Risk and Technology Review, Phase II, Group 2

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.

[Federal Register: March 29, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 60)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 14734-14750]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr29mr07-26]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0859; FRL-8293-4]
RIN 2060-AN85

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This ANPRM asks for public comment on hazardous air pollutant
emissions and other model input data that EPA intends to use to assess
residual risk from selected industrial major source categories, as
required by the Clean Air Act. Specifically, the data are comprised of
hazardous air pollutant emission estimates and emission release
parameters for 22 industrial source categories subject to 12 national
emission standards for hazardous air pollutants for hazardous air
pollutants with compliance dates of 2002 and earlier. The source of
this information is the February 2006 version of the 2002 National
Emissions Inventory, updated with some facility-specific data collected
by EPA. We are seeking comment on the emissions and source data found
at the Risk and Technology Review Web site and we are providing the
opportunity for the public to submit technical corrections and updates.
Following review of comments received, we will update the data, as
appropriate, and assess risk for these source categories. We will use
these risk estimates and our evaluation of the availability, cost, and
feasibility of emissions reduction options to determine the ample
margin of safety for residual risk and to fulfill our obligations to
conduct a technology review. We currently anticipate using the results
of these risk estimates along with review of control technology as the
basis for our decisions on whether to propose additional standards to
address residual risk for each source category. There will be
opportunity for oral and written comment on any additional standards
when we publish our Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). We anticipate
proposing the results of this risk and technology review for these 22
source categories by fall 2007.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 29, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2006-0859 by one of the following methods:
http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for
submitting comments.
E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epamail.epa.gov.
Fax: (202) 566-1741.
Mail: U.S. Postal Service, send comments to: Air and
Radiation Docket (6102T), Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0859, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20460. Please include a total of two copies.
Hand Delivery: In person or by Courier, deliver comments
to: Air and Radiation Docket (6102T), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004. Such deliveries are
accepted only during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2006-0859. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous
access'' system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through http://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the
EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation
Docket, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, 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 http://www.regulations.gov
are not affected by the flooding and will remain the same.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information about this
ANPRM, contact Ms. Paula Hirtz, Office and Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division, Coatings and
Chemicals Group (E143-01), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919)
541-2618; fax number: (919) 541-0246; and e-mail address:
hirtz.paula@epa.gov.

[[Page 14735]]

For information specific to the National Emissions Inventory (NEI),
contact Ms. Anne Pope, Air Quality and Assessment Division (Office and
Air Quality Planning and Standards), Mail Code C339-02, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711; telephone number: (919) 541-5373; fax number: (919) 541-0684;
and e-mail address: pope.anne@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated Entities. Entities potentially affected by this action
include facilities containing any one or more of the 22 major source
categories subject to the 12 national emission standards for hazardous
air pollutants (NESHAP) (or commonly referred to maximum achievable
control technology (MACT) standards) listed in Table 1. This action
does not affect area sources, as these NESHAP do not apply to area
sources. Industries regulated by these MACT are classified by the North
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes shown in Table 1.
In addition, a classification system of MACT codes has been developed
and is used in the 2002 NEI to identify processes included in each MACT
source category. The MACT codes for the 22 source categories addressed
in this notice are also displayed in Table 1.

Table 1.--MACT Standards, Source Categories, and Corresponding NAICS and
MACT Codes Addressed by This ANPRM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MACT standard/source category name NAICS codes MACT code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mineral Wool Production................. 327993 409
Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework 336411 0701
Facilities.............................
Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations... 4883 0603
Natural Gas Transmission and Storage.... 486210 0504
Oil and Natural Gas Production.......... 211 0501
Petroleum Refineries.................... 32411 0503
Pharmaceuticals Production.............. 3254 1201
Group I Polymers and Resins:
Epichlorohydrin Elastomers 325212 1311
Production.........................
Hypalon(TM) Production.............. 325212 1315
Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production. 325212 1321
Polybutadiene Rubber Production..... 325212 1325
Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and Latex 325212 1339
Production.........................
Group IV Polymers and Resins:
Acrylic-Butadiene-Styrene Production 325211 1302
Methyl Methacrylate-Acrylonitrile- 325211 1317
Butadiene-Styrene Production.......
Methyl Methacrylate-Butadiene- 325211 1318
Styrene Production.................
Nitrile Resins Production........... 325211 1342
Polyethylene Terephthalate 325211 1328
Production.........................
Polystyrene Production.............. 325211 1331
Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production.... 325211 1338
Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants....... 331312 0201
Printing and Publishing Industry........ 32311 0714
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Operations. 336611 0715
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitting Comments/CBI. When submitting comments, remember to
identify this ANPRM by docket number and other identifying information
(subject heading, Federal Register date, and page number). Also, make
sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline identified.
As described further in section VII of this ANPRM, specific data change
suggestions need to be accompanied by supporting documentation that
includes a description of any assumptions used and any technical
information and/or data that you used.
Do not submit CBI to EPA through http://www.regulations.gov or
e-mail. Instead, send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the
following address: Mr. Roberto Morales, OAQPS Document Control Officer
(C404-02), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Attention
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0859. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to Mr. Morales, mark the outside of the disk or
CD-ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-
ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. If
you submit a CD-ROM or disc that does not contain CBI, mark the outside
of the disk or CD-ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information
not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and EPA's
electronic public docket without prior notice.
If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming
CBI, please consult the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. Information marked as CBI will not be
disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part
2.
Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of today's notice is also available on the World
Wide Web through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following
signature by the EPA Administrator, a copy of today's notice will be
posted on the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or
promulgated NESHAP at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg.
The TTN provides information and technology exchange in various areas
of air pollution control.
As discussed in more detail in section VI of this ANPRM, additional
information is available on the Risk and Technology Review Phase II Web
page at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html.
This information includes source category descriptions and detailed
emissions and other data that will be used as model inputs.
Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as
follows:

[[Page 14736]]

I. Background
II. What approach is EPA taking for the Risk and Technology Review?
A. What is the approach we are taking to address residual risk
for the Group 2 source categories?
B. What data were compiled and reviewed?
C. What are the steps planned before proposing NESHAP to address
residual risk?
D. How will we develop proposed NESHAP to address residual risk?
E. When will the NESHAP be proposed and promulgated?
III. What is the purpose of this ANPRM?
IV. What data are in the ANPRM data sets for each source category?
V. What are we specifically seeking comment on?
VI. How may I access the data for a specific source category?
VII. How do I submit suggested data corrections?
VIII. What additional steps are expected after EPA reviews the
comments received?

I. Background

Section 112 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) establishes a two-stage
regulatory process to address emissions of hazardous air pollutants
(HAP) from stationary sources. In the first stage, after EPA has
identified categories of sources emitting one or more of the HAP listed
in CAA section 112(b), section 112(d) of the CAA calls for promulgation
of technology-based emission standards for those sources. For ``major
sources'' that emit or have the potential to emit 10 tons per year or
more of any single HAP or 25 tons per year or more of any combination
of HAP, these technology-based standards must reflect the maximum
reductions of HAP achievable (after considering cost, energy
requirements, and non-air health and environmental impacts). These
technology based standards are commonly referred to as MACT standards.
Between 1993 and 2004, EPA published 96 MACT standards (or NESHAP)
covering 174 source categories. In this first stage, the focus was on
ensuring reductions through available technologies. CAA Section
112(d)(6) requires EPA to review these emission standards and to revise
them ``as necessary (taking into account developments in practices,
processes, and control technologies)'' no less frequently than every 8
years.
The second stage in standard-setting focuses on reducing any
remaining ``residual'' risk according to CAA section 112(f). This
provision requires, first, that EPA prepare a Report to Congress
discussing (among other things) methods of calculating risk posed (or
potentially posed) by sources after implementation of the MACT
standards, the public health significance of those risks, the means and
costs of controlling them, actual health effects to persons in
proximity of emitting sources, and recommendations as to legislation
regarding such remaining risk. EPA prepared and submitted this report
(Residual Risk Report to Congress, EPA-453/R-99-001) in March 1999.
Congress did not act in response to the report, thereby triggering
EPA's obligation under CAA section 112(f)(2) to analyze and address
residual risk.
Section 112(f)(2) of the CAA then directs EPA to assess the risk
remaining (residual risk) after the application of the MACT standards
and promulgate more stringent standards for a category or subcategory
of sources subject to MACT standards if promulgation of such standards
is necessary to protect public health with an ample margin of safety or
to prevent (taking into consideration various factors) adverse
environmental effects. The standards to be promulgated under this
subsection must ``provide an ample margin of safety to protect public
health in accordance with this section (as in effect before the date of
enactment of the CAA Amendments of 1990), unless the Administrator
determines that a more stringent standard is necessary to prevent,
taking into consideration costs, energy, safety, and other relevant
factors, an adverse environmental impact.'' Section 112(f)(2) of the
CAA expressly preserves our use of a two-step process for developing
standards to address any residual risk and our interpretation of
``ample margin of safety'' developed in the ``National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Benzene Emissions from Maleic
Anhydride Plants, Ethylbenzene/Styrene Plants, Benzene Storage Vessels,
Benzene Equipment Leaks, and Coke By-Product Recovery Plants'' (Benzene
NESHAP) (54 FR 38044, September 14, 1989).
To date, EPA has conducted CAA 112(d)(6) technology reviews and
promulgated residual risk standards for eight (Halogenated Solvents
will be promulgated in April 2007) individual NESHAP and their
associated source categories. In an effort to streamline this process
for the remaining source categories, EPA plans to address residual risk
and perform a technology review for several source categories in one
combined effort. While the standard review and development process will
be streamlined, each source category will be assessed independently and
decisions on the level of any standards will be made individually for
each source category. The first set of MACT source categories for which
this streamlined process will be undertaken includes the 50 source
categories listed in Table 2, all of which have MACT compliance dates
of 2002 and earlier. (Except for the Chemical Recovery Combustion
Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp
Mills source category, which has a compliance date of January 2004,
these facilities are believed to be in compliance with MACT as of 2002,
so the NEI reflects their post-MACT compliance emissions.) This action
is referred to as Phase II of the Risk and Technology Review (RTR)
process (where the first eight individual NESHAP comprise Phase I).
Other MACT standards will be reviewed in the future. While the initial
phases of data compilation and EPA internal review processes have been
completed for each of the 50 source categories included in RTR Phase
II, the source categories have been divided into smaller groups to ease
the burden on public commenters and EPA's review of public comments and
the rulemaking processes. Table 2 shows the source categories EPA
anticipates including in each group of the RTR Phase II.

Table 2.--Source Categories and Corresponding NAICS and MACT Codes Included in Risk and Technology Review Phase
II
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RTR Phase II group Source category name NAICS codes MACT code
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.......................................... Acetal Resins Production........... 325211 1301
Hydrogen Fluoride Production....... 325120 1409
Group I Polymers and Resins:
Butyl Rubber Production......... 325212 1307
Ethylene-Propylene Rubber 325212 1313
Production.
Polysulfide Rubber Production... 325212 1332
Neoprene Production............. 325212 1320
Group II Polymers and Resins:

[[Page 14737]]

Epoxy Resins Production......... 325211 1312
Non-Nylon Polyamides Production. 325211 1322
2.......................................... Mineral Wool Production............ 327993 409
Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework. 336411 701
Marine Tank Vessel Loading......... 4883 603
Natural Gas Transmission & Storage. 486210 504
Oil and Natural Gas Production..... 211 501
Petroleum Refineries............... 32411 503
Pharmaceuticals Production......... 3254 1201
Group I Polymers and Resins:
Epichlorohydrin Elastomers 325212 1311
Production.
Hypalon(TM) Production.......... 325212 1315
Nitrile Butadiene Rubber 325212 1321
Production.
Polybutadiene Rubber Production. 325212 1325
Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and 325212 1339
Latex Production.
Group IV Polymers and Resins:
Acrylic-Butadiene-Styrene 325211 1302
Production.
2.......................................... Group IV Polymers and Resins:
Methyl Methacrylate- 325211 1317
Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene
Production.
Methyl Methacrylate-Butadiene- 325211 1318
Styrene Production.
Nitrile Resins Production....... 325211 1342
Polyethylene Terephthalate 325211 1328
Production.
Polystyrene Production.......... 325211 1331
Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production 325211 1338
Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants.. 331312 201
Printing and Publishing Industry... 32311 714
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair....... 336611 715
Other...................................... Acrylic/Modacrylic Fibers.......... 325222 1001
Chromium Electroplating:
Chromic Acid Anodizing.......... 332813 1607
Decorative Chromium 332813 1610
Electroplating.
Hard Chromium Electroplating.... 332813 1615
Ferroalloys Production............. 331112 304
Flexible Polyurethane Foam......... 326150 1314
Other...................................... Kraft, Sulfite, Semi-chemical, Soda
Pulping Processes and Mechanical,
Secondary Fiber, and Non-wood
Pulping Processes and Papermaking
Systems:
Pulp and Paper Production....... 3221 1626-1
Chemical Recovery Combustion
Sources at Kraft, Soda, Sulfite,
and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp
Mills:
Pulp and Paper Production....... 3221 1626-2
Off-site Waste and Recovery........ 562 806
Phosphate Fertilizer Production.... 325312 1410
Phosphoric Acid Manufacturing...... 325312 1411
Polycarbonates Production.......... 325199 1326
Polyether Polyols Production....... 325199 1625
Portland Cement Manufacturing...... 3273 410
Primary Lead Smelting.............. 331419 204
Publicly Owned Treatment Works..... 221320 803
Secondary Aluminum Production...... 331314 202
Secondary Lead Smelting............ 331492 205
Steel Pickling-HCl Process......... 331111 310
Wood Furniture Manufacturing....... 337122 716
Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing...... 327993 412
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This ANPRM addresses only the 22 source categories included in
Group 2. As initial analyses for each source category included in Group
1 of the RTR Phase II indicate that estimated health risks to the
individual most exposed to emissions from a facility in the source
category meet levels the Agency considers to be without appreciable
health risk and it is improbable that these source categories emit
pollutants that would cause adverse environmental effects, we plan to
publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register
for the 8 source categories in Group 1 without previously issuing an
ANPRM. The remaining source categories were split into two groups.
Group 2 is generally comprised of source categories with earlier
deadlines, fewer multipathway concerns, and categories that the Agency
believes will require fewer resources to complete. The source
categories in the other group generally have later deadlines and more
multipathway concerns. Additional notices will be published addressing
the other source categories in the future.

II. What approach is EPA taking for the Risk and Technology Review?

A. What is the approach we are taking to address residual risk for the
Group 2 source categories?

We plan to follow the same general process in revising NESHAP to
address residual risk for each of Group 2 source categories listed in
the table above. This

[[Page 14738]]

general approach includes the following primary steps:
1. Compile and review (and update with facility-specific data
collected by EPA in some cases) readily available source category
emissions data from the 2002 NEI.
2. For each group of source categories, conduct preliminary
evaluations to identify key HAP and data anomalies.
3. Make emissions and other modeling input data, along with a list
of the identified key HAP and data anomalies, available for public
comment through an ANPRM.
4. Reconcile and update emissions and other modeling input data,
based on comments received, and conduct a risk assessment for each
category.
5. Develop and propose CAA section 112(f)(2) residual risk and CAA
section 112(d)(6) technology review standard(s) as appropriate.
6. Address comments from the proposal(s) and promulgate CAA section
112(f)(2) residual risk and CAA 112(d)(6) technology standard(s), where
necessary.
An independent scientific peer consultation is currently underway
to review the approach for assessing residual risk for the source
categories included in the RTR Phase II. This peer consultation will be
conducted by a panel of EPA's Science Advisory Board, and will focus
on: (1) The source of emissions and other modeling data and the
approach for refining this data, (2) the analytical approach for
quantifying and characterizing human and environmental exposures and
risks, and (3) the types of results that will be generated and the
format for the characterization of assessment results.
The process outlined above for the 22 source categories included in
Group 2 of the RTR Phase II is described in more detail in the
following discussion.

B. What data were compiled and reviewed?

In the first step of this process, we used the 2002 NEI Final
Version 1 (made publicly available on February 26, 2006) as a starting
point and compiled emissions information for each source category and
performed an internal engineering review of these data (referred to
hereafter as ``initial NEI data''). The primary data attributes
evaluated in this review included: (1) Facility representation in each
source category (i.e., we ensured that source categories accurately
included facilities making the products characteristic of the source
categories), and (2) appropriateness of facility emissions, in both the
inclusion of the appropriate HAP, and in the magnitude of those HAP
emissions. In cases where better data were known to exist for a
particular source category, that information was integrated into the
data set for that source category. These reviewed and integrated data
sets for each source category are referred to hereafter as the ``ANPRM
data sets.''

C. What are the steps planned before proposing NESHAP to address
residual risk?

In this ANPRM, we are seeking public review and comment on the
emissions and other model input data included in the ANPRM data sets
for the source categories included in Group 2 of the RTR Phase II.
These source categories are listed in Table 1. We will evaluate the
comments and data corrections received in response to this ANPRM and
update the data for the source categories in Group 2, as appropriate.
In accordance with the methodologies described in the Residual Risk
Report to Congress, we will then use the revised model input data sets
for these source categories (referred to as the notice of proposed
rulemaking, or NPRM, data sets) in an analysis of the inhalation risks.
The Human Exposure Model (Community and Sector HEM-3 version 1.1.0)
will be used to perform this modeling. The HEM-3 model performs three
main operations: dispersion modeling, estimation of population
exposure, and estimation of human health risks. The dispersion model
used by HEM-3 is AERMOD, which is one of EPA's preferred models for
assessing pollutant concentrations from industrial facilities.\1\ We
will also perform a screening assessment of potential adverse
environmental effects using these updated data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ Environmental Protection Agency. Revision to the Guideline
on Air Quality Models: Adoption of a Preferred General Purpose (Flat
and Complex Terrain) Dispersion Model and Other Revisions (70 FR
68218, November 9, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

We will also evaluate the NPRM data sets for each of the 22 source
categories for potential non-inhalation human health risks,
specifically through the presence of emissions of any persistent and
bioaccumulative (PB) HAP, all of which are listed in Table 3 below.\2\
For source categories that also carry a potential for non-inhalation
human health risks, in addition to analyses to estimate risks from
inhalation of emissions, we will also estimate risks using refined
models capable of addressing multi-pathway exposures (i.e., exposures
due to ingestion or dermal exposures). The models selected for this
exercise (primarily, we will use the EPA's Total Risk Integrated
Modeling system, or TRIM, a refined multi-pathway pollutant fate and
transport model) will also be used to produce estimates of pollutant
concentrations in the surrounding environment, which will be used in
the quantitative assessment of environmental risks from these
chemicals. The 22 source categories are not expected to have multi-
pathway issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ Environmental Protection Agency. Air Toxics Risk Assessment
Reference Library, Volume I. EPA-453K-04-001A.
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/fera/risk_atra_vol1.html.

Table 3.--Persistent and Bioaccumulative Hazardous Air Pollutants (PB HAP)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cadmium compounds.................... Chlordane.............. Chlorinated dibenzodioxins and furans
DDE.................................. Heptachlor............. Hexachlorocyclohexane (all isomers)
Hexachlorobenzene.................... Lead compounds......... Mercury compounds
Methoxychlor......................... Polychlorinated Polycyclic Organic Matter (POM)
biphenyls.
Toxaphene............................ Trifluralin............ ................................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. How will we develop proposed NESHAP to address residual risk?

We will provide a more detailed discussion of the residual risk
methodology in the Group 2 NPRM. Therefore, after the risk assessments
for Group 2 are complete, the results will be examined to determine
whether any source category meets certain criteria where the Agency
considers the risk to not be a problem (``low risk''). The ``low risk''
criteria we intend to consider include: Lifetime cancer risk to the
individual most exposed is less than 1-in-1 million, chronic non-cancer
risk to

[[Page 14739]]

the individual most exposed is less than a target-organ-specific hazard
index of 1, air concentrations estimated for acute exposures scenarios
are less than health-protective reference levels, and there is no
potential for significant and widespread adverse environmental effect.
For Group 2 source categories in which all facilities meet these
``low risk'' criteria, EPA will not propose further regulation under
CAA section 112(f). For source categories that are not determined to be
low risk, a two-step standard development process will be applied,
consistent with CAA section 112(f) and with our previously articulated
approach for developing NESHAP pursuant to CAA section 112(f). This
approach was described in the final NESHAP addressing residual risk for
coke ovens (58 FR 57898, October 27, 1993).
In the first step of this approach, modeled source category risks
will be evaluated to determine if they are ``acceptable.'' The term
``acceptable,'' in reference to residual risks is not specifically
defined in the CAA, but CAA section 112(f)(2) refers positively to the
interpretation of this term in the Benzene NESHAP (54 FR 38044,
September 14, 1989).
The preamble to the Benzene NESHAP (54 FR 38044, September 14,
1989) stated that a lifetime maximum individual excess cancer risk of
approximately 100-in-1 million ``should ordinarily be the upper-end of
the range of acceptability.'' However, this is not a rigid line of
acceptability, and other factors will be considered, such as the number
of people exposed at various risk levels, the overall incidence of
cancer and other serious health effects, assumptions and uncertainties
associated with the risk analysis (including the 70 year exposure
assumption), and the weight of evidence for human health effects.
In the second step of this standard development process, we will
develop risk-reduction regulatory alternatives and decide upon the
level of the standard for each source category, considering the
requirements necessary to provide an ample margin of safety to protect
human health, as required by CAA section 112(f)(2). To develop the
regulatory alternatives, we will conduct various analyses, including an
assessment of the impacts of each regulatory alternative. The impacts
will include HAP emission reductions, other environmental impacts,
costs, economics, small business impacts, reduction in maximum risks to
individuals most exposed, reductions in chronic and acute risks to
populations at various risk levels, and reductions in cancer incidence.
We will assess these alternatives, decide upon the level of the
standard, and publish a NPRM in the Federal Register to propose any
regulatory changes for the individual standards codified in 40 CFR part
63 for each source category.
As we undertake these rulemaking proposals, we will also consider
developments in pollution control in each source category and the costs
of potentially stricter standards reflecting those developments, to
fulfill the requirements of CAA section 112(d)(6). Where there have
been developments in practices, processes, and control technologies, we
will consider relevant factors, such as costs, potential emissions
reductions, and health and environmental risk in a determination of
what, if any, further controls are necessary. Where appropriate, we
will develop regulatory alternatives, assess the impacts of those
alternatives, and decide upon the level of the standard(s). We plan to
propose any CAA section 112(d)(6) regulatory changes for the individual
standards codified in 40 CFR part 63 for each source category in the
same Federal Register notice proposing action addressing residual risk.

E. When will the NESHAP be proposed and promulgated?

Our current goal is to propose the decisions resulting from both
CAA section 112(f) (residual risk) and CAA section 112(d)(6)
(technology review) efforts, including the proposal of any standards
for each of the 21 source categories in Group 2, in the Fall of 2007.
Proposal of any standards for the petroleum refineries source category
will occur by the court-ordered deadline of August 22, 2007. In
addition to proposing any new residual risk or technology-based
standards, we will announce any decisions not to promulgate residual
risk standards for ``low risk'' source categories or source categories
for which the current standards protect public health with an ample
margin of safety and any decisions not to promulgate additional
technology-based standards.
After the close of the comment period on the proposed standard(s),
we will review and perform any analyses and data gathering necessary to
address the comments, prepare responses, and make changes to the
proposed standards, as necessary. We anticipate the final standards
will be published in the Federal Register in the summer of 2008.

III. What is the purpose of this ANPRM?

The primary purpose of today's ANPRM is to request public comments
on the emissions and other model input data included in the ANPRM data
sets for the 22 source categories included in Group 2 of the RTR Phase
II. These data are provided in an updatable form on the RTR Web page at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. We provide detail
in section VII below on how to submit updates and corrections to this
information. Following review of comments received, we will update the
data as appropriate, and model to generate estimates of residual risk
that we will use as the basis for our proposed decisions on whether to
develop standards to address residual risk for each source category.
Section V lists the general items for which we are seeking comment
for all source categories. In addition, we note information unique to
each source category for which we are requesting technical corrections
or updates in the source category specific sections within section IV
of this ANPRM. We note that emissions data cannot be withheld from
disclosure as CBI pursuant to section 1905 of title 18 of the United
States Code. EPA's policy regarding the categories of information that
it considers to be ``emissions data'' is set forth in a Federal
Register notice dated February 14, 1991 (56 FR 7042). A copy of that
notice has been placed in the docket.

IV. What data are in the ANPRM data sets for each source category?

As mentioned in Section II of this ANPRM, the 2002 NEI is the
primary data source used in creating the ANPRM data sets for each
source category. The data extracted from the NEI for inclusion in the
ANPRM data sets included general facility information, such as company
name, plant name, and facility identification codes; emissions data,
including speciated HAP emissions data; emissions release
characteristics, including stack height, stack diameter, and the
emissions stream exit temperature and velocity; and location
information, including the latitude/longitude coordinates of emissions
release locations. For more information on the 2002 NEI, please visit
our 2002 NEI Web page at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2002inventory.html.
For the most part, the emissions values in the ANPRM data set
represent actual emission levels. Where actual emissions data is not
already included,

[[Page 14740]]

we request that commenters provide such data.
Due to the high uncertainty of the dioxin/furan emissions
information submitted during the inventory development process, dioxin/
furan emissions were not included in the 2002 NEI, and no emissions of
these compounds are included in the ANPRM data sets. As we update the
ANPRM data set, we will include dioxin/furan emissions, based on the
best information available to EPA at that time. These data may include
information EPA has gathered on dioxin and dioxin-like compounds. The
EPA National Center for Environmental Assessment Web site,
http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=159286,
contains links to these data.
In creating the ANPRM data sets for each source category, we
started with the February 2006 version of the 2002 NEI. We first
conducted a detailed review of the facilities that were included in the
NEI and added or removed facilities to make the data as representative
of the overall source category as possible. We then reviewed emissions,
release characteristics, and other model input data.
We began by retrieving all records in the 2002 NEI based solely on
MACT source category designations, which are fields in the NEI that
identify the MACT source category that applies to each emission point.
This MACT source category is assigned by a variety of methods. In some
cases, the State or local agency that provided the data to EPA
identified the MACT category. Since State and local agencies are aware
of the regulations that apply to facilities, we have high confidence in
MACT category designations provided by a State or local agency. In
other cases, EPA staff responsible for developing the MACT standards
provided input to populate the MACT source category code fields. As
these individuals have knowledge of the source category for which they
are accessing and using the NEI data, the confidence in these
designations is also high. Most of the MACT source category code
designations, however, are assigned based on Standard Industrial
Classification (SIC), NAICS, or Source Classification Code (SCC)
defaults. There is often considerable uncertainty associated with these
designations.
One of the first things we reviewed in the NEI data was the list of
facilities included for each source category. For some source
categories, we are reasonably confident that we know the names of the
facilities and their exact locations. In these cases, we compared the
``known'' lists of facilities to the facilities in the NEI. We removed
the MACT source category designation for facilities not on the known
list. If facilities on the known lists were not in the data for the
source categories, we searched the NEI for these facilities. Quite
often, they were in the 2002 NEI, but had different, and presumably
incorrect, MACT source category designations. These facilities were
added to the data set for the category and the MACT source category
codes were re-designated accordingly.
For large facilities with multiple processes that represent
multiple MACT source categories, it was not always straightforward to
separate the processes by source category. In these cases, we used a
variety of approaches to separate the processes and emission points
into source categories. Examples of the criteria used to separate
processes and emissions into source categories include SCC, SIC codes,
and pollutants emitted. Situations where such source category
separation decisions were made are highlighted in the source-category
discussions later in this section and detailed in the files available
for download on the RTR Web page at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/
rtrpg.html. We are asking specifically for comment on how we separated
processes and emission points by source category at these large
integrated facilities.
For categories with large numbers of facilities for which we do not
have complete lists of known facilities, we conducted more general
evaluations of the facilities in the data sets. These evaluations
included examining the company names, SIC, NAICS, and SCC, and adding
or removing facilities based on these criteria.
We will be evaluating residual risk for all facilities and emission
sources that are in the 22 source categories included in Group 2 of the
RTR Phase II. In some instances, the ANPRM data sets may include
emission points that are part of the source category but are not
subject to the MACT standard for that source category. Emissions from
these sources will be considered in our future regulatory decisions. In
addition, the ANPRM data sets, for most source categories, include all
major and area sources (facilities) in the 2002 NEI that have processes
related to the specific source category.
After finalizing the facility lists for each source category, we
conducted a general review of the emissions and other data included in
the ANPRM data sets to identify data anomalies that could affect the
risk estimates. With a few exceptions, we did not change the data or
include additional data. For the following source categories, the 2002
NEI was supplemented with additional data provided by industry to
create the ANPRM data sets:
Petroleum Refineries
Shipbuilding and Ship Repair
Source categories regulated by the Group I Polymers and Resins MACT:
? Epichlorohydrin Elastomers Production
? HypalonTM Production
? Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production
? Polybutadiene Rubber Production
? Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and Latex Production
The addition of these data, as well as other data changes made, are
described in the source-category specific sections below. We note that
because these changes are included in the ANPRM data sets, these data
sets do not exactly match the February 2006 version of the 2002 NEI
data available on our NEI Web site--http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/
2002inventory.html. When comments are received via this ANPRM and
incorporated into the source category-specific ANPRM data sets, these
revisions will then also be incorporated into the 2002 NEI and made
publicly available through the NEI Web site in Final Version 2.1.
Following are sections discussing the data for individual source
categories. These discussions provide an overview of the source
category, a brief summary of the ANPRM data sets, and a mention of the
types of major anomalies associated with the data. Summary reports for
each of the source categories, which contain considerable detail on the
information summarized below, including the carcinogenic HAP and HAP
with adverse health effects other than cancer, are available on the RTR
Web page at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. We especially
encourage you to review the specific anomalies raised in these reports
and to provide data to help reduce these anomalies.
1. Mineral Wool Production
The mineral wool production source category includes facilities
that produce mineral wool, which is a fibrous, glassy substance made
from natural rock (such as basalt), blast furnace slag, or other
similar materials and consisting of silicate fibers. In the mineral
wool manufacturing process, rock and/or blast furnace slag and other
raw materials (e.g., gravel) are melted in a furnace (cupola) using
coke as fuel. The molten material is then formed into fiber. Mineral
wool is manufactured as either a ``bonded'' product that

[[Page 14741]]

incorporates a binder to increase structural rigidity or a less rigid
``nonbonded'' product. Emission sources from mineral wool manufacturing
facilities include the cupola furnace where the mineral charge is
melted; a blow chamber, in which air or a binder is drawn over the
fibers, forming them into a screen; a curing oven that bonds the fibers
(for bonded products); and a cooling oven. The primary HAP expected to
be emitted during the mineral wool manufacturing process are metals,
including antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, manganese,
nickel, lead, and selenium that are emitted from the cupola, and
gaseous HAP, including formaldehyde, carbonyl sulfide, and phenol, that
result from the vaporization of the binder.
The ANPRM data set for this source category includes information
for 12 facilities, 11 of which are classified as major sources in the
NEI. Based on our previous estimates of the number of facilities in the
mineral wool source category, this data set represents between 75 and
90 percent of the industry. The HAP emitted in largest quantities from
these facilities is carbonyl sulfide, which accounts for over 84
percent of the total HAP emissions by mass from the data set.
Formaldehyde, triethylamine, and phenol are also emitted in large
quantities. Several PB HAP are reported in the data set for the mineral
wool manufacturing source category, including lead, cadmium, and
mercury compounds.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category include the HAP emitted and the speciation of chromium and
mercury emissions. Some HAP expected (e.g., lead, manganese, cadmium,
chromium, nickel, etc.) are not included for all the facilities in the
data set, and some that are not expected (e.g., benzene and
triethylamine) are reported from a few facilities.
2. Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Facilities
The aerospace manufacturing and rework source category includes all
facilities that manufacture aerospace vehicles and/or vehicle
components and all facilities that rework or repair these items. An
aerospace vehicle or component is any fabricated, processed, or
assembled set of parts or complete unit of any aircraft including, but
not limited to, airplanes, helicopters, missiles, rockets, and space
vehicles. Organic and inorganic HAP emissions in aerospace facilities
originate from cleaning, primer application, topcoat application, paint
stripping, chemical milling maskant application, and waste handling and
storage. The HAP expected to be emitted by aerospace facilities include
chromium, cadmium, methylene chloride, toluene, xylene, ethylene
glycol, and glycol ethers. For emissions reported generically as
``chromium'' or ``chromium and compounds,'' emissions are speciated for
this source category as 75 percent ``chromium (III) compounds'' and 25
percent ``chromium (VI) compounds.'' This speciation is based on source
category-specific information provided by the aerospace industry.
(Typically, a 66 percent ``chromium (III) compounds'' and 34 percent
``chromium (VI) compounds'' is used as a default speciation profile
based on the approach adopted by the 1996 National-Scale Air Toxics
Assessment, or NATA.) We encourage commenters to review this assumption
and provide site-specific chromium (VI) and chromium (III) data where
possible.
The ANPRM data set for the Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework
source category includes information for 301 facilities, 169 of which
are classified as major sources in the NEI. Based on our previous
estimates of the number of facilities in the aerospace source category,
the ANPRM data set includes data for about 10 percent of the industry.
Methyl chloroform, tetrachloroethylene, toluene, trichloroethylene, and
methylene chloride account for approximately 80 percent of the mass of
HAP emitted across the 301 facilities in the ANPRM dataset.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category include the number of facilities in the source category, the
HAP emitted, and the speciation of chromium. Some HAP expected to be
reported (chromium, nickel, and hexamethylene diisocyanate) are not
included for all the facilities in the data set.
3. Marine Tank Vessel Loading Operations
Marine tank vessel loading operations are facilities that load and
unload liquid commodities in bulk, such as crude oil, gasoline and
other fuels, and some chemicals and solvent mixtures. The cargo is
pumped from the terminal's large, above-ground storage tanks through a
network of pipes and into a storage compartment (tank) on the vessel.
Most marine tank vessel loading operations are associated with
petroleum refineries, synthetic organic chemical manufacturers, or are
independent terminals. The major HAP emission points for marine vessel
loading operations include open tank hatches and overhead vent systems.
Other possible emission points are hatch covers or domes, pressure-
vacuum relief valves, seals, and vents. Emissions may also occur during
ballasting (i.e., the process of drawing ballast as water into a cargo
hold). The primary HAP expected to be emitted from marine vessel
loading operations depend on the material being loaded, but are
generally expected to be benzene, hexane, toluene, xylene compounds,
ethyl benzene, and cumene.
The ANPRM data set for the marine tank vessel loading operations
source category includes information for 126 facilities, all of which
are classified as major sources in the NEI. Based on our previous
estimates of the number of facilities in this source category, the
ANPRM data set includes data for more than were expected to be subject
to the MACT (which was estimated to be 40 at time of the MACT
promulgation) and less than the estimated number of existing facilities
based on Army Corps of Engineers estimates (700). In the ANPRM data
set, the HAP emitted in largest quantities from these 126 sources are
hexane, methanol, toluene, xylene compounds, and benzene, which
collectively accounts for nearly 75 percent of the total HAP emitted.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category include the number of facilities in the source category and
the emission release parameters (of which nearly all are NEI default
values).
4. Natural Gas Transmission and Storage
The natural gas transmission and storage source category comprises
the pipelines, facilities, and equipment used to transport and store
natural gas products (hydrocarbon liquids and gases). Pipeline
transport of natural gas products is covered by this category to either
the point of custody transfer for the oil and natural gas production
source category or the point of delivery to the local distribution
company or final end user of the natural gas if no local distribution
company is present. Emissions of HAP from the natural gas transmission
and storage category come from glycol dehydration unit reboiler vents,
other process vents, storage vessels with flash emissions, pipeline
pigging and storage of pipeline pigging wastes, combustion sources, and
equipment leaks. The major HAP expected to be emitted by the natural
gas transmission and storage source category are hexane, toluene,
benzene, mixed xylenes, formaldehyde, and glycol ethers.

[[Page 14742]]

Our previous estimates identified seven natural gas transmission
and storage facilities that were major sources. The ANPRM data set for
the natural gas transmission and storage source category includes
information for 123 facilities, 78 of which are classified as major
sources in the NEI. In the ANPRM data set, the HAP emitted in largest
quantities from natural gas transmission and storage facilities are
hexane, toluene, benzene, and mixed xylenes and these emissions
collectively account for over 75 percent of the total HAP emissions
from this source category.
One major anomaly associated with the data set for this source
category is the number of facilities identified in the ANPRM data set
compared to the number of facilities previously identified for this
source category (i.e., there appear to be more facilities identified as
natural gas transmission and storage facilities in the ANPRM data set
than previously identified).
5. Oil and Natural Gas Production
The Oil and Natural Gas Production source category includes
facilities involved in the recovery and treatment of hydrocarbon
liquids and gases from oil and natural gas production wells. Components
of these facilities include glycol dehydration units, condensate tank
batteries, and other tanks and equipment present at natural gas
processing plants. The primary HAP emissions from oil and natural gas
production facilities occur via the glycol dehydration reboiler vents,
other process vents, storage vessels, and equipment leaks. The major
HAP expected to be emitted by the oil and natural gas production source
category are xylenes, toluene, hexane, and ethyl benzene.
The ANPRM data set for the oil and natural gas production source
category includes information for 2,824 facilities, of which 909
facilities are classified as major sources in the NEI. Our previous
estimates identified 440 major sources and 2,200 area sources. In the
ANPRM data set, the HAP emitted in the greatest amounts are carbonyl
sulfide, hexane, toluene, benzene, and xylenes formaldehyde, ethyl
benzene, ethylene glycol, and methanol. These HAP collectively account
for over 99 percent of the total HAP emissions for this source
category. There are twelve PB HAP reported in the data set for the Oil
and Natural Gas Production source category, including polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), lead, dibenzofuran, and cadmium.
For reported emissions of POM chemicals, emissions are grouped into
one of seven POM categories--POM 71002 (16-PAH, PAH total, POM); POM
72002 (2-Chloronaphthalene, 2-Methylnaphthalene, Acenaphthene,
Acenaphthylene, Anthracene, Benzo(c)phenanthrene, Benzo[e]Pyrene,
Benzo[g,h,i,]Perylene, Fluoranthene, Fluorene, Perylene, Phenanthrene,
Pyrene); POM 73002 (7,12-Dimethylbenz[a]Anthracene); POM 74002 (3-
Methylcholanthrene); POM 75002 (5-Methylchrysene, Benzo[a]Pyrene,
Dibenzo[a,h]Anthracene); POM 76002 (B[j]Fluoranthen, Benz[a]Anthracene,
Benzo[b]Fluoranthene, Benzo[k]Fluoranthene, Indeno[1,2,3-c,d]Pyrene);
and POM 77002 (Chrysene). We encourage commenters to provide data on
the individual chemical(s) that make up the POM.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category include the number of facilities in the source category, the
specific HAP emitted by individual facilities, and default plant
coordinates. The ANPRM data set contains over 2,800 facilities and this
number is more than expected. The ANPRM data set also contains
emissions of some HAP that are expected to be emitted from all
facilities in the category (e.g., xylenes, hexane, toluene, and ethyl
benzene), but are only emitted from a small percentage of facilities.
Conversely, the HAP with the largest quantity of emissions in the ANPRM
data set, carbonyl sulfide, is not expected to be emitted from
facilities in this source category. In addition, a significant
percentage (40 percent) of the coordinates in the ANPRM data set are
default coordinates.
6. Petroleum Refineries
Petroleum refineries are facilities engaged in refining and
producing products made from crude oil or unfinished petroleum
derivatives. EPA listed two separate Petroleum Refinery source
categories, both of which include any facility engaged in producing
gasoline, naphtha, kerosene, jet fuels, distillate fuel oils, residual
fuel oils, lubricants, or other products from crude oil or unfinished
petroleum derivatives. The Petroleum Refineries--Catalytic Cracking
(Fluid and Other) Units, Catalytic Reforming Units, and Sulfur Plant
Units source category includes the following process units: catalytic
cracking (fluid and other) units, catalytic reforming units, and sulfur
plant units (MACT II). The second source category, Petroleum
Refineries--Other Sources Not Distinctly Listed, includes the process
units not listed in the first category including, but not limited to,
thermal cracking, vacuum distillation, crude distillation,
hydrotreating, hydrorefining, isomerization, polymerization, lube oil
processing, and hydrogen production (MACT I).
Because the MACT standard for the ``Other Sources Not Distinctly
Listed'' source category (40 CFR part 63, subpart UU) was promulgated
first (60 FR 43244, August 18, 1995), it is commonly referred to as
Petroleum Refineries MACT I. Only the units in the ``Other Sources Not
Distinctly Listed'' category, and regulated by the MACT 1 standards,
are being addressed in RTR Phase II. These units include emissions
sources classified under SIC 2911 located at petroleum refineries,
including: petroleum refinery process units, storage vessels, transfer
racks, wastewater streams, and equipment leaks. The units and emissions
associated with catalytic cracking, catalytic reforming, and sulfur
plants, which are all regulated by MACT 2 standards, will be
investigated in future RTR efforts.
The specific HAP emitted by petroleum refineries varies by facility
and process operations but can include a variety of organic and
inorganic compounds and metals. Emissions originate from various
process vents, storage vessels, wastewater streams, loading racks,
marine tank vessel loading operations, and equipment leaks associated
with refining facilities. Process vents, wastewater streams, and
storage vessels generally emit organic HAP. The primary HAP expected to
be emitted from the MACT 1 petroleum refining sources include benzene,
toluene, and ethyl benzene, but can also include acetaldehyde,
formaldehyde, hexane, phenol, xylene, carbonyl sulfide, carbon
disulfide, hydrogen chloride, chlorine and other HAP.
The ANPRM dataset for this source category contains 175 refineries,
of which 124 are classified as major sources. In conjunction with
previous efforts for this source category, the industry had collected
and submitted up-to-date benzene emissions data for 23 refineries. The
industry and EPA consider these data to be the most accurate benzene
emissions data available for petroleum refineries. For these 23
refineries, EPA replaced all benzene emissions data in the NEI with
these updated industry data. The emissions of other HAP that were in
the NEI for these 23 refineries were not removed. For the purpose of
these analyses, the ANPRM data set for these 23 facilities was kept
separate from the ANPRM data set for the remaining 152 refineries.

[[Page 14743]]

Organic chemicals account for the majority of the total mass of HAP
emitted by petroleum refinery sources, with toluene, hexane, mixed and
individual isomers of xylenes, benzene, methanol, methyl tert-butyl
ether, and ethyl benzene accounting for about 90 percent of the HAP
mass emitted across the both data sets. Of the 152 refineries for which
industry did not supply benzene emissions data, benzene emissions were
reported for 137 refineries. A range of PB HAP emissions are reported
in the ANPRM datasets, including various PAH and several metals
(including lead and lead compounds, cadmium and cadmium compounds,
mercury and mercury compounds).
For reported emissions of POM chemicals, emissions are grouped into
one of seven POM categories. We encourage commenters to provide the
individual chemical(s) that make up the POM.
The major anomalies associated with the data sets for this source
category include specific HAP emitted by individual facilities, along
with release characteristics and coordinates for those refineries for
which industry did not provide updated data. The data sets contain
emissions of several metal HAP, which are expected to be more likely to
be emitted from MACT 2 sources, not MACT 1. Also, it appears that the
benzene emissions for the 23 facilities for which the industry supplied
new data are significantly higher than the benzene emissions in the NEI
for the other refineries.
Nearly all of the emissions release parameters (71 percent of stack
height, 96 percent of stack diameter, 97 percent of emissions exit
temperature, and 97 percent of emissions exit velocity values) for the
refineries for which no new data were provided are default values in
the NEI and the ANPRM data set. Finally, a significant percentage (40
percent) of the coordinates in the data set for which new data were not
provided are defaulted, some based on county or zip code centroids.
7. Pharmaceutical Manufacturing
The pharmaceutical manufacturing process consists of chemical
production operations that produce drugs and medication. These
operations include chemical synthesis (deriving a drug's active
ingredient) and chemical formulation (producing a drug in its final
form). During pharmaceutical manufacturing operations, HAP emissions
can occur from breathing and withdrawal losses from chemical storage
tanks, venting of process vessels, leaks from piping and equipment used
to transfer HAP compounds (equipment leaks), and volatilization of HAP
from wastewater streams. While a wide variety of HAP can be emitted
from pharmaceutical manufacturing processes, expected HAP include
methylene chloride, methanol, N,N-dimethylformamide, toluene and
hydrochloric acid. When the NESHAP for this category was finalized in
1998, EPA estimated that there were approximately 101 pharmaceutical
manufacturing operations subject to the MACT regulations.
The ANPRM data set for pharmaceutical manufacturing includes 222
facilities, 107 of which are classified as major sources in the NEI.
The HAP emitted in largest quantities from these sources are methanol,
methylene chloride, and toluene. Emissions of these three HAP account
for over 80 percent of the mass of all HAP emitted across all 222
facilities. PB HAP emissions in the ANPRM data set for the
Pharmaceutical Manufacturing source category include lead, mercury, and
cadmium compounds as well as a range of PAH.
For reported emissions of POM chemicals, emissions are grouped into
of one of seven POM categories. We encourage commenters to provide the
individual chemical(s) that make up the POM.
For emissions reported generically as ``chromium'' or ``chromium
and compounds,'' emissions are speciated for this source category as 66
percent ``chromium (III) compounds'' and 34 percent ``chromium (VI)
compounds.'' We encourage commenters to review this assumption and
provide specific chromium (VI) and chromium (III) data where possible.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category are related to the HAP emitted. While methylene chloride, NN-
dimethylformamide, toluene, and hydrochloric acid are expected to be
emitted by facilities in this source category, these emissions were not
reported for many of the facilities. Also, HAP not expected to be
emitted from this source category (e.g., ethylene oxide, p-dioxane,
naphthalene, ethylene dichloride, arsenic, hydrazine, POM, and chromium
(IV) compounds) are reported for eight or fewer facilities.
8. Epichlorohydrin Elastomers Production
Epichlorohydrin elastomers are widely used in the automotive
industry. The main epichlorohydrin elastomers are polyepichlorohydrin,
epi-ethylene oxide (EO) copolymer, epi-allyl glycidyl ether (AGE)
copolymer, and epi-EO-AGE terpolymer. Sources of HAP emissions for the
Epichlorohydrin Elastomer source category include raw material storage
vessels, front-end process vents, back-end process operations,
wastewater operations, and equipment leaks. The majority of the
emissions come from equipment leaks. The process ``front-end'' includes
pre-polymerization, reaction, stripping, and material recovery
operations; and the process ``back-end'' includes all operations after
stripping (predominately drying and finishing). The primary HAP emitted
during production are epichlorohydrin and toluene.
The ANPRM data set for the Epichlorohydrin source category includes
information for one facility, which is classified as a major source in
the NEI. Our previous estimate of the number of facilities in the
Epichlorohydrin source category was also one, therefore we believe the
ANPRM data set includes data for the entire industry. In conjunction
with previous efforts for this source category, the industry had
collected and submitted up-to-date emissions and emissions release
characteristic data for this facility. The industry and EPA consider
these data to be the most accurate emissions and emissions release
characteristic data available for the epichlorohydrin elastomers
production processes at this facility. EPA replaced all epichlorohydrin
elastomers production emissions and emissions release characteristic
data in the NEI with the updated industry data for this facility. In
the ANPRM data set, toluene is emitted in the greatest quantity and
accounts for about 99 percent of the total emissions.
9. HypalonTM Production
HypalonTM, or chlorosulfonated polyethylene, is a
synthetic rubber produced by reacting polyethylene with chloric and
sulfur dioxide, transforming the thermoplastic polyethylene into a
vulcanized elastomer. The reaction is conducted in a solvent reaction
medium containing carbon tetrachloride. Sources of HAP emissions
include raw material storage vessels, front-end process vents, back-end
process operations, and equipment leaks. The majority of the emissions
come from front-end process vents. The process ``front-end'' includes
pre-polymerization, reaction, stripping, and material recovery
operations; and the process ``back-end'' includes all operations after
stripping (predominately drying and finishing). The primary HAP emitted
during production are carbon tetrachloride and chloroform.

[[Page 14744]]

The ANPRM data set for the HypalonTM resins source
category includes information for one facility, which is classified as
a major source in the NEI. Our previous estimate of the number of
facilities in the HypalonTM source category was also one,
therefore we believe the ANPRM data set includes data for the entire
industry. In conjunction with previous efforts for this source
category, the industry had collected and submitted up-to-date emissions
and emissions release characteristic data for this facility. The
industry and EPA consider these data to be the most accurate emissions
and emissions release characteristic data available for the
HypalonTM production processes at this facility. EPA
replaced all HypalonTM production emissions and emissions
release characteristic data in the NEI with the updated industry data
for this facility.
In the ANPRM data set, carbon tetrachloride and chloroform are emitted
in the greatest amounts and account for nearly all of the emissions.
10. Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production
Nitrile butadiene rubber is a copolymer of 1,3-butadiene and
acrylonitrile, and the Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production source
category includes any facility that polymerizes 1,3-butadiene and
acrylonitrile. Depending on its specific composition, nitrile butadiene
rubber can be resistant to oil and chemicals, a property that
facilitates its use in disposable gloves, hoses, seals, and a variety
of automotive applications. The drying and finishing steps that make up
the back-end processes are significant sources of HAP emissions. Other
sources of HAP emissions include raw material storage vessels, front-
end process vents, wastewater operations, and equipment leaks. The
primary HAP emitted during production are acrylonitrile, 1,3-butadiene,
and styrene.
The ANPRM data set for the Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production
source category includes five facilities, two of which are classified
as major sources. Based on our previous estimates of the number of
facilities in the source category, the ANPRM data set includes data for
the entire industry. In conjunction with previous efforts for this
source category, the industry had collected and submitted up-to-date
emissions and emissions release characteristic data for three of these
five facilities. The industry and EPA consider these data to be the
most accurate emissions and emissions release characteristic data
available for the nitrile butadiene rubber production processes at
these facilities. For these three facilities, EPA replaced all nitrile
butadiene rubber production emissions and emissions release
characteristic data in the NEI with these updated industry data.
In the ANPRM data set, styrene, 1,3-butadiene, and acrylonitrile
are emitted in the largest quantities, accounting for 42 percent, 21
percent, and 33 percent of the total source category emissions,
respectively.
A major anomaly associated with the data set for this source
category is that one HAP expected to be reported by each facility (1,3-
butadiene) is not included in the data for all the facilities.
11. Polybutadiene Rubber Production
Polybutadiene rubber is a homopolymer of 1,3-butadiene, and the
Polybutadiene Rubber Production source category includes any facility
that polymerizes 1,3-butadiene. Most of the polybutadiene rubber
manufactured in the United States is used in the production of tires in
the construction of the tread and sidewalls. Sources of HAP emissions
include raw material storage vessels, front-end process vents, back-end
process operations, wastewater operations, and equipment leaks. The
majority of the emissions come from back-end process operations, which
are predominately drying and finishing. The primary HAP emitted during
production include hexane, 1,3-butadiene, styrene, and toluene.
The ANPRM data set for the Polybutadiene Rubber Production source
category includes information for five facilities, each of which are
classified as major sources in the NEI. Based on our previous estimates
of the number of facilities in the Polybutadiene Rubber Production
source category, the ANPRM data set includes data for the entire
industry. In conjunction with previous efforts for this source
category, the industry had collected and submitted up-to-date emissions
and emissions release characteristic data for each of these five
facilities. The industry and EPA consider these data to be the most
accurate emissions and emissions release characteristic data available
for the polybutadiene rubber production processes at these facilities.
For these five facilities, EPA replaced all polybutadiene rubber
production emissions and emissions release characteristic data in the
NEI with these updated industry data.
In the ANPRM data set, hexane and toluene are emitted in the
greatest amounts and account for about 74 and 19 percent of the total
emissions, respectively.
12. Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and Latex Production
The Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and Latex Production source category
includes any facility that manufactures copolymers consisting of
styrene and butadiene monomer units. This source category is divided
into three subcategories due to technical process and HAP emission
differences: (1) The production of styrene-butadiene rubber by
emulsion, (2) the production of styrene-butadiene rubber by solution,
and (3) the production of latex. Styrene-butadiene rubber is coagulated
and dried, while latex is not. For both styrene-butadiene rubber
processes, the monomers used are styrene and butadiene; either process
can be conducted as a batch or a continuous process. Sources of HAP
emissions for the emulsion subcategory include raw material storage
vessels, front-end process vents, back-end process operations,
wastewater operations, and equipment leaks. Most of the emissions come
from back-end process operations, which are predominately drying and
finishing. The primary HAP emitted by emulsion styrene-butadiene rubber
production are styrene and 1-3,butadiene. Sources of HAP emissions for
the solution subcategory include raw material storage vessels, front-
end process vents, back-end process operations, wastewater operations,
and equipment leaks. Most of the emissions come from back-end process
operations. The primary HAP emitted by production of solution styrene
butadiene rubber are hexane, butadiene, styrene, and toluene. Sources
of HAP emissions from the latex production subcategory include raw
material storage vessels, front-end process vents, wastewater
operations, and equipment leaks. The primary HAP emitted are styrene
and butadiene.
The ANPRM data set for the Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and Latex
Production source category includes information for 15 facilities,
seven of which are classified as major sources in the NEI. Based on our
previous estimates of the number of facilities in the Styrene-Butadiene
Rubber and Latex Production source category, the ANPRM data set
includes data for the entire industry. In conjunction with previous
efforts for this source category, the industry had collected and
submitted up-to-date emissions and emissions release characteristic
data for eight of these 15 facilities. The industry and EPA consider
these data to be the most accurate emissions and emissions release
characteristic data available for the styrene butadiene rubber and latex

[[Page 14745]]

production processes at these facilities. For these eight facilities,
EPA replaced all styrene butadiene rubber and latex production
emissions and emissions release characteristic data in the NEI with
these updated industry data.
In the ANPRM data set, styrene and 1,3-butadiene are emitted in the
greatest amounts and account for about 88 and 8 percent of the total
emissions, respectively.
13. Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene Production
Acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene resins consist of a terpolymer of
acrylonitrile, butadiene, and styrene and can be synthesized by
emulsion, suspension, and continuous mass polymerization. The majority
of acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene resin production is by batch
emulsion. The primary HAP emissions during the acrylonitrile-butadiene-
styrene production process occur via equipment leaks and process vents.
Other emission points include storage vessels, wastewater operations,
and heat exchange systems. Typical products made from acrylonitrile-
butadiene-styrene resins are piping, refrigerator door liners and food
compartments, automotive components, telephones, luggage and cases,
toys, mobile homes, and margarine tubs. The major HAP expected to be
emitted by the Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene Production source
category are acrylonitrile, butadiene, and styrene.
The ANPRM data set for the Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene
Production source category includes information for seven facilities,
six of which are classified as major sources in the NEI. Based on our
previous estimates of the number of facilities in the Acrylonitrile-
Butadiene-Styrene Production source category, the ANPRM data set
includes data for about half of the industry. In the ANPRM data set,
styrene and acrylonitrile are emitted in the greatest amounts and
account for about 65 percent of the total emissions.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category include the number of facilities in the source category (i.e.,
only about half of the facilities in the category appear to be included
in the inventory) and the specific HAP emitted by individual
facilities. Some HAP expected to be reported (styrene and 1,3-
butadiene) are not included for all the plants in the data set and
other unexpected HAP (e.g., ethylene dichloride and ethylene oxide) are
reported to be emitted by at least one facility.
14. Methyl Methacrylate-Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene Resin Production
Methyl methacrylate-acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene is an acrylic
graft copolymer. Chemically, graft copolymers are prepared by attaching
a polymer as a branch to the chain of another polymer of a different
composition. Typical products made from methyl methacrylate-
acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene resins are piping, refrigerator door
liners and food compartments, automotive components, telephones,
luggage and cases, toys, mobile homes, and margarine tubs. Major HAP
expected to be emitted by the Methyl Methacrylate-Acrylonitrile-
Butadiene-Styrene source category are acrylonitrile, butadiene, and styrene.
The ANPRM data set for the Methyl Methacrylate-Acrylonitrile-
Butadiene-Styrene source category includes information for one
facility, which is classified as a major source in the NEI. Based on
our previous estimates of the number of facilities in the Methyl
Methacrylate-Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene source category, the ANPRM
data set includes data for the whole industry. In the ANPRM data set,
the six HAP reported to be emitted include styrene, acrylonitrile, 1,3-
butadiene, methyl methacrylate, cumene, and ethyl benzene. Styrene
accounts for almost 83 percent of the mass emitted.
One major anomaly associated with the data set for this source
category is that nearly all of the emissions points are reported to be
fugitive sources, but the data includes only NEI default ``virtual
stack'' emissions parameters for these sources.
15. Methyl Methacrylate-Butadiene-Styrene Production
Methyl methacrylate-butadiene-styrene polymers are prepared by
grafting methyl methacrylate and styrene onto a styrene-butadiene
rubber in an emulsion process. The product is a two-phase polymer used
as an impact modifier for rigid polyvinyl chloride products. These
products are used for applications in packaging, building, and
construction. Emission points for methyl methacrylate-butadiene-styrene
resin production include process vents, equipment leaks, storage
vessels, and wastewater operations. Major HAP expected to be emitted by
the Methyl Methacrylate-Butadiene-Styrene Production source category
include butadiene, styrene, acrylonitrile, and methyl methacrylate.
The ANPRM data set for the Methyl Methacrylate-Butadiene-Styrene
Resin Production source category includes information for three
facilities, each of which are classified as major sources in the NEI.
Based on our previous estimates of the number of facilities in the
Methyl Methacrylate-Butadiene-Styrene Production source category, the
ANPRM data set includes data for each facility in the industry. In the
ANPRM data set, toluene, methyl methacrylate, styrene, and 1,3-
butadiene account for nearly all of the emissions.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category include the HAP emitted. Some HAP are emitted by one facility
and possibly should be emitted by the other facilities in the source
category. In addition, nearly all of the emission release parameters
are NEI default values.
16. Nitrile Resins Production
Nitrile resins are synthesized through the polymerization of
acrylonitrile, methyl acrylate, and butadiene latex using an emulsion
process. Nitrile resin products are commonly used in packaging
applications (e.g., food packaging). Emissions points for nitrile resin
manufacturing processes are process vents and equipment leaks.
Emissions from storage tanks, such as those used to store
acrylonitrile, are also possible. The major HAP expected to be emitted
by the nitrile resins production source category is acrylonitrile.
The ANPRM data set for the Nitrile Resins source category includes
information for one facility, which is classified as a major source in
the NEI. Based on our previous estimates of the number of facilities in
the Nitrile Resins source category, the ANPRM data set includes data
for the whole industry. Acrylonitrile is the HAP emitted in the largest
quantity, accounting for over 55 percent of the total HAP mass emitted.
One major anomaly associated with the data set for this source
category is that 100 percent of the emission release parameters are NEI
default values.
17. Polyethylene Terephthalate Production
Three different types of resins are made by sources covered by the
Polyethylene Terephthalate Production source category: Solid-state
resins (polyethylene terephthalate bottle grade resins); polyester
film; and engineering resins. They are all thermoplastic linear
condensation polymers based on dimethyl terephthalate or terephthalic
acid. Polyethylene terephthalate melt-phase polymer is used in the
production of all three of these resins. Polyethylene terephthalate
production can occur via either a batch or continuous process. The most
common use of polyethylene terephthalate solid-state resins is in soft
drink bottles, and some industrial fiber-

[[Page 14746]]

graded polyester (e.g., for tire cord) is also produced from
polyethylene terephthalate solid-state resins. The most common uses of
polyethylene terephthalate film are photographic film and magnetic
media. Polyethylene terephthalate is used extensively in the
manufacture of synthetic fibers (i.e., polyester fibers), which compose
the largest segment of the synthetic fiber industry. The most common
uses of polyester fibers are apparel, home furnishings, carpets,
fiberfill, and other industrial processes. Emissions sources present at
polyethylene terephthalate production processes include raw material
storage tanks, mix tanks, prepolymerization and polymerization reaction
vents and process tanks, cooling towers, and methanol recovery systems.
Major HAP emissions expected from the Polyethylene Terephthalate
Production source category are ethylene glycol, methanol, acetaldehyde,
and dioxane.
The ANPRM data set for the Polyethylene Terephthalate source
category includes information for 22 facilities, 21 of which are
classified as major sources in the NEI. Based on our previous estimates
of the number of facilities in the Polyethylene Terephthalate
Production source category, the ANPRM data set includes data for about
two-thirds of the facilities in the industry. In the ANPRM data set,
volatile organic HAP dominate the total mass emissions, with methanol,
ethylene glycol, acetaldehyde, methylene chloride, and mixed xylenes
accounting for over three-fourths of the total emissions.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category include the number of facilities in the source category and
the HAP emitted. Some HAP expected to be reported (methanol, acetaldehyde,
and dioxane) are not included for all the plants in the data set.
18. Polystyrene Production
Polystyrene resins are those produced by the polymerization of
styrene monomer. This type of resin can be produced by three methods:
(1) Suspension polymerization (operated in batch mode); (2) mass
(operated in a continuous mode); and (3) emulsion process (operated in
a continuous mode). The mass and suspension methods are the most
commercially significant, whereas use of the emulsion process has
decreased significantly since the mid-1940s. The uses for polystyrene
resin include packaging and one-time use, expandable polystyrene beads,
electronics, resellers and compounding, consumer and institutional
products, and furniture, building, or construction uses. A wide variety
of consumer and construction products are made from polystyrene resins,
including disposable dinnerware, shower doors, light diffusers, soap
dishes, insulation board, food containers, drain pipes, audio and video
tape, picnic coolers, loose fill packaging, and tubing. The major HAP
expected to be emitted by the polystyrene source category is styrene.
The ANPRM data set for the polystyrene resins source category
includes information for 23 facilities, 14 of which are classified as
major sources in the NEI. Based on our previous estimates of the number
of facilities in the Polystyrene Production source category, the ANPRM
data set is missing data for 5 facilities in the industry. In the ANPRM
data set, styrene is emitted in the greatest amounts and accounts for
about 65 percent of the total emissions.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category include facility representation of the source category and the
HAP emitted. Some unexpected HAP, including tetrachloroethylene,
naphthalene, ethyl chloride, and several metals, are reported to be
emitted by some facilities.
19. Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production
Styrene-acrylonitrile resins are copolymers of styrene and
acrylonitrile. Styrene-acrylonitrile resins may be synthesized by
emulsion, suspension, and continuous mass polymerization; however, the
majority of production is by batch emulsion. Typical uses include
automobile instrument panels and interior trim and housewares. Emission
points along the styrene-acrylonitrile resin production process include
equipment leaks, process vents, storage vessels, and wastewater
operations. Major HAP expected to be emitted by the Styrene-
Acrylonitrile Production source category are acrylonitrile and styrene.
The ANPRM data set for the Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production source
category includes information for three facilities, all of which are
classified as major sources in the NEI. Based on our previous estimates
of the number of facilities in the Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production
source category, the ANPRM data set is missing data for 3 facilities in
the industry. Many facilities that produce acrylonitrile-butadiene-
styrene resins also produce styrene-acrylonitrile, because much of the
styrene-acrylonitrile resins that are produced are used as feedstock in
the production of acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene. Therefore, for two
of these plant sites, we could not distinguish whether certain
emissions units belonged to the Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene or the
Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production source categories. For these two plant
sites, the emissions units in question were assigned to the
Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene Production source category and no
emissions units were assigned to the Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production
source category. For the third plant site, EPA assigned the Styrene-
Acrylonitrile Production MACT code to all the processes that emitted
styrene or acrylonitrile and included these units in the ANPRM data set
for the Styrene-Acrylonitrile Production source category. For this
facility, styrene is the HAP emitted in the largest quantity accounting
for over 55 percent of total HAP mass emitted. Ethyl benzene, 1,3-
butadiene, and toluene are also reported in relatively large quantities
and collectively account for about 35 percent of the total emissions.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category include the number of facilities in the source category, the
use of county centroid locations as default emissions release
locations, and the use of NEI default values for 100 percent of the
emissions release parameters. In addition, one HAP (acrylonitrile) is
expected to be emitted in larger quantities than reported in the NEI.
20. Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants
Primary aluminum plants produce aluminum metal from alumina ore
through the electrolytic reduction of aluminum oxide (alumina) by
direct current voltage in an electrolyte (called ``cryolite'') of
sodium aluminum fluoride. All primary aluminum facilities have potlines
that produce aluminum metal, and also have a paste production
operation. In addition, some facilities have anode bake furnaces that
are used in the production of aluminum anodes. Potlines are categorized
based primarily on differences in the process operation, equipment, and
the applicability of control devices. HAP expected to be emitted by
primary aluminum production sources include hydrogen fluoride and POM,
including PAH (e.g., anthracene, benzo(a) pyrene, and naphthalene) that
are part of the POM HAP category.
The ANPRM data set for the primary aluminum reduction source
category includes information for 20 primary aluminum facilities. Of
these 20 facilities, 19 are classified as major sources in the NEI.
Based on our previous estimates of the number of primary aluminum
reduction facilities,

[[Page 14747]]

this includes over 85 percent of the industry. Although a wide range of
compounds are reported as emissions from these facilities in the ANPRM
data set, carbonyl sulfide, hydrogen fluoride, and hydrochloric acid
make up over 96 percent of the total emissions by mass. Hydrogen
fluoride is the most common HAP reported as an emission (reported for
18 facilities); carbonyl sulfide and hydrochloric acid are reported as
emissions by 11 and 7 facilities, respectively. A wide variety of PB
HAP are reported, including numerous PAH and the metals lead, cadmium,
and mercury and their associated compounds. For reported emissions of
POM chemicals, emissions are grouped into one of seven POM categories.
We encourage commenters to provide the individual chemical(s) that make
up the POM.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category include the specific HAP emitted by individual facilities and
the speciation of POM. Certain HAP (e.g., chlorine, hydrogen chloride,
POM) are not included for all the facilities in the data set.
21. Printing and Publishing
The printing and publishing source category includes facilities
that use lithography, rotogravure, and other methods to print a variety
of substrates, including paper, plastic, metal foil, wood, vinyl,
metal, and glass. The MACT standards focused on those facilities that
perform publication rotogravure printing, product and package
rotogravure printing, and wide-web flexographic printing. Publication
rotogravure printing refers to printing using a rotogravure press of
various paper products, including catalogs, magazines, direct mail
advertisements, display advertisements, miscellaneous brochures and
other advertisements, newspaper sections and inserts, periodicals, and
telephone directories. Product and packaging rotogravure printing
entails the production, on a rotogravure press, of any printed
substrate not otherwise defined as publication rotogravure printing.
This includes (but is not limited to) folding cartons, flexible
packaging, labels and wrappers, gift wraps, wall and floor coverings,
upholstery, decorative laminates, and tissue products. Wide-web
flexographic printing is a technique for printing substrates of 18
inches or wider in which the applied pattern is raised above the
printing plate and the image carrier is made of rubber or other
elastomeric materials. The wide-web flexographic presses are used to
print flexible and rigid packaging; newspapers, magazines, and
directories; paper towels, tissues, and similar products; and printed
vinyl shower curtains and wallpaper. Research and laboratory facilities
are not subject to the provisions of the MACT standards unless they are
collocated with production lines. The NESHAP applies to HAP present in
the inks, ink extenders, solvents, coatings, varnishes, primers, adhesives,
and other materials applied with rotogravure and flexographic plates.
The primary HAP expected to be emitted from printing and publishing
operations are toluene, xylene, ethylbenzene, methanol, methyl isobutyl
ketone, ethylene glycol, and certain glycol ethers.
At the time of MACT promulgation in 1995, EPA estimated that there
were approximately 200 publication rotogravure, product and packaging
rotogravure, and wide-web flexographic printing facilities nationwide
that would be subject to these MACT regulations.
The ANPRM dataset for the printing and publishing source category
contains 463 facilities, of which 216 are classified as major sources
in the NEI. The HAP emitted in largest quantities from these sources
are toluene, glycol ethers, methyl isobutyl ketone, and xylene (mixture
of o-, m-, and p-isomers). Emissions from these HAP account for nearly
94 percent of the mass emitted across all 463 facilities. POM is the
only PB HAP reported in the ANPRM data set for this source category.
For reported emissions of POM chemicals, emissions are grouped into
one of seven POM categories. We encourage commenters to provide the
individual chemical(s) that make up the POM.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category are related to the HAP emitted. Emissions of several HAP,
including trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, p-dioxane, benzene,
and naphthalene, are reported to be emitted by a small percentage of
sources in this category. These HAP may be emitted from other on-site
processes. We are requesting data on these HAP emissions.
22. Shipbuilding and Ship Repair
The shipbuilding and ship repair industry consists of
establishments that build, repair, repaint, convert, and alter ships.
In general, activities and processes involved in ship repair and new
ship construction are relatively similar. Operations include
fabrication of basic components from raw materials, welding components
and parts together, painting and repainting, overhauls, ship
conversions, and other alterations. Nearly all shipyards that construct
new ships also perform major ship repairs. Marine coatings used on
offshore oil and gas well drilling and production platforms are not
included in this source category.
Emissions of HAP from shipbuilding and ship repair facilities
result from painting, cleaning solvents, welding, metal forming and
cutting, and abrasive blasting performed during ship repair and
shipbuilding operations. HAP expected to be emitted include a range of
organic compounds used as solvents, including toluene, xylene,
ethylbenzene, methanol, methyl isobutyl ketone, ethylene glycol, and
glycol ethers. In addition to the organic HAP, relatively small amounts
of inorganic HAP such as chromium, hexavalent chromium, manganese,
nickel, and lead are expected to be emitted from painting, welding,
metal forming and cutting, and abrasive blasting performed during ship
repair and shipbuilding operations.
At the time of NESHAP promulgation in 1995, EPA estimated that
there were approximately 437 facilities of varying capabilities
involved in the construction and repair of ships in the United States;
approximately 35 of these facilities qualified as major sources of HAP
emissions.
The ANPRM data set for the shipbuilding and ship repair source
category contains 88 facilities, of which 71 facilities are classified
as major sources. In conjunction with previous efforts for this source
category, the industry had collected and submitted up-to-date welding
and blasting emissions data for 13 facilities. The industry and EPA
consider these data to be the accurate welding and blasting emissions
data for these facilities. For 12 of these 13 facilities, the 2002 NEI
did not include any emissions from these welding and blasting
processes. The newly collected data was added to the ANPRM data set for
these facilities. The data was not added for the 13th facility, which
did have detailed state-submitted welding and blasting emissions data
already included in the NEI. As no welding and blasting emissions data
were available for the other facilities in the source category, no data
was added to the ANPRM data set for these facilities. The HAP emitted
in largest quantities in total from these sources are xylenes and
ethylbenzene. Total emissions from these two HAP account for 63 percent
of the mass emitted across all 88 facilities. PB HAP emissions reported
in the ANPRM data set for the shipbuilding and ship repair

[[Page 14748]]

source category include cadmium, lead compounds, POM, and mercury.
For emissions reported generically as ``chromium'' or ``chromium
and compounds,'' emissions are speciated for this source category as 66
percent ``chromium (III) compounds'' and 34 percent ``chromium (VI)
compounds.'' We encourage commenters to review this assumption and
provide specific chromium (VI) and chromium (III) data where possible.
For reported emissions of POM chemicals, emissions are grouped into
one of seven POM categories. We encourage commenters to provide the
individual chemical(s) that make up the POM.
The major anomalies associated with the data set for this source
category are related to the HAP emitted. Some metal HAP expected to be
reported from welding, blasting, and other metalworking processes are
not included for all the facilities in the data set. We have been
working with the industry to improve these anomalies, and will continue
these efforts. However, we also welcome additional data on these emissions.

V. What are we specifically seeking comment on?

The primary purpose of this ANPRM is to solicit comments on the
source-category specific data included in the ANPRM data sets.
Therefore, we are asking you to carefully review the facility-specific
data available for download on the RTR Web page at http://www.epa.gov/
ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html and provide corrections to these data. These
data include information for each emissions release point at each
facility in each of the 22 source categories included in Group 2 of the
RTR Phase II. For large integrated facilities with multiple processes
representing multiple source categories, it is often difficult to
clearly distinguish the source category to which each emission point
belongs. For this reason, the data available for download include not
only the data for each facility in the specific source category, but
also the data for each entire facility.
In addition to the ANPRM data sets for each source category, we are
providing a downloadable file which describes each source category and
summarizes the major data anomalies. These files are being made
available to focus the review of emissions data on the emission points
and pollutants which are expected to contribute the most to significant
inhalation exposures and health risks. More information on how to
download the data and how to submit data corrections is provided in
Sections VI and VII of this ANPRM, respectively.
In reviewing the data, we are requesting both general comments
about how well the data represent the source categories and more
specific comments regarding the emission-point specific information
included in the ANPRM data set for each facility in the 22 source
categories. We also ask that you examine situations in which we made
changes or additions to the NEI data and provide comments and data that
will help us improve or clarify the information in order to minimize
any anomalies. We are particularly interested in the following
information regarding source category representation in the data:
Names and addresses for any facilities with processes
which should be, but are not included in the data set for a specific
source category.
? If known, whether data for these facilities are included in the NEI.
Facilities whose data should not be included in the data
set for a specific source category--please provide a brief description
of the facilities and an explanation of why they do not belong in the
data set for that source category.
Facilities in the data set for a source category that are
not major sources for HAP--please provide documentation verifying the
area source status.
We would also like comment on the facility-specific and emission-
point specific data, as well as our assumptions about certain data
characteristics. As discussed further below, the areas in which further
information and/or correction or clarification is requested, include
the following:
Facility location and identification.
? Facility name.
? Facility address.
? Facility category code (i.e., major or area source).
Emission point data
? SCC and MACT codes
? Emissions (tons per year (TPY)) of each HAP.
? Emission release point type (i.e., fugitive, vertical,
horizontal, gooseneck, vertical with raincap, or downward facing vent).
? Emissions release characteristics: stack height and diameter,
exit gas temperature, velocity, and flow rate.
? Emission point latitude and longitude coordinates.
Data characteristics.
? Acute emissions factors.
? Speciation of metal HAP and POM.
? HAP emissions performance level (e.g., actual, allowable, maximum).
At the facility level, we are asking for input on the name and
address of the facility, whether the facility is a major or area source
for HAP, and facility identification codes. The facility name should
include at least the company name and may also include facility
identification information, such as ``Plant A'' or ``Ohio River
Works.'' The address should include the street address of the plant
location, as well as the city, county, State, and zip code for that
location. We are also requesting verification of the area/major source
status of each facility.
For each individual emission point, we are asking for comments on
the SCC and MACT code to which each emission point is assigned, the HAP
emitted, the mass of emissions reported for each HAP, and the release
characteristics. For large facilities with multiple processes
representing more than one source category, we ask that you pay
particular attention to the MACT and SCC codes, so that emission points
and emissions are assigned to the appropriate source category. We also
ask that you provide comments on all HAP emitted from a process, even
if you know the emission levels are very low. The high toxicity of some
HAP means that even emission levels one might otherwise consider
insignificant (in terms of mass) can have a significant risk impact.
This is particularly true for PB HAP. These compounds have high
toxicities and may be emitted by some of the source categories being
reviewed. It is critical that we obtain the most accurate, speciated
emission estimates possible to be used in the multi-pathway assessments
that will be conducted prior to proposal of regulatory actions.
If you consider the data in the ANPRM data sets unrepresentative of
the emissions from a facility, explain why these data are not
representative and submit better data where available. When submitting
emissions data, we ask that you provide documentation of the basis for
the revised values. We will need appropriate documentation to support
any suggested changes. Data corrections are discussed more in section VII.
In addition to the emissions data, we also request comments and
revisions on the release characteristics for individual emission
points. First, you should check the emission release point type
description. Most of the emission points in the NEI are either
classified as vertical or fugitive, although the options also include
horizontal, goose neck, vertical with rain cap, and downward facing
vent. Then you should check the release parameters, which include stack
height, exit gas temperature, stack diameter, exit gas velocity, and
exit gas flow rate. Quite often the NEI contains default release
parameters, so providing

[[Page 14749]]

actual parameters will improve the quality of the data and the modeling
results.
Emission point location is a parameter that can have a significant
effect on the modeling results. Ideally, we would like a specific set
of coordinates for every emission point. In many instances, a single
set of coordinates is used for all emission points at a facility. In
these situations, we request information on emission-point specific
coordinates. If such detailed coordinates are already in the ANPRM data
sets, we would like you to review them carefully and provide any
updates or corrections needed.
To model fugitive sources, the release parameters used include the
height, length, width, and angle of the area where the fugitive
emissions sources are located, along with the temperature. The NEI
contains fields for these parameters, but they are rarely populated.
Instead, the NEI contains a set of default vertical stack parameters
for fugitive sources, which have been designed to provide the same
dispersion as a low-lying point source with minimal plume rise. These
are a temperature of 72[deg] Fahrenheit, a diameter of 0.003 feet, a
velocity of 0.0003 feet per second, and a flow rate of 0 cubic feet per
second. We request comment on the use of these release characteristics
to effectively model fugitive emission sources as pseudo-point sources.
We are also requesting comments concerning certain data
characteristics. This includes the speciation of several metal HAP,
including mercury and chromium, and polycyclic organic material. These
HAP were separated into their various forms, such as hexavalent and
trivalent chromium, within NEI using the procedures established by the
National Air Toxics Assessment. We are requesting comment on whether
the speciation factors used are appropriate and ask that any suggested
alternative approaches be accompanied by documentation supporting that
alternative.
Also, to screen for potentially-significant short-term exposures,
maximum short-term (one-hour) emission rates will be developed by
multiplying the average annual hourly emission rates by ten. We would
like comments on whether this factor represents a reasonable
approximation for each emission point in order to estimate acute
exposures and risks. If you believe that any particular emission point
does not represent a reasonable approximation, please provide your
rationale and a suggestion for a more appropriate ratio. This will
assist us in our assessment of short-term impacts and risks.
As noted in section IV, the emissions values in the ANPRM data set
generally represent actual emission levels. Where actual emissions data
is not already included, we request that commenters provide such data.
In addition to comments on the data included in the data sets for
each source category, we will accept other comments related to this
ANPRM. As described in section VII of this ANPRM, all comments and
supporting data must be submitted to the docket for this action.

VI. How may I access the data for a specific source category?

Source category descriptions and the ANPRM data sets are available
on the RTR Web page at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html.
Information is available to be downloaded from this Web page for each
source category in two separate files. One file contains a description
of the source category, and a separate file includes the detailed ANPRM
data set for the source category. These files must be downloaded from
the Web site to be viewed.
The file containing the source category description is available in
an Adobe® PDF format (this file format is viewable with
Adobe® Reader, which may be downloaded at
http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readermain.html)
and contains the following information:
A description of the processes and major products
The estimated number of facilities in the source category.
A summary of emission points types and HAP emissions from
the source category.
A summary of the anomalies associated with the data for
that source category.
The ANPRM data set for each source category is included in a
separate file, which must be downloaded from the RTR Web page--
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. These are Microsoft®
Access files, which require Microsoft® Access to be viewed (if
you do not have Microsoft® Access, contact Anne Pope by telephone
((919) 541-5373) or by e-mail (pope.anne@epa.gov) for other
data viewing options). Each file contains the following information
from the NEI for each facility in the source category:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility data Emissions data
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA Region Pollutant Code
Tribal Code Pollutant Code Description
Tribe Name Emissions (TPY)
State Abbreviation MACT Code
County Name MACT Flag
State County FIPS SCC Code
NEI Site ID SCC Code Description
Facility Name Emission Unit ID
Location Address Process ID
City Name Emission Release Point ID
State Name Emission Release Point Type
Zip Code Stack Default Flag
Facility Registry Stack Height
Facility Registry Identifier
State Facility Identifier Exit Gas Temperature
SIC Code Stack Diameter
SIC Code Description Exit Gas Velocity
NAICS Code Exit Gas Flow Rate
Facility Category Code Longitude
Facility Category Latitude
Location Default Flag
Data Source Code
Data Source Description
HAP Emissions Performance Level

[[Page 14750]]

Start Date
End Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------

More information on these NEI data fields can be found in the NEI
documentation at
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/net/2002inventory.html#documentation.

VII. How do I submit suggested data corrections?

The source category-specific ANPRM data sets are available for
download on the RTR Web page at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/
rtrpg.html. To suggest revisions to this information, we request that
you complete the following steps:
1. Download the Microsoft® Access file containing the ANPRM
data set for a source category.
2. Within this downloaded file, enter suggested revisions in the
data fields appropriate for that information. The data fields that may
be revised include the following:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility data Emissions data
------------------------------------------------------------------------
REVISED Tribal Code REVISED Emissions (TPY)
REVISED County Name REVISED MACT Code
REVISED Facility Name REVISED SCC Code
REVISED Location Address REVISED Emission Release Point
REVISED City Name REVISED Stack Height
REVISED State Name REVISED Exit Gas Temperature
REVISED Zip Code REVISED Stack Diameter
REVISED Facility Registry REVISED Exit Gas Velocity
REVISED State Facility REVISED Exit Gas Flow Rate
REVISED Facility Category REVISED Longitude
REVISED Latitude
REVISED HAP Emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Fill in the following commenter information fields for each
suggested revision:
Commenter Name.
Commenter E-Mail Address.
Commenter Phone Number.
Revision Comments.
4. Gather documentation for any suggested emissions revisions
(e.g., performance test reports, material balance calculations, etc.).
5. Send the entire downloaded file with suggested revisions in
Microsoft® Access format and all accompanying documentation to
the docket for this ANPRM (through one of the methods described in the
ADDRESSES section of this ANPRM). To help speed review of the
revisions, it would also be helpful to submit the suggestions to EPA
directly at RTR@epa.gov.
6. If you are providing comments on a facility with multiple source
categories, you need only submit one file for that facility, which
should contain all suggested changes for all source categories at that
facility.
We strongly urge that all data revision comments be submitted in
the form of updated Microsoft® Access files, which are provided on the
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html Web page. Data in
the form of written descriptions or other electronic file formats will
be difficult for EPA to translate into the necessary format in a timely
manner. Additionally, placing the burden on EPA to interpret data
submitted in other formats increases the possibility of
misinterpretation or errors.

VIII. What additional steps are expected after EPA reviews the comments
received?

Once EPA receives comments on the Group 2 emissions and emissions
release data, we plan to revise the ANPRM data sets based upon public
comment and supporting documentation, model with the new data, and
proceed with proposing and promulgating residual risk and technology
review standards as appropriate. More detail of this process is
provided in sections C, D, and E of section II of this ANPRM.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous substances.

Dated: March 23, 2007.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E7-5805 Filed 3-28-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

Notices For
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994

Risk and Technology Review, Phase II, Group 2

Local Navigation