminal
proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.
Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further provides a mechanism for us
to convene a proceeding for reconsideration, ``[i]f the person raising
an objection can demonstrate to the EPA that it was impracticable to
raise such objection within [the period for public comment] 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.'' Any
person seeking to make such a demonstration to us should submit a
Petition for Reconsideration to the Office of the Administrator, U.S.
EPA, Room 3000, Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460, with a copy to both the person(s) listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, and the Associate
General Counsel for the Air and Radiation Law Office, Office of General
Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
Organization of this Document. The information presented in this
preamble is organized as follows:
I. Background Information
A. What is the statutory authority for this final rule?
B. What criteria are used in the development of area source
standards?
C. How was this final rule developed?
II. Summary of This Final Rule
A. What source categories are affected by this final rule?
B. What is the affected source?
C. What pollutants are emitted and controlled?
D. Does this final rule apply to me?
E. What are the emission limitations and work practice
standards?
F. What are the testing and initial compliance requirements?
G. What are the continuous compliance requirements?
III. Significant Changes Since Proposal
A. Compliance Dates
B. Applicability Requirements
C. Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction Requirements
IV. Responses To Significant Comments
A. What geographic applicability criteria is being used in this
final rule?
B. What urban definition is being used in this final rule?
C. What are the requirements for remote/unmanned sources?
V. Impacts of This Final Rule
A. What Are The Air Impacts?
B. What Are The Cost Impacts?
C. What Are The Economic Impacts?
D. What Are The Non-Air Environmental and Energy Impacts?
VI. 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 of 1995
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
J. Congressional Review Act
I. Background Information
A. What is the statutory authority for this final rule?
Sections 112(c)(3) and 112(k)(3)(B) of the CAA instruct us to
identify not less than 30 hazardous air pollutants (HAP) which, as a
result of emissions from area sources,\1\ present the greatest threat
to public health in the largest number of urban areas, and to list
sufficient source categories or subcategories to ensure that 90 percent
of the emissions of the listed HAP (area source HAP) are subject to
regulation. CAA Section 112(c)(3) requires us to regulate these listed
area source categories under CAA section 112(d). Section 112(d)(5) of
the CAA provides us with the discretion to set standards for area
sources according to generally available control technologies (GACT) or
management practices in lieu of maximum achievable control technologies
(MACT). Unlike MACT, there is no prescription in CAA section 112(d)(5)
that standards for existing sources must, at a minimum, be set at the
level of emission reduction achieved by the best performing 12 percent
of existing sources, or that standards for new sources be set at the
level of emission reduction achieved in practice by the best controlled
similar source. The legislative history suggests that standards under
CAA section 112(d)(5) should ``[reflect] application of generally
available control technology--that is, methods, practices, and
techniques which are commercially available and appropriate for
application by the sources in the category considering economic impacts
and the technical capabilities of the firms to operate and maintain the
emissions control systems.'' SEN. REP. NO. 101-228, at 171 (1989).
Thus, by contrast to MACT, CAA section 112(d)(5) allows us to consider
various factors in determining the appropriate standard for a given
area source category.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Under section 112(a) of the CAA, an area source is a
stationary source that is not a major source. A major source, as
defined under section 112(a) of the CAA, is a stationary source or a
group of stationary sources located within a contiguous area and
under common control that emits or has the potential to emit
considering controls, in the aggregate, 10 tons per year or more of
any HAP or 25 tons per year or more of any combination of HAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. What criteria are used in the development of area source standards?
We are issuing standards for this area source category under CAA
section 112(d)(5), in lieu of a MACT standard. There are factors
relevant to this area source category that warrant our consideration,
and we can properly assess those factors under section 112(d)(5) of the
CAA. For example, the locations of oil and natural gas production
sources are dictated by the locations of the relevant natural resources
rather than a need to serve a particular population center. In
addition, these sources do not typically require on-site operators and
are usually not manned by large staff, if manned at all. Given the
unique nature of these sources, many of these sources are located in
remote areas. We believe that a CAA section 112(d)(5) standard is
appropriate because it would allow us to adequately address these and
other relevant factors, including costs, in promulgating these national
emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP).
C. How was this final rule developed?
We initially proposed NESHAP for the Oil and Natural Gas Production
source category on February 6, 1998 (63 FR 6288) that addressed both
major and area source oil and natural gas production facilities. CAA
Section
[[Page 28]]
112(c)(3) authorizes us to list for regulation an area source category
``which the Administrator finds present a threat of adverse effects to
human health or the environment * * * warranting regulation.'' In the
1998 proposed NESHAP, we proposed to regulate this area source category
pursuant to CAA section 112(c)(3) due to the risks from exposure to
benzene emissions from triethylene glycol (TEG) dehydration units at
these area sources. Public comments were solicited at the time of the
proposal. We received 29 comment letters on the proposed area source
standards. On June 17, 1999, we promulgated the NESHAP for major
sources of oil and natural gas production (64 FR 32610) but did not
finalize either the 1998 proposed listing of this area source category
for regulation or the proposed area source standards. Instead, on July
19, 1999, we published the Urban Air Toxics Strategy (Strategy) (64 FR
38706, July 19, 1999). The Strategy included benzene as one of the 30
listed area source HAP under CAA section 112(k)(3)(B)(i). The Strategy
also listed oil and natural gas production for regulation under CAA
section 112(k)(3)(B)(ii) because TEG dehydration units at oil and
natural gas production facilities contributed approximately 47 percent
of the national urban benzene emissions from area sources. On July 8,
2005 (70 FR 39443), we published a supplemental proposal to the 1998
proposed area source standards. The 60-day comment period ended on
September 6, 2005, and we received 18 comment letters on the
supplemental proposal. Today's final rule reflects our consideration of
all of the comments received on both the 1998 and 2005 proposed
standards for area sources of oil and natural gas production.
II. Summary of This Final Rule
A. What source categories are affected by this final rule?
This final rule affects area source oil and natural gas production
facilities. An oil and natural gas production facility processes,
upgrades, or stores (1) hydrocarbon liquids (with the exception of
those facilities that exclusively handle black oil) to the point of
custody transfer and (2) natural gas from the well up to and including
the natural gas processing plant.
B. What is the affected source?
In this final rule, the affected source is defined as each TEG
dehydration unit located at an area source oil and natural gas
production facility. Other types of dehydration units or other emission
points (e.g., equipment leaks) at area source oil and natural gas
production facilities are not a part of the affected source.
C. What pollutants are emitted and controlled?
The primary HAP associated with oil and natural gas production
facilities include benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and mixed xylenes
and n-hexane. Only benzene is listed under CAA section 112(k)(3)(B)(i)
as one of the 30 area source HAP. Benzene is classified as a known
human carcinogen based on convincing human evidence (such as observed
increases in the incidence of leukemia in exposed workers), as well as
supporting evidence from animal studies. In addition, short-term
inhalation of high benzene levels may cause nervous system effects such
as drowsiness, dizziness, headaches, and unconsciousness in humans. At
even higher concentrations of benzene, exposure may cause death, while
lower concentrations may irritate the skin, eyes, and upper respiratory
tract. Long-term inhalation exposure to benzene may cause various
disorders of the blood and toxicity to the immune system. Reproductive
disorders in women, as well as developmental effects in animals, have
also been reported for benzene exposure.
Benzene emissions from TEG dehydration units at oil and natural gas
production facilities contributed approximately 47 percent of the
nationwide urban area source benzene emissions. Accordingly, this final
rule regulates benzene emissions from TEG dehydration units at area
source oil and natural gas production facilities.
D. Does this final rule apply to me?
You are subject to emissions reduction requirements in this final
rule if you own or operate a TEG dehydration unit with an actual annual
average natural gas flow rate equal to or greater than 85 thousand
standard cubic meters per day (thousand m\3\/day) (3 million standard
cubic feet per day (MMSCF/D)), and with benzene emissions equal to or
greater than 0.90 Megagrams per year (Mg/yr) (1.0 ton per year (tpy)).
E. What are the emission limitations and work practice standards?
We created three subcategories of sources in this final rule. We
created a subcategory of TEG dehydration units with either an annual
average natural gas flowrate less than 85 thousand m\3\/day (3 MMSCF/D)
or benzene emissions less than 0.90 Mg/yr (1.0 tpy). As explained in
the supplemental proposed rule, we determined that GACT is no control
for these sources. We did not receive any comments on this
determination.
As for those TEG dehydration units with an annual average natural
gas flow rate equal to or greater than 85 thousand m\3\/day (3 MMSCF/D)
and benzene emissions equal to or greater than 0.90 Mg/yr (1.0 tpy), we
subcategorized these units based on their locations with regard to
areas of higher population densities. In evaluating population density,
we started with the U.S. Census Bureau terms of ``urbanized area'' and
``urban cluster.'' Upon evaluating the characteristics of this area
source category, we define areas of higher population densities to be
urbanized areas (UA),\2\ urban clusters (UC) \3\ that contain 10,000
people or more,\4\ and the area located two miles \5\ or less from each
UA boundary. For ease of reference, this final rule refers to these
areas as ``UA plus offset and UC.'' As mentioned above, UA and UC are
terms used by the United States Census Bureau to identify densely
settled areas. Among other Census Bureau criteria, an UA has a
population of at least 50,000 people, and an UC has a population of at
least 2,500, but less than 50,000 people.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Urbanized area (UA) refers to Census 2000 Urbanized Area,
which is defined in the Urban Area Criteria for Census 2000, 67 FR
11663, 11667 (March 15, 2002). Essentially, an UA consists of
densely settled territory with a population of at least 50,000
people.
\3\ Urban cluster (UC) refers to Census 2000 Urban Cluster,
which is defined in the Urban Area Criteria for Census 2000, 67 FR
11667. Essentially, an UC consists of densely settled territory with
at least 2,500 people, but fewer than 50,000 people.
\4\ This final rule does not cover all UC areas, but only those
UC areas that contain 10,000 people or more, which are used to
construct Census 2000 core-based statistical areas (65 FR 82233).
\5\ We determined the 2-mile offset distance by reviewing maps
of different UA areas and measuring the distance across the largest
pockets or holes within the UA footprint. Since our evaluations
showed that the largest distance was just under 4 miles across, we
decided to use one half of that distance, i.e., 2 miles, as the
offset distance. This would ensure that any sources located within a
pocket or hole would be controlled as part of the UA source-group.
Since we did not find the presence of holes in UC's, no offset is
provided.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For those area source TEG dehydration units with natural gas
throughput and benzene emission rates above the cutoff levels described
above that are located within the UA plus offset and UC boundary, we
are requiring, pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(5), that each such unit
be connected, through a closed vent system, to one or more emission
control devices. The control devices must: (1) Reduce HAP emissions by
95 percent or more (generally by a condenser with a
[[Page 29]]
flash tank); or (2) reduce HAP emissions to an outlet concentration of
20 parts per million by volume (ppmv) or less (for combustion devices);
or (3) reduce benzene emissions to a level less than 0.90 Mg/yr (1.0
tpy). As an alternative to complying with these control requirements,
pollution prevention measures such as process modifications or
combinations of process modifications and one or more control devices
that reduce the amount of HAP generated, are allowed provided that they
achieve the same required emission reductions.
For those area source TEG dehydration units with natural gas
throughput and benzene emission rates above the cutoff levels described
above that are located outside of UA plus offset and UC boundaries, we
are requiring, pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(5), that each unit reduce
emissions by lowering the glycol circulation rate to be less than or
equal to an optimum rate. The optimum rate is determined by the
following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA07.000
Where:
LOPT = Optimal circulation rate, gal/hr.
F = Gas flowrate (MMSCF/D).
I = Inlet water content (lb/MMSCF), and
O = Outlet water content (lb/MMSCF).
The constant 3.0 gal TEG/lb H2O is the industry accepted
rule of thumb for a TEG-to-water ratio. The constant 1.15 is an
adjustment factor included for a margin of safety.
We decided to subcategorize in the manner described above for
several reasons. We received a number of comments on both the 1998 and
2005 proposals that this source category contains many sources that are
located in remote areas. Our understanding of this area source category
is consistent with the comment on the remoteness of the locations of
many of these sources. We recognize that the oil and natural gas
production source category is unique compared to many other area source
categories in that the location of these sources is dictated by the
location of the relevant natural resources rather than a need to serve
a particular population center. In addition, sources in this category
do not typically require on-site operators and are usually not manned
by large staff, if manned at all. As previously mentioned, we believe
that the standards need to be tailored to appropriately address these
unique circumstances.
In conducting our analysis, we compared the impacts of applying the
add-on control requirement described above to TEG dehydration units
nationwide to the impacts of only applying the requirement to units
located in areas of high population densities (i.e., within the UA plus
offset and UC boundary).\6\ Applying the add-on control to the
estimated 2,222 TEG dehydration units nationwide would result in
approximately 13,400 tpy of HAP (4,020 tpy of benzene) emission
reduction. We estimate that these 2,222 TEG dehydration units are
located in States with a combined population of 92 million people.\7\
The annual cost for this option was estimated to be $39 million. We
then evaluated the impacts of applying the add-on control requirement
to only those TEG dehydration units located within UA plus offset and
UC boundaries. We estimated 50 TEG dehydration units in this area with
a combined population of 80 million people. This scenario would result
in a 300 tpy HAP (90 tpy of benzene) emission reduction and an annual
cost of compliance of $883 thousand. Thus, extending the add-on control
requirement to sources outside the UA plus offset and UC boundaries
would result in an additional annual cost exceeding $38 million in an
area with a combined population of 12 million people. This analysis
showed that the overall cost of controlling units outside UA plus
offset and UC boundaries was much higher for a lower population.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Because we have determined that GACT is no control for units
below the natural gas throughput and benzene emission threshold, we
only considered the impacts of sources above the thresholds.
\7\ We are using an approach by which we are evaluating the
affected TEG dehydration units relative to the populations contained
in the top 13 natural gas producing States (Texas, New Mexico,
Oklahoma, Wyoming, Louisiana, Colorado, Alaska, Kansas, California,
Utah, Michigan, Alabama, and Mississippi). This approach is
consistent with that used in the July 2005 proposal (70 FR 39446).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the areas located outside UA plus offset and UC boundaries
are sparsely populated compared to those inside UA plus offset and UC
boundaries, we do not believe the additional cost associated with
extending the add-on control requirement to sources in this area is
justified. Under this final rule, the add-on control requirement
applies only to sources located within the UA plus offset and UC
boundaries. Section 112(d)(5) of the CAA authorizes us to set standards
for area sources that provide for the use of generally available
management practices by sources to reduce HAP emissions. Pursuant to
CAA section 112(d)(5), we have prescribed a management practice for
sources located outside the UA plus offset and UC boundaries. We have
determined that adjusting the TEG circulation rate is an appropriate
management practice for several reasons. First, by lowering the TEG
circulation rate, the amount of glycol that comes in contact with the
natural gas is reduced, thereby lowering the amount of HAP (e.g.,
benzene) that is absorbed by the glycol and subsequently emitted
through the reboiler vent when the glycol is regenerated. We estimate
that the HAP emissions reduction is approximately 7,600 tpy (2,400 tpy
of benzene) for the approximately 2,172 sources located outside UA plus
offset and UC boundaries. Second, reducing the TEG circulation rate has
the added benefit of reducing natural gas losses. Natural gas is also
absorbed by the TEG, and subsequently emitted through the reboiler
vent. The amount of natural gas vented is directly proportional to the
TEG circulation rate. Lowering the TEG circulation rate has a direct
impact on the amount of natural gas lost. Third, optimizing the TEG
circulation rate can be achieved without sacrificing the performance of
the TEG dehydration unit. Fourth, this process variable does not
require the presence of an on-site operator to maintain and, thus,
would be an achievable option for unmanned sources. Finally, the TEG
circulation rate can be optimized for minimal capital cost (e.g., a new
pump may be required) and could result in an annual cost savings due to
the reduction of the natural gas losses. Therefore, this final rule
requires each TEG dehydration unit at area source oil and natural gas
production facilities located outside of UA plus offset and UC
boundaries to reduce emissions by optimizing the TEG circulation rate.
F. What are the testing and initial compliance requirements?
To demonstrate that the actual annual average natural gas flowrate
of your TEG dehydration unit is less than 85 thousand m3/day
(3 MMSCF/D), this final rule specifies that you must determine the
natural gas flow rate using either a flow measurement device or another
method approved by the Administrator. To demonstrate that your TEG
dehydration unit emits less than 0.90 Mg/yr (1.0 tpy) of benzene, this
final rule specifies that you must determine its emissions using either
GRI-GLYCalcTM, Version 3.0 or higher, or direct measurement.
For TEG dehydration units that have an actual annual average
natural gas flowrate and benzene emission rate at or above the cut-off
levels mentioned above and are located within the UA
[[Page 30]]
plus offset and UC boundaries, the source must submit Notification of
Compliance Status Reports, inspect/test the closed-vent system and
control device(s), and establish monitoring parameter values. If the
unit is above the cut-offs and located outside the UA plus offset and
UC boundaries, the source only has to submit an Initial Notification
which must include a certified statement of future compliance.
We are finalizing the change proposed in the July 8, 2005 notice to
allow ASTM D6420-99 (2004) as an alternative where EPA Method 18 is
specified. The General Provisions of 40 CFR part 63 will be amended to
incorporate the approved method by reference for 40 CFR part 63,
subpart HH. See section VI.J. for further discussion.
G. What are the continuous compliance requirements?
Area sources within UA plus offset and UC boundaries are required
to submit periodic reports on an annual basis, instead of semiannually,
as is required for major sources. Continuous compliance requirements
include submitting periodic reports, conducting annual inspections of
closed-vent systems, repairing leaks and defects, conducting the
required monitoring, and maintaining the required records. As described
in the 1998 proposal and the 2005 proposal, these monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements are the same as those
required for major sources except for the frequency of submittal for
periodic reports. Sources outside the UA plus offset and UC boundaries
must maintain a record of the circulation rate determination.
III. Significant Changes Since Proposal
A. Compliance Dates
The compliance date provisions for existing sources in this final
rule differ from the two proposed rules in two respects. First, because
we have added a management practice requirement to this final rule, we
included a 2-year compliance deadline for existing sources subject to
this requirement. The management practice requirement would require, at
most, that a source install a new glycol pump to optimize the TEG
circulation rate. We believe that 2 years is a sufficient length of
time in which to install and operate the glycol pump at the optimum
circulation rate. We considered making the compliance deadline 1 year,
however we decided that given the estimated 2,172 sources required to
implement this management practice, a 2-year compliance period was more
appropriate.
Second, we use the date of the 1998 proposed rule for defining
existing and new sources in ``Urban-1'' counties only. In the 2005
supplemental proposal, we used the date of the 1998 proposed rule to
define new and existing sources in both Urban-1 and ``Urban-2''
counties, because we had proposed to regulate sources in these counties
in the 1998 proposed rule.\8\ Since then, we concluded that defining
existing and new sources in Urban-2 counties based on the date of the
1998 proposed rule would be inappropriate because the 1998 proposed
rule contained an inaccurate definition for Urban-2 and, therefore, did
not provide adequate notice to sources in Urban-2 counties.
Accordingly, this final rule uses the date of the 1998 proposal for
defining existing and new sources in Urban-1 counties only. For sources
in areas other than Urban-1 counties, this final rule determines
existing and new sources based on the date of the 2005 supplemental
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Both the 1998 and 2005 proposed rules provided definitions
for ``Urban-1'' and ``Urban-2.'' However, we did not accurately
define ``Urban-2'' in the 1998 proposed rule. The definition for
``Urban-2'' was corrected in the 2005 supplemental proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 of this preamble presents compliance dates for existing and
new sources for this final rule.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and the
For an affected source located in a county we where the source was constructed/ then the source compliance date
classified as * * * and is located * * * reconstruct-ed * * * is * * * for that source
would be * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Urban-1 based on 2000 census data,............. within any UA plus offset and UC boundary,................. before February 6, 1998,.................. Existing......... January 5,
2010.
(b) Urban-1 based on 2000 census data,............. Not within any UA plus offset and UC boundary,............. before February 6, 1998,.................. Existing......... January 5,
2009.
(c) Urban-1 based on 2000 census data,............. either within or outside any UA plus offset and UC on or after February 6, 1998,............. New.............. January 3, 2007
boundary,. or startup,
whichever is
later.
(d) Not Urban-1 based on 2000 census data,......... within any UA plus offset and UC boundary,................. before July 8, 2005,...................... Existing......... January 4,
2010.
(e) Not Urban-1 based on 2000 census data,......... Not within any UA plus offset and UC boundary,............. before July 8, 2005,...................... Existing......... January 5,
2009.
(f) Not Urban-1 based on 2000 census data,......... Either within or outside any UA plus offset and UC on or after July 8, 2005,................. New.............. January 3, 2007
boundary,. or startup,
whichever is
later.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Applicability Requirements
Whereas the proposed rules proposed applying the add-on control
requirement either nationally or only to TEG dehydration units at
sources located in ``urban'' counties, this final rule applies this
requirement to: Units at area sources located within a UA plus offset
and UC boundary, which is described in section II.E above. Units at
area sources not located within the UA plus offset and UC boundaries
must implement the prescribed management practices (i.e., adjust TEG
circulation rate) for operation of the TEG dehydration unit. Guidance
is available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/oilgas/oilgaspg.html to assist in determining your location relative to a UA
plus offset and UC boundary, or you can access the Bureau of Census Web
site at http://factfinder.census.gov to generate a map based on the
location of your TEG dehydration unit and calculate the location
relative to the nearest UA plus offset and UC boundaries.
[[Page 31]]
C. Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction Requirements
This final rule follows the requirements of the General Provisions
(40 CFR part 63, subpart A) regarding startup, shutdown, and
malfunction (SSM) events. Because this final rule only requires area
sources within UA plus offset and UC boundaries to have add-on control,
only sources within the UA plus offset and UC boundaries are subject to
the General Provisions regarding SSM.
IV. Responses to Significant Comments
Our responses to all of the significant public comments on both
proposals are presented in the Response to Comments Document which is
available in Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0238.
A. What Geographic Applicability Criteria is Being Used in this final
rule?
Comment: We proposed two options for the geographic applicability
criteria: (1) all TEG dehydration units would be subject to area source
standards (hereinafter referred to as ``Option 1''); and (2) area
source standards would apply to TEG dehydration units located in Urban-
1 and Urban-2 counties (hereinafter referred to as ``Option 2''). We
received comments objecting to Option 1 for primarily two reasons: (1)
EPA does not have the authority to regulate rural sources under the
CAA; and (2) regulation of rural or remote sources is not warranted due
to low exposure risks.
The commenters stated that nationwide applicability is contrary to
the plain language of the CAA, specifically section 112(k). According
to the commenters, CAA section 112(k) is designed to address those
smaller sources of HAP that create unacceptable exposures in
concentrated urban areas; remote, small, or sparsely populated rural
areas, where many dehydrators are located, are therefore not within the
scope of CAA section 112(k)(1). Several commenters stated that there is
no clear indication that emissions from remote sources provide a
meaningful contribution to ambient air toxic levels in urban areas;
therefore, regulating rural sources would not have the effect intended
by the CAA.
We also received comments objecting to Option 1 asserting that
exposure risks from facilities located in rural or remote areas are low
or nonexistent. One commenter stressed that the foundation for the area
source program was based on regulating area sources in a manner that
would result in a public health benefit. The commenter stated that
regulating dehydration units in rural areas, which are sparsely
populated, would not yield the same public health benefits that were
``contemplated'' by the statute.
Response: We believe that the CAA provides the Agency with the
authority to regulate area sources nationwide. CAA section 112(k)(1)
states that ``It is the purpose of this subsection to achieve a
substantial reduction in emissions of hazardous air pollutants from
area sources and an equivalent reduction in the public health risks
associated with such sources including a reduction of not less than 75
per centum in the incidence of cancer attributable to emissions from
such sources.'' Consistent with this expressed purpose of CAA section
112(k) to reduce both emissions and risks, CAA section 112(k)(3)(i)
requires that we list not less than 30 HAP that, as a result of
emissions from area sources, present the greatest threat to public
health in the largest number of urban areas. CAA sections 112(c)(3) and
(k)(3)(ii) require that we list area source categories that represent
not less than 90 percent of the area source emissions of each of the
listed HAP. CAA section 112(c) requires that we issue standards for
listed categories under CAA section 112(d). These relevant statutory
provisions authorize us to regulate listed area source categories and
not just sources located in urban areas.
In both the UATS and our July 8, 2005 supplemental proposal, we
identified the reasons supporting a national rule (e.g., benzene's
toxicity and carcinogenicity, a level playing field, the 75 percent
cancer incidence reduction goal) (64 FR 38724 and 70 FR 39446).
Furthermore, by requiring management practices rather than control
requirements on sources outside the UA plus offset and UC boundaries,
we believe that we have appropriately addressed commenters' concern
with respect to remote sources being subject to unnecessary or costly
requirements.
B. What urban definition is being used in this final rule?
Comment: Several commenters opposed EPA's definition of ``urban
areas.'' According to the commenters, by defining urban areas as
county-wide areas, EPA has expanded urban areas to include large
expanses of rural territories. One commenter stated that a comparison
of land area to population on a county basis shows that the target
population for protection is very thinly distributed. Four commenters
referred to maps noting that the maps show vast areas of the United
States that would be classified as urban areas based on the proposed
definition, but have very low population. The commenters specifically
referred to the State of Wyoming, in which half of the State is
classified as ``urban'' using EPA's proposed definition. One commenter
also pointed out that in Utah, six of the 12 counties designated as
urban using EPA's definition have a population density of less than ten
persons per square mile.
Other commenters stated that some counties with a total population
of less than 5,000, and an average population density of less than two
people per square mile, would be classified as urban under the Urban-2
designation. In order to illustrate the broad geographical
applicability that includes remote locations, the commenters stated
that, based on the Urban-2 definition, urban designations would be
applied to:
14 of 23 counties in Wyoming;
20 of 33 counties in New Mexico;
10 or 17 counties in Nevada; and
17 of 56 counties in Montana.
One commenter stated that EPA's proposed definition of urban areas
would be unnecessarily costly and burdensome on sites located in rural
or remote areas, but classified as urban. One commenter acknowledged
that there has been, and will continue to be, instances of energy
production and population encroachment. However, according to the
commenter, most of the known conventional or unconventional gas supply
basins are likely to remain rural for the foreseeable future.
Response: The statute does not define urban, thus, leaving us the
discretion to define the term. We proposed and took comments on our
definition of the term urban as part of our 1999 UATS. The definition
was the basis for the listing of area source categories pursuant to
section 112(c)(3) and (k)(3)(B)(ii) of the CAA. We are currently under
court-ordered deadlines to complete issuing standards for all listed
area source categories. Changing the definition of urban would mean
recreating an area source category list, which may differ significantly
from the current list and, thus, greatly hinders our effort to complete
our obligation by the court-ordered deadlines. Therefore, we believe
that revisiting the definition of urban is inappropriate at this time.
However, we have tailored this rule to address the unique circumstances
associated with this source category, as described above. Moreover, in
response to comments regarding the nature of remote sources, we
modified this final rule and are only requiring the add-on control
requirement for sources in areas of higher population densities, which
we have identified as areas within the UA plus offset and UC
boundaries. This
[[Page 32]]
rule imposes the less costly management practice requirements on
sources outside the UA plus offset and UC boundaries.
C. What are the requirements for remote/unmanned sources?
Comment: Commenters said if EPA imposes controls on TEG dehydrators
outside of Urban-1 areas, it should adopt a separate (lesser) control
standard for those remote area sources for the following reasons:
It is not justified based on health effects.
Practical considerations prevent operators from achieving
the 95-percent control efficiency on remote, unmanned TEG dehydrators.
Commenters said that in order to meet the 95-percent control
efficiency or the outlet concentration, an operator generally has to
install a system with a forced draft fan for the condenser and a flare
or vapor recovery system. Many remote sources do not have an electric
power supply, which precludes using a forced draft fan. Routing the
vapors to the firebox or fire-tube is not practical in all situations
because the high water vapor content can extinguish the fire. While
flares and vapor recovery systems address this problem, they require
frequent monitoring, which is a problem at unmanned sites that are only
visited infrequently. The lack of electric power supply would make
certain automated monitoring systems impossible.
Commenters said EPA should adopt a separate GACT standard for
facilities outside of ``Urban-1'' areas and ``urbanized areas.'' The
95-percent control efficiency standard could still apply in Urban-1
areas and urbanized areas, but it would not otherwise apply to area
source TEG dehydrators. The commenters recommended that EPA set GACT
for facilities that are not located in Urban-1 or urbanized areas as a
reduction of benzene to a level of less than 1 tpy, and remove the 95-
percent control efficiency requirement. One commenter added that GACT
could also be considered as the installation of a flash tank/condenser
or incinerator process.
Response: We agree with the commenters that it is reasonable to
require a higher level of emission reductions for TEG dehydration units
located in more densely populated areas. We also recognize that the oil
and natural gas source category is unique because there are many area
sources that are located in remote or rural areas. For these reasons
and the reasons discussed above, we have subcategorized to
differentiate between those sources above the cutoff levels identified
above that are located inside UA plus offset and UC boundaries and
those located outside such boundaries. We require installation of
control equipment for TEG dehydration units located inside UA plus
offset and UC boundaries and management practices (i.e., optimized
glycol circulation rate) for units located outside UA plus offset and
UC boundaries. We believe that this approach addresses the commenters'
concerns regarding the control of remote or rural facilities.
V. Impacts of This Final Rule
The environmental and cost impacts for this final rule are
presented in Table 2 of this preamble:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing New
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Number of Impacted Facilities......... 2,222 *141
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facilities Required to Install Add-On Controls
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Facilities........................ 50 3
Emission Reductions (Mg/yr):
HAP..................................... 300 17
VOC..................................... 530 30
Benzene................................. 90 5
Secondary Emissions Increases (Mg/yr):
SO2..................................... <1 <1
NOX..................................... <1 <1
CO...................................... <1 <1
Cost Impacts:
Total Capital Investment (1,000 $/yr)... 850 35
Total Annual Cost (1,000 $/yr).......... 880 50
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facilities Required to Implement Management Practices
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Facilities........................ 2,172 138
Emission Reductions (Mg/yr):
HAP..................................... 6,900 440
VOC..................................... 14,020 890
Benzene................................. 2,200 140
Cost Impacts:
Total Capital Investment (1,000 $/yr)... 1,700 105
Total Annual Cost without considering 14,200 905
gas savings (1,000 $/yr)...............
Total Annual gas savings (1,000 $/yr)... (12,600) (800)
Total Annual Cost considering gas 1,600 105
savings (1,000 $/yr)...................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* New source estimates are estimated by determining the average number
of new sources per year.
A. What Are the Air Impacts?
For existing area source TEG dehydration units in the oil and
natural gas production source category, we estimate that nationwide
baseline area sources HAP emissions are 45,100 Mg/yr (49,600 tpy) and
13,500 Mg/yr of benzene (14,800 tpy). The final standards require that
TEG dehydration units with a natural gas throughput greater than 85
thousand m\3\/day (3 MMSCF/D) and benzene emissions greater than 0.90
Mg/yr (1.0 tpy), located within the UA plus offset and UC boundaries
achieve a 95-percent emission reduction or reduce benzene emissions to
less than 0.90 Mg/yr (1.0 tpy) either through pollution prevention
process changes or by installing a control device (e.g., condenser),
while sources located outside the UA plus
[[Page 33]]
offset and UC boundaries optimize their glycol circulation rate. We
estimate that this final rule will result in a HAP emission reduction
of 7,200 Mg/yr (7,900 tpy) and 2,200 Mg/yr of benzene (2,400 tpy).
To estimate the impacts of this final rule on new sources, we
assumed that new area source facilities would, in the absence of the
standards, have baseline emissions equivalent to existing sources. We
estimate that a total of 7,200 new area source TEG dehydration units
will be constructed within the next 5 years, or 2,400 per year. Of
these 7,200 new area source TEG dehydration units, we estimate that a
total of 423 (141 per year) will have an actual annual average natural
gas flowrate greater than or equal to 85 thousand m\3\/day (3 MMSCF/D).
Using these assumptions, we estimate the nationwide emission reduction
resulting from new area source TEG dehydration units complying with
this final rule would be approximately 450 Mg/yr (500 tpy) of HAP and
140 Mg/yr (150 tpy) of benzene from the 141 new area sources that would
become subject each year. We assume that, of the 141 new area sources,
3 would be located within the UA plus offset and UC boundaries and 138
would be located outside the boundaries.
Secondary environmental impacts are considered to be any air,
water, or solid waste impacts, positive or negative, associated with
the implementation of the final standards. These impacts are exclusive
of the direct organic HAP air emissions reductions discussed in the
previous section.
The capture and control of benzene that is presently emitted from
area source TEG dehydration units will result in a decrease in volatile
organic compound (VOC) emissions as well. The estimated total VOC
emissions reductions are 14,550 Mg/yr (16,000 tpy) from existing
sources.
Other secondary environmental impacts are those associated with the
operation of certain air emission control devices (i.e., flares). The
adverse secondary air impacts would be minimal in comparison to the
primary HAP reduction benefits from implementing the final control
requirements for area sources. We estimate that the national annual
increase of secondary air pollutant emissions resulting from the use of
a flare to comply with the final standards is less than 1 Mg/yr for
sulfur oxides, 1 Mg/yr for carbon monoxide, and 1 Mg/yr for nitrogen
oxides.
B. What are the Cost Impacts?
Since several compliance options are available to owners/operators
of affected sources subject to the add-on control requirement, we are
not sure what control method will be employed. Sources can control
emissions by routing emissions to a condenser, a flare, a process
heater, or back to the process or by implementing pollution prevention
process changes. For the cost estimates developed for condenser
systems, we looked at systems with and without the use of a gas
condensate glycol separator (GCG separator) or flash tank in TEG
dehydration system design. We estimate that approximately 50 sources
are located within the UA plus offset and UC boundaries. For the new
source cost impacts, we assumed that new area source TEG dehydration
units will be constructed with a flash tank.
Affected sources located outside of UA plus offset and UC
boundaries are required to operate the TEG dehydration unit at the
optimum glycol circulation rate. For estimating annual costs for these
sources, it was assumed that in order to meet the optimum glycol
circulation rate, owners or operators would be required to purchase and
install a new pump. Because reducing the glycol circulation rate to an
optimum level reduces gas losses, a recovery credit is also associated
with this requirement. Although we believe a minority of sources will
have to install a new pump to meet the management practice
requirements, costs were estimated by assuming that 50 percent of the
2,172 sources would have to install a new pump while the other 50
percent could lower the circulation rate sufficiently by making
adjustments on the existing pump.
The estimated annual costs shown in Table 2 of this preamble
include the capital cost; operating and maintenance costs; the cost of
monitoring, inspection, recordkeeping, and reporting; and any
associated product recovery credits.
C. What are the Economic Impacts?
For the 1998 proposal, we prepared an economic impact analysis
evaluating the impacts of the rule on affected producers, consumers,
and society. The economic analysis focused on the regulatory effects on
the United States natural gas market that is modeled as a national,
perfectly competitive market for a homogenous commodity.
The results of the analysis showed that the imposition of
regulatory costs on the natural gas market would result in negligible
changes in natural gas prices, output, employment, foreign trade, and
business closures. The price and output changes as a result of the 1998
proposed regulation were estimated to be less than 0.01 percent,
significantly less than observed market trends. We continue to believe
that the previous analysis is valid for today's action and that the
result of the 1998 economic impact analysis resulted in a very low
percent increase in price and output changes. Therefore, we believe
that imposition of regulatory costs associated with this final rule
will result in negligible changes in natural gas prices, output,
employment, foreign trade, and business closures.
D. What are the Non-Air Environmental and Energy Impacts?
The water impacts associated with the installation of a condenser
system for the TEG dehydration unit reboiler vent would be minimal.
This is because the condensed water collected with the hydrocarbon
condensate can be directed back into the system for reprocessing with
the hydrocarbon condensate or, if separated, combined with produced
water for disposal by reinjection.
Similarly, the water impacts associated with installation of a
vapor control system would be minimal. This is because the water vapor
collected along with the hydrocarbon vapors in the vapor collection and
redirect system can be directed back into the system for reprocessing
with the hydrocarbon condensate or, if separated, combined with the
produced water for disposal for reinjection.
The best management practice of optimizing the glycol circulation
rate would result in lower quantities of water being absorbed into the
glycol and sent to the glycol dehydration unit.
Therefore, we expect the adverse water impacts from the
implementation of the emissions reduction options for the final area
source standards to be minimal.
We do not anticipate any adverse solid waste impacts from the
implementation of the area source standards.
Energy impacts are those energy requirements associated with the
operation of emission control devices. There would be no national
energy demand increase from the operation of any of the control options
analyzed under the final oil and natural gas production standards for
area sources. The final area source standards encourage the use of
emission controls that recover hydrocarbon products, such as methane
and condensate that can be used on-site as fuel or reprocessed, within
the production process, for sale. There are no energy requirements
associated with the management
[[Page 34]]
practices within this final rule. Thus, the final standards have a
positive impact associated with the recovery of non-renewable energy
resources.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is a ``significant regulatory action.'' This action meets
criteria 3(f)(4) of Executive Order 12866, ``raise novel legal or
policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's
priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order.''
Accordingly, EPA submitted this action to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review under Executive Order 12866 and any changes
made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the
docket for this action.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements in this rule have been
submitted for approval to OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44
U.S.C. 3501, et seq. The information collection requirements are not
enforceable until OMB approves them.
The information to be collected for the area source provisions of
the Oil and Natural Gas Production NESHAP are based on notification,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the NESHAP General
Provisions in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, which are mandatory for all
operators subject to national emission standards. These recordkeeping
and reporting requirements are specifically authorized by section 114
of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7414). All information submitted to the EPA
pursuant to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for which a
claim of confidentiality is made is safeguarded according to EPA
policies set forth in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
This final rule requires maintenance inspections of the control
devices but does not require any notifications or reports beyond those
required by the applicable General Provisions in subpart A to 40 CFR
part 63. The recordkeeping requirements require only the specific
information needed to determine compliance.
The Oil and Natural Gas Production NESHAP requires that facility
owners or operators retain records for a period of 5 years, which
exceeds the 3-year retention period contained in the guidelines in 5
CFR 1320.6. The 5-year retention period is consistent with the
provisions of the General Provisions of 40 CFR part 63, and with the 5-
year records retention requirement in the operating permit program
under title V of the CAA. All subsequent guidelines have been followed
and do not violate any of the Paperwork Reduction Act guidelines
contained in 5 CFR 1320.6.
The annual projected burden for this information collection to
owners and operators of affected sources subject to the emissions
reduction requirements in this final rule (averaged over the first 3
years after the effective date of the promulgated rule) is estimated to
be 28,000 labor-hours per year, with a total annual cost of $1.6
million per year. These estimates include a one-time performance test
and report (with repeat tests where needed), preparation of a startup,
shutdown, and malfunction plan, immediate reports for any event when
the procedures in the plan were not followed, annual compliance
reports, maintenance inspections, notifications, and recordkeeping.
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 are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When this
Information Collection Request is approved by OMB, the Agency will
publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 in the Federal Register
to display the OMB control number for the approved information
collection requirements contained in this final rule.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business with 500
employees or less (as defined by the Small Business Administration's
(SBA) regulations 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 today's final rule on
small entities, EPA has concluded that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
This final rule requires emission reductions (either by installing a
control device or by implementing management practices) at facilities
that operate a TEG dehydration unit with an average annual natural gas
throughput at or above 85 thousand m3/day (3 MMSCF/D) and benzene
emissions at or above 0.90 Mg/yr (1.0 tpy). This final rule provides
that GACT is no control for sources with natural gas flow below 85
thousand m3/day (3 MMSCF/D) or with benzene emissions below 0.90 Mg/yr
(1.0 tpy) of benzene. Accordingly, we estimated that 2,222 of the
38,000 sources would be subject to the emission reduction requirements.
We performed an economic impact analysis to estimate the changes in
product price and production quantities due to this final rule. Because
sales and revenues data were not readily available for the affected
industries, we began our analysis by examining the annual cost of
meeting the emissions reduction requirements. Since the maximum cost
incurred by a source subject to this final rule occurs when installing
add-on controls, we are basing our analysis on that compliance
approach. The annual per unit cost of compliance with this final rule
would be $17,657. The throughput cost for natural gas has experienced
significant volatility within the past several years, making a point
estimate difficult to identify. The wellhead natural gas price, from
the Department of Energy, averaged $4.00 per thousand cubic feet from
2001 to 2003. In order to be conservative for this analysis, we assumed
a natural gas price of $88.29 per thousand cubic meters ($2.50 per
thousand cubic feet).
[[Page 35]]
One frequently used approach for determining whether or not a rule
would have a significant impact on a small entity is to compare
annualized control cost with annualized revenue from sales. Typically,
costs less than 1 percent of revenues are not considered as imposing a
significant impact. In the present case, the annual per-unit cost of
compliance is estimated to be $17,657. Using the aforementioned 1
percent criterion for significant impact, annual revenues would have to
be less than $1,765,700 in order for significant impact to occur. At
$88.29 per thousand cubic meters ($2.50 per thousand cubic feet) of
throughput, that revenue translates to 19,999 thousand cubic meters per
year (706,280 thousand cubic feet per year) throughput, or 54.8
thousand m3/day (1.94 MMSCF/D). Since the cutoff for installation of
emissions controls for this final rule is 85 thousand m3/day (3 MMSCF/
D), we determined the annual cost of control for those entities
affected by this final rule is not sufficient to generate a significant
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Although this final rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities, we nonetheless have
tried to reduce the impact of this rule on small entities. Where
periodic reporting is required, we are requiring annual reporting in
this rule, as opposed to semi-annual reporting that is required in the
major source NESHAP for this category. In addition, our
subcategorization, as described above, should reduce the number of
small entities impacted and the extent of the impact.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any
1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires 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 EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the
Administrator publishes with this final rule an explanation why that
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, including tribal governments, 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.
EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal
mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private
sector in any 1 year. The maximum total annual cost of this final rule
for any 1 year has been estimated to be less than $2.5 million. Thus,
today's rule is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205
of the UMRA. In addition, the rule does not significantly or uniquely
affect small governments because it does not contain any requirements
applicable to such governments or impose obligations upon them.
Therefore, today's rule is not subject to section 203 of the UMRA.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.''
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
This 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. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does
not apply to this rule.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' This final rule does not have
tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
This final rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian tribal governments. We do not know of any area
source TEG dehydration units owned or operated by Indian tribal
governments. However, if there are any, the effect of this final rule
on communities of tribal governments would not be unique or
disproportionate to the effect on other communities. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this final rule.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children from Environmental
health Risks and Safety Risks'' (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 Agency 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.
EPA interprets 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 Order has the
potential to influence the regulation. This final rule is not subject
to Executive Order 13045 because it is based on technology performance
and not on health or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations
[[Page 36]]
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Further,
we have concluded that this rule is not likely to have any adverse
energy effects.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
As noted in the proposed rule, 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 (VCS) in its regulatory activities unless to do so
would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. VCS
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or
adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress,
through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available
and applicable VCS.
This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA
did not consider the use of any VCS. However, we would like to note
that the draft standard ASTM Z7420Z, which was cited in the final Oil
and Natural Gas Production NESHAP (64 FR 32609-32664, June 17, 1999) as
a potentially practical method to use in lieu of EPA Method 18, has now
been finalized by ASTM and approved by EPA for use in rules where
Method 18 is cited. This new standard is ASTM D6420-99 (2004), Standard
Test Method for Determination of Gaseous Organic Compounds by Direct
Interface Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry, and it is appropriate
for inclusion in this final rule in addition to EPA Method 18, codified
at 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, for measurement of total organic carbon,
total HAP, total volatile HAP, and benzene.
Similar to EPA's performance-based Method 18, ASTM D6420-99 (2004)
is also a performance-based method for measurement of total gaseous
organic compounds. However, ASTM D6420-99 (2004) was written to support
the specific use of highly portable and automated gas chromatographs/
mass spectrometers (GC/MS). While offering advantages over the
traditional Method 18, the ASTM method does allow some less stringent
criteria for accepting GC/MS results than required by Method 18.
Therefore, ASTM D6420-99 (2004) is a suitable alternative to Method 18
only where: (1) The target compound(s) are those listed in Section 1.1
of ASTM D6420-99 (2004), and (2) the target concentration is between
150 parts per billion by volume and 100 ppmv. For target compound(s)
not listed in Section 1.1 of ASTM D6420-99 (2004), but potentially
detected by mass spectrometry, this final rule specifies that the
additional system continuing calibration check after each run, as
detailed in Section 10.5.3 of the ASTM method, must be followed, met,
documented, and submitted with the data report even if there is no
moisture condenser used or the compound is not considered water
soluble. For target compound(s) not listed in Section 1.1 of ASTM
D6420-99 (2004), and not amenable to detection by mass spectrometry,
ASTM D6420-99 (2004) does not apply.
As a result, EPA will allow ASTM D6420-99 (2004) for use with this
final rule. The EPA will also allow Method 18 as an option in addition
to ASTM D6420-99 (2004). This will allow the continued use of GC
configurations other than GC/MS. Under 40 CFR 63.7(f) and 40 CFR
63.8(f), subpart A of the General Provisions, a source may apply to EPA
for permission to use alternative test methods or alternative
monitoring requirements in place of any of the EPA testing methods,
performance specifications, or procedures.
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. EPA will submit a report containing this
rule and other required information to the United States Senate, the
United States House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of
the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is
published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule''
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule will be effective January 3,
2007.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: December 21, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
0
For the reasons set forth 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 A--[Amended]
0
2. Section 63.14 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(28) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.14 Incorporations by reference.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(28) ASTM D6420-99 (Reapproved 2004), Standard Test Method for
Determination of Gaseous Organic Compounds by Direct Interface Gas
Chromatography-Mass Spectometry, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.
63.772(a)(1)(ii), 63.2354(b)(3)(i), 63.2354(b)(3)(ii),
63.2354(b)(3)(ii)(A), and 63.2351(b)(3)(ii)(B).
* * * * *
Subpart HH--[Amended]
0
3. Section 63.760 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraph (a)(1) introductory text;
0
b. By revising paragraph (b);
0
c. By revising paragraph (e)(2);
0
d. By revising paragraph (f) introductory text;
0
e. By revising the first sentences in paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2);
0
f. By adding paragraphs (f)(3) through (6);
0
g. By revising paragraph (g) introductory text; and
0
h. By adding a sentence at the end of paragraph (h).
Sec. 63.760 Applicability and designation of affected source.
(a) * * *
(1) Facilities that are major or area sources of hazardous air
pollutants (HAP) as defined in Sec. 63.761. Emissions for major source
determination purposes can be estimated using the maximum natural gas
or hydrocarbon liquid throughput, as appropriate, calculated in
paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section. As an alternative
to calculating the maximum natural gas or hydrocarbon liquid
throughput, the owner or operator of a new or existing source may use
the facility's design maximum natural gas or hydrocarbon
[[Page 37]]
liquid throughput to estimate the maximum potential emissions. Other
means to determine the facility's major source status are allowed,
provided the information is documented and recorded to the
Administrator's satisfaction. A facility that is determined to be an
area source, but subsequently increases its emissions or its potential
to emit above the major source levels (without first obtaining and
complying with other limitations that keep its potential to emit HAP
below major source levels), and becomes a major source, must comply
thereafter with all provisions of this subpart applicable to a major
source starting on the applicable compliance date specified in
paragraph (f) of this section. Nothing in this paragraph is intended to
preclude a source from limiting its potential to emit through other
appropriate mechanisms that may be available through the permitting
authority.
* * * * *
(b) The affected sources for major sources are listed in paragraph
(b)(1) of this section and for area sources in paragraph (b)(2) of this
section.
(1) For major sources, the affected source shall comprise each
emission point located at a facility that meets the criteria specified
in paragraph (a) of this section and listed in paragraphs (b)(1)(i)
through (b)(1)(iv) of this section.
(i) Each glycol dehydration unit;
(ii) Each storage vessel with the potential for flash emissions;
(iii) The group of all ancillary equipment, except compressors,
intended to operate in volatile hazardous air pollutant service (as
defined in Sec. 63.761), which are located at natural gas processing
plants; and
(iv) Compressors intended to operate in volatile hazardous air
pollutant service (as defined in Sec. 63.761), which are located at
natural gas processing plants.
(2) For area sources, the affected source includes each triethylene
glycol (TEG) dehydration unit located at a facility that meets the
criteria specified in paragraph (a) of this section.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(2) A major source facility, prior to the point of custody
transfer, with a facility-wide actual annual average natural gas
throughput less than 18.4 thousand standard cubic meters per day and a
facility-wide actual annual average hydrocarbon liquid throughput less
than 39,700 liters per day.
(f) The owner or operator of an affected major source shall achieve
compliance with the provisions of this subpart by the dates specified
in paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this section. The owner or operator
of an affected area source shall achieve compliance with the provisions
of this subpart by the dates specified in paragraphs (f)(3) through
(f)(6) of this section.
(1) The owner or operator of an affected major source, the
construction or reconstruction of which commenced before February 6,
1998, shall achieve compliance with the applicable provisions of this
subpart no later than June 17, 2002, except as provided for in Sec.
63.6(i). * * *
(2) The owner or operator of an affected major source, the
construction or reconstruction of which commences on or after February
6, 1998, shall achieve compliance with the applicable provisions of
this subpart immediately upon initial startup or June 17, 1999,
whichever date is later.* * *
(3) The owner or operator of an affected area source, located in an
Urban-1 county, as defined in Sec. 63.761, the construction or
reconstruction of which commences before February 6, 1998, shall
achieve compliance with the provisions of this subpart no later than
the dates specified in paragraphs (f)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section,
except as provided for in Sec. 63.6(i).
(i) If the affected area source is located within any UA plus
offset and UC boundary, as defined in Sec. 63.761, the compliance date
is January 4, 2010.
(ii) If the affected area source is not located within any UA plus
offset and UC boundary, as defined in Sec. 63.761, the compliance date
is January 5, 2009.
(4) The owner or operator of an affected area source, located in an
Urban-1 county, as defined in Sec. 63.761, the construction or
reconstruction of which commences on or after February 6, 1998, shall
achieve compliance with the provisions of this subpart immediately upon
initial startup or January 3, 2007, whichever date is later.
(5) The owner or operator of an affected area source that is not
located in an Urban-1 county, as defined in Sec. 63.761, the
construction or reconstruction of which commences before July 8, 2005,
shall achieve compliance with the provisions of this subpart no later
than the dates specified in paragraphs (f)(5)(i) or (ii) of this
section, except as provided for in Sec. 3.6(i).
(i) If the affected area source is located within any UA plus
offset and UC boundary, as defined in Sec. 63.761, the compliance date
is January 4, 2010.
(ii) If the affected area source is not located within any UA plus
offset and UC boundary, as defined in Sec. 63.761, the compliance date
is January 5, 2009.
(6) The owner or operator of an affected area source that is not
located in an Urban-1 county, as defined in Sec. 63.761, the
construction or reconstruction of which commences on or after July 8,
2005, shall achieve compliance with the provisions of this subpart
immediately upon initial startup or January 3, 2007, whichever date is
later.
* * * * *
(g) The following provides owners or operators of an affected
source at a major source with information on overlap of this subpart
with other regulations for equipment leaks. The owner or operator of an
affected source at a major source shall document that they are
complying with other regulations by keeping the records specified in
Sec. 63.774(b)(9).
* * * * *
(h) * * * Unless otherwise required by law, the owner or operator
of an area source subject to the provisions of this subpart is exempt
from the permitting requirements established by 40 CFR part 70 or 40
CFR part 71.
0
4. Section 63.761 is amended by adding, in alphabetical order, the
definitions of ``UA plus offset and UC,'' ``Urban-1 County,''
``urbanized area,'' and ``urban cluster'' to read as follows:
Sec. 63.761 Definitions.
* * * * *
UA plus offset and UC is defined as the area occupied by each
urbanized area, each urban cluster that contains at least 10,000
people, and the area located two miles or less from each urbanized area
boundary.
Urban-1 County is defined as a county that contains a part of a
Metropolitan Statistical Area with a population greater than 250,000,
based on the Office of Management and Budget's Standards for defining
Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas (December 27, 2000),
and Census 2000 Data released by the U.S. Census Bureau.
Urbanized area refers to Census 2000 Urbanized Area, which is
defined in the Urban Area Criteria for Census 2000 (March 15, 2002).
Essentially, an urbanized area consists of densely settled territory
with a population of at least 50,000 people.
Urban cluster refers to a Census 2000 Urban Cluster, which is
defined in the Urban Area Criteria for Census 2000 (March 15, 2002).
Essentially, an urban cluster consists of densely settled
[[Page 38]]
territory with at least 2,500 people but fewer than 50,000 people.
* * * * *
0
5. Section 63.762 is amended by revising paragraph (e) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.762 Startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions.
* * * * *
(e) Owners or operators are not required to prepare a startup,
shutdown, and malfunction plan for any facility where all of the
affected sources meet the exemption criteria specified in Sec.
63.764(e), or for any facility that is not located within a UA plus
offset and UC boundary.
0
6. Section 63.764 is amended by adding paragraph (d) and by revising
paragraph (e)(1) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.764 General standards.
* * * * *
(d) Except as specified in paragraph (e)(1) of this section, the
owner or operator of an affected source located at an existing or new
area source of HAP emissions shall comply with the applicable standards
specified in paragraph (d) of this section.
(1) Each owner or operator of an area source located within an UA
plus offset and UC boundary (as defined in Sec. 63.761) shall comply
with the provisions specified in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through (iii) of
this section.
(i) The control requirements for glycol dehydration unit process
vents specified in Sec. 63.765;
(ii) The monitoring requirements specified in Sec. 63.773; and
(iii) The recordkeeping and reporting requirements specified in
Sec. Sec. 63.774 and 63.775.
(2) Each owner or operator of an area source not located in a UA
plus offset and UC boundary (as defined in Sec. 63.761) shall comply
with paragraphs (d)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) Determine the optimum glycol circulation rate using the
following equation:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR02JA07.001
Where:
LOPT = Optimal circulation rate, gal/hr.
F = Gas flowrate (MMSCF/D).
I = Inlet water content (lb/MMSCF).
O = Outlet water content (lb/MMSCF).
3.0 = The industry accepted rule of thumb for a TEG-to water ratio
(gal TEG/lb H2O).
1.15 = Adjustment factor included for a margin of safety.
(ii) Operate the TEG dehydration unit such that the actual glycol
circulation rate does not exceed the optimum glycol circulation rate
determined in accordance with paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section. If
the TEG dehydration unit is unable to meet the sales gas specification
for moisture content using the glycol circulation rate determined in
accordance with paragraph (d)(2)(i), the owner or operator must
calculate an alternate circulation rate using GRI-GLYCalcTM,
Version 3.0 or higher. The owner or operator must document why the TEG
dehydration unit must be operated using the alternate circulation rate
and submit this documentation with the initial notification in
accordance with Sec. 63.775(c)(7).
(iii) Maintain a record of the determination specified in paragraph
(d)(2)(ii) in accordance with the requirements in Sec. 63.774(f) and
submit the Initial Notification in accordance with the requirements in
Sec. 63.775(c)(7). If operating conditions change and a modification
to the optimum glycol circulation rate is required, the owner or
operator shall prepare a new determination in accordance with paragraph
(d)(2)(i) or (ii) of this section and submit the information specified
under Sec. 63.775(c)(7)(ii) through (v).
(e) * * *
(1) The owner or operator is exempt from the requirements of
paragraph (c)(1) and (d) of this section if the criteria listed in
paragraph (e)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section are met, except that the
records of the determination of these criteria must be maintained as
required in Sec. 63.774(d)(1).
* * * * *
0
7. Section 63.765 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.765 Glycol dehydration unit process vent standards.
(a) This section applies to each glycol dehydration unit subject to
this subpart with an actual annual average natural gas flowrate equal
to or greater than 85 thousand standard cubic meters per day and with
actual average benzene glycol dehydration unit process vent emissions
equal to or greater than 0.90 megagrams per year, that must be
controlled for HAP emissions as specified in either paragraph (c)(1)(i)
or paragraph (d)(1)(i) of Sec. 63.764.
* * * * *
0
8. Section 63.772 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraph (a)(1);
0
b. By revising the first sentence of paragraph (b)(2)(ii);
0
c. By revising paragraph (e)(3)(iii) introductory text;
0
d. By revising paragraph (e)(3)(iii)(B)(2); and
0
e. By revising the first and second sentences of paragraph (e)(3)(iv)
introductory text.
Sec. 63.772 Test methods, compliance procedures, and compliance
demonstrations.
(a) * * *
(1) For a piece of ancillary equipment and compressors to be
considered not in VHAP service, it must be determined that the percent
VHAP content can be reasonably expected never to exceed 10.0 percent by
weight. For the purposes of determining the percent VHAP content of the
process fluid that is contained in or contacts a piece of ancillary
equipment or compressor, you shall use the method in either paragraph
(a)(1)(i) or paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section.
(i) Method 18 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, or
(ii) ASTM D6420-99 (2004), Standard Test Method for Determination
of Gaseous Organic Compounds by Direct Interface Gas Chromatography-
Mass Spectrometry (incorporated by reference--see Sec. 63.14),
provided that the provisions of paragraphs (a)(1)(ii)(A) through (D) of
this section are followed:
(A) The target compound(s) are those listed in section 1.1 of ASTM
D6420-99 (2004);
(B) The target concentration is between 150 parts per billion by
volume and 100 parts per million by volume;
(C) For target compound(s) not listed in Table 1.1 of ASTM D6420-99
(2004), but potentially detected by mass spectrometry, the additional
system continuing calibration check after each run, as detailed in
section 10.5.3 of ASTM D6420-99 (2004), is conducted, met, documented,
and submitted with the data report, even if there is no moisture
condenser used or the compound is not considered water soluble; and
(D) For target compound(s) not listed in Table 1.1 of ASTM D6420-99
(2004), and not amenable to detection by mass spectrometry, ASTM D6420-
99 (2004) may not be used.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * * (ii) The owner or operator shall determine an average
mass rate of benzene emissions in kilograms per hour through direct
measurement using the methods in Sec. 63.772(a)(1)(i) or (ii), or an
alternative method according to Sec. 63.7(f).* * *
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(3) * * *
(iii) To determine compliance with the control device percent
reduction performance requirement in
[[Page 39]]
Sec. 63.771(d)(1)(i)(A), (d)(1)(ii), and (e)(3)(ii), the owner or
operator shall use one of the following methods: Method 18, 40 CFR part
60, appendix A; Method 25A, 40 CFR part 60, appendix A; ASTM D6420-99
(2004), as specified in Sec. 63.772(a)(1)(ii); or any other method or
data that have been validated according to the applicable procedures in
Method 301, 40 CFR part 63, appendix A. The following procedures shall
be used to calculate percent reduction efficiency:
* * * * *
(B) * * *
(2) When the TOC mass rate is calculated, all organic compounds
(minus methane and ethane) measured by Method 18, 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A, or Method 25A, 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, or ASTM D6420-99
(2004) as specified in Sec. 63.772(a)(1)(ii), shall be summed using
the equations in paragraph (e)(3)(iii)(B)(1) of this section.
* * * * *
(iv) To determine compliance with the enclosed combustion device
total HAP concentration limit specified in Sec. 63.771(d)(1)(i)(B),
the owner or operator shall use one of the following methods to measure
either TOC (minus methane and ethane) or total HAP: Method 18, 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A; Method 25A, 40 CFR part 60, appendix A; ASTM
D6420-99 (2004), as specified in Sec. 63.772(a)(1)(ii), or any other
method or data that have been validated according to Method 301 of
appendix A of this part.* * *
* * * * *
0
9. Section 63.774 is amended as follows:
0
a. By revising paragraph (b) introductory text;
0
b. By revising paragraph (d)(1) introductory text; and
0
c. By adding paragraph (f).
Sec. 63.774 Recordkeeping requirements.
* * * * *
(b) Except as specified in paragraphs (c), (d), and (f) of this
section, each owner or operator of a facility subject to this subpart
shall maintain the records specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (11)
of this section:
* * * * *
(d)(1) An owner or operator of a glycol dehydration unit that meets
the exemption criteria in Sec. 63.764(e)(1)(i) or Sec.
63.764(e)(1)(ii) shall maintain the records specified in paragraph
(d)(1)(i) or paragraph (d)(1)(ii) of this section, as appropriate, for
that glycol dehydration unit.
* * * * *
(f) The owner or operator of an area source not located within a UA
plus offset and UC boundary must keep a record of the calculation used
to determine the optimum glycol circulation rate in accordance with
Sec. 63.764(d)(2)(i) or Sec. 63.764(d)(2)(ii), as applicable.
0
10. Section 63.775 is amended as follows:
0
a. By adding paragraph (c);
0
b. By revising paragraph (e) introductory text; and
0
c. By adding paragraph (e)(3).
Sec. 63.775 Reporting requirements.
* * * * *
(c) Except as provided in paragraph (c)(8), each owner or operator
of an area source subject to this subpart shall submit the information
listed in paragraph (c)(1) of this section. If the source is located
within a UA plus offset and UC boundary, the owner or operator shall
also submit the information listed in paragraphs (c)(2) through (6) of
this section. If the source is not located within any UA plus offset
and UC boundaries, the owner or operator shall also submit the
information listed within paragraph (c)(7).
(1) The initial notifications required under Sec. 63.9(b)(2) not
later than January 3, 2008. In addition to submitting your initial
notification to the addressees specified under Sec. 63.9(a), you must
also submit a copy of the initial notification to EPA's Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards. Send your notification via e-mail to
[email protected] or via U.S. mail or other mail delivery service to U.S.
EPA, Sector Policies and Programs Division/Coatings and Chemicals Group
(E143-01), Attn: Oil and Gas Project Leader, Research Triangle Park, NC
27711.
(2) The date of the performance evaluation as specified in Sec.
63.8(e)(2) if an owner or operator is required by the Administrator to
conduct a performance evaluation for a continuous monitoring system.
(3) The planned date of a performance test at least 60 days before
the test in accordance with Sec. 63.7(b). Unless requested by the
Administrator, a site-specific test plan is not required by this
subpart. If requested by the Administrator, the owner or operator must
submit the site-specific test plan required by Sec. 63.7(c) with the
notification of the performance test. A separate notification of the
performance test is not required if it is included in the initial
notification submitted in accordance with paragraph (c)(1) of this
section.
(4) A Notification of Compliance Status as described in paragraph
(d) of this section;
(5) Periodic reports as described in paragraph (e)(3) of this
section; and
(6) Startup, shutdown, and malfunction reports specified in Sec.
63.10(d)(5). Separate startup, shutdown, and malfunction reports as
described in Sec. 63.10(d)(5) are not required if the information is
included in the Periodic Report specified in paragraph (e) of this
section.
(7) The information listed in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) through (v) of
this section. This information shall be submitted with the initial
notification.
(i) Documentation of the source's location relative to the nearest
UA plus offset and UC boundaries. This information shall include the
latitude and longitude of the affected source; whether the source is
located in an urban cluster with 10,000 people or more; the distance in
miles to the nearest urbanized area boundary if the source is not
located in an urban cluster with 10,000 people or more; and the names
of the nearest urban cluster with 10,000 people or more and nearest
urbanized area.
(ii) Calculation of the optimum glycol circulation rate determined
in accordance with Sec. 63.764(d)(2)(i).
(iii) If applicable, documentation of the alternate glycol
circulation rate calculated using GRI-GLYCalcTM, Version 3.0
or higher and documentation stating why the TEG dehydration unit must
operate using the alternate glycol circulation rate.
(iv) The name of the manufacturer and the model number of the
glycol circulation pump(s) in operation.
(v) Statement by a responsible official, with that official's name,
title, and signature, certifying that the facility will always operate
the glycol dehydration unit using the optimum circulation rate
determined in accordance with Sec. 63.764(d)(2)(i) or Sec.
63.764(d)(2)(ii), as applicable.
(8) An owner or operator of a TEG dehydration unit located at an
area source that meets the criteria in Sec. 63.764(e)(1)(i) or Sec.
63.764(e)(1)(ii) is exempt from the reporting requirements for area
sources in paragraphs (c)(1) through (7) of this section, for that
unit.
* * * * *
(e) Periodic Reports. An owner or operator of a major source shall
prepare Periodic Reports in accordance with paragraphs (e) (1) and (2)
of this section and submit them to the Administrator. An owner or
operator of an area source shall prepare Periodic Reports in accordance
with paragraph (e)(3) of this section and submit them to the
Administrator.
* * * * *
(3) An owner or operator of an area source located inside a UA plus
offset
[[Page 40]]
and UC boundary shall prepare and submit Periodic Reports in accordance
with paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) Periodic reports must be submitted on an annual basis. The
first reporting period shall cover the period beginning on the date the
Notification of Compliance Status Report is due and ending on December
31. The report shall be submitted within 30 days after the end of the
reporting period.
(ii) Subsequent reporting periods begin every January 1 and end on
December 31. Subsequent reports shall be submitted within 30 days
following the end of the reporting period.
(iii) The periodic reports must contain the information included in
paragraph (e)(2) of this section.
* * * * *
0
11. In the Appendix to Subpart HH of Part 63, revise Table 2 to read as
follows:
Appendix to Subpart HH of Part 63--Tables
* * * * *
Table 2 to Subpart HH of Part 63.--Applicability of 40 CFR Part 63 General Provisions to Subpart HH
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General provisions reference Applicable to subpart HH Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1(a)(1)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(a)(2)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(a)(3)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(a)(4)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(a)(5)....................... No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.1(a)(6)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(a)(7) through (a)(9)........ No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.1(a)(10)...................... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(a)(11)...................... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(a)(12)...................... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(b)(1)....................... No......................... Subpart HH specifies applicability.
Sec. 63.1(b)(2)....................... No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.1(b)(3)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(c)(1)....................... No......................... Subpart HH specifies applicability.
Sec. 63.1(c)(2)....................... Yes. Subpart HH exempts area sources from the
requirement to obtain a title V permit
unless otherwise required by law as
specified in Sec. 63.760(h).
Sec. 63.1(c)(3) and (c)(4)............ No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.1(c)(5)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.1(d).......................... No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.1(e).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.2............................. Yes. Except definition of major source is
unique for this source category and
there are additional definitions in
subpart HH.
Sec. 63.3(a) through (c).............. Yes.
Sec. 63.4(a)(1) through (a)(2)........ Yes.
Sec. 63.4(a)(3) through (a)(5)........ No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.4(b).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.4(c).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(a)(1)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(a)(2)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(b)(1)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(b)(2)....................... No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.5(b)(3)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(b)(4)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(b)(5)....................... No......................... Section Reserved.
Sec. 63.5(b)(6)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(c).......................... No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.5(d)(1)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(d)(2)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(d)(3)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(d)(4)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(e).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(f)(1)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.5(f)(2)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(a).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(b)(1)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(b)(2)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(b)(3)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(b)(4)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(b)(5)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(b)(6)....................... No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.6(b)(7)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(c)(1)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(c)(2)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(c)(3) through (c)(4)........ No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.6(c)(5)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(d).......................... No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.6(e).......................... Yes.
[[Page 41]]
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i).................... No......................... Except as otherwise specified. Addressed
in Sec. 63.762.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(ii)................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(iii).................. Yes.
Sec. 63.6(e)(2)....................... No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(i).................... Yes. Sources exempt under Sec. 63.764(e) and
sources located outside UA plus offset
and UC boundaries are not required to
develop startup, shutdown, and
malfunction plans as stated in Sec.
63.762(e).
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(i)(A)................. No......................... Except as otherwise specified. Addressed
in Sec. 63.762(c).
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(i)(B)................. Yes.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(i)(C)................. Yes.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(ii)................... No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii) through (3)(vi).. Yes.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(vii).................. Yes.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(vii) (A).............. Yes.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(vii) (B).............. Yes........................ Except that the plan must provide for
operation in compliance with Sec.
63.762(c).
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(viii) through (ix).... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(f)(1)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(f)(2)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(f)(3)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(g).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(h).......................... No......................... Subpart HH does not contain opacity or
visible emission standards.
Sec. 63.6(i)(1) through (i)(14)....... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(i)(15)...................... No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.6(i)(16)...................... Yes.
Sec. 63.6(j).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.7(a)(1)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.7(a)(2)....................... Yes........................ But the performance test results must be
submitted within 180 days after the
compliance date.
Sec. 63.7(a)(3)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.7(b).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.7(c).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.7(d).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.7(e)(1)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.7(e)(2)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.7(e)(3)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.7(e)(4)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.7(f).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.7(g).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.7(h).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(a)(1)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(a)(2)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(a)(3)....................... No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.8(a)(4)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(b)(1)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(b)(2)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(b)(3)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(c)(2)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(c)(3)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(c)(4)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(c)(4)(i).................... No......................... Subpart HH does not require continuous
opacity monitors.
Sec. 63.8(c)(4)(ii)................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(c)(5) through (c)(8)........ Yes.
Sec. 63.8(d).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(e).......................... Yes........................ Subpart HH does not specifically require
continuous emissions monitor performance
evaluation, however, the Administrator
can request that one be conducted.
Sec. 63.8(f)(1) through (f)(5)........ Yes.
Sec. 63.8(f)(6)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.8(g).......................... No......................... Subpart HH specifies continuous
monitoring system data reduction
requirements.
Sec. 63.9(a).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.9(b)(1)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.9(b)(2)....................... Yes........................ Existing sources are given 1 year (rather
than 120 days) to submit this
notification. Major and area sources
that meet Sec. 63.764(e) do not have
to submit initial notifications.
Sec. 63.9(b)(3)....................... No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.9(b)(4)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.9(b)(5)....................... Yes.
[[Page 42]]
Sec. 63.9(c).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.9(d).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.9(e).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.9(f).......................... No......................... Subpart HH does not have opacity or
visible emission standards.
Sec. 63.9(g)(1)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.9(g)(2)....................... No......................... Subpart HH does not have opacity or
visible emission standards.
Sec. 63.9(g)(3)....................... Yes.
Sec. 63.9(h)(1) through (h)(3)........ Yes........................ Area sources located outside UA plus
offset and UC boundaries are not
required to submit notifications of
compliance status.
Sec. 63.9(h)(4)....................... No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.9(h)(5) through (h)(6)........ Yes.
Sec. 63.9(i).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.9(j).......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(a)......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(b)(1)...................... Yes. Sec. 63.774(b)(1) requires sources to
maintain the most recent 12 months of
data on site and allows offsite storage
for the remaining 4 years of data.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)...................... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(b)(3)...................... Yes........................ Sec. 63.774(b)(1) requires sources to
maintain the most recent 12 months of
data on site and allows offsite storage
for the remaining 4 years of data.
Sec. 63.10(c)(1)...................... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(c)(2) through (c)(4)....... No......................... Sections reserved.
Sec. 63.10(c)(5) through (c)(8)....... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(c)(9)...................... No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.10(c)(10) through(c)(15)...... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(d)(1)...................... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(d)(2)...................... Yes........................ Area sources located outside UA plus
offset and UC boundaries do not have to
submit performance test reports.
Sec. 63.10(d)(3)...................... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(d)(4)...................... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(i)................... Yes........................ Subpart HH requires major sources to
submit a startup, shutdown, and
malfunction report semi-annually. Area
sources located within UA plus offset
and UC boundaries are required to submit
startup, shutdown, and malfunction
reports annually. Area sources located
outside UA plus offset and UC boundaries
are not required to submit startup,
shutdown, and malfunction reports.
Sec. 63.10(e)(1)...................... Yes........................ Area sources located outside UA plus
offset and UC boundaries are not
required to submit reports.
Sec. 63.10(e)(2)...................... Yes........................ Area sources located outside UA plus
offset and UC boundaries are not
required to submit reports.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)(i)................... Yes........................ Subpart HH requires major sources to
submit Periodic Reports semi-annually.
Area sources are required to submit
Periodic Reports annually. Area sources
located outside UA plus offset and UC
boundaries are not required to submit
reports.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)(i)(A)................ Yes.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)(i)(B)................ Yes.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)(i)(C)................ No......................... Section reserved.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)(ii) through (viii)... Yes.
Sec. 63.10(f)......................... Yes.
Sec. 63.11(a) and (b)................. Yes.
Sec. 63.12(a) through (c)............. Yes.
Sec. 63.13(a) through (c)............. Yes.
Sec. 63.14(a) and (b)................. Yes.
Sec. 63.15(a) and (b)................. Yes
Sec. 63.16............................ Yes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 43]]
[FR Doc. E6-22413 Filed 12-29-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P