# + 2

(,1 1/,1(

Citation: 43 Fed. Reg. 38872 1978

Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Thu Mar 22 07:35:33 2012

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.PROPOSED RULES

percent of the time for a purpose other than, on-the-job training, it would be used in a significant manner for a purpose other thanjob training. Thus, a production facility is not an on-the-job training facility for purposes of section 188 simply because

new employees receive training on the machines they will be using as fully productive employees.A facility isconsidered to be used by an employer in connection with an occupational training program for his employees or prospective employees if at least 80 percent of the trainees participating in the program are employees orprospective employees. For purposes of this section, a prospective employee is a trainee with respect to whom it is rea- sonably expected that the trainee will be employed by the employer upon successful completion of the training program.

(4) Qualified child carefacility.A "qualified child care facility" is a facility whichis-

(i) Particularly suited to provide child care services and specifically used by an employer to provide such services primarily for his employees'. children;

(ii) Operated as a licensed or approved facility under applicable local law, if any, relating to the.day care of children; and

(iiI) If directly or indirectly funded
to any extentby the United States, es- tablished and operated in compliance with the requirements contained in Part 71 of title 45 ofthe Code ofFederal Regulations, relating to Federal -InteragencyDay Care Requirements.
For purposes of this subparagrapli, a "facility" consists of the buildings, or portions or structural components thereof, in whichchildren receive such personal care, protection, arid supervision In the absence oftheir parents as may be required to meet their needs, and the equipment or other personal property necessary to render such ser- vices.Whether ornot afacility, or any component property thereof, is particularly suited for the needs of the children being cared for depends upon thefacts and circumstances ofeachindividual case. Generally, a building and its structural components, or a
room therein, and equipment are particularly suitable for furnishing child

care service if they are designed or adapted for such use or satisfy re- quirements under local law for such

use as a condition to granting alicense for the operation of the facility. For example, such property includes special kitchen or toilet facilities connected to the building or room in which the services are rendered and equipment such as children's desks, chairs, and play or instructional equipment. Such property would not include general purpose rooms usedfor manypurposes (for example, a room used as an employee recreation center during the evening) nor would it include a room

or a part of a room which is simply screened offforuse by children during the day.For purposes ofthis section, a facility is considered to be specifically used as a child care-facility ifsuch facility is actually usedfor suchpurpose and isnotusedin a significant manner for any purpose otherthan childcare. For purposes of this subparagraph, a child care facility is used by an employer to provide 'child care services primarily for children of employees of the employer if, for any month, no

more than 20 percent of the average daily enrolled or attending children for such month are other than childrenofsuch employees.

(5) -Placed in service.For purposes of section 188 and this section, the term "placed in service" shall have the meaning assigned to such term in paragraph (d) of§1.46-3.

(e) Effective date.The provisions of section 188 and this section apply to taxable years ending after December 31, 1971.

PAR. 2. Section 1.642(f)-i is amended

toread as follows:"

§1.642(f)-1 Amortization deductions.

-An estate or trust is allowed amortization deductions with respect to an emergency facility as defined in seetion-168(d), with respect to a certified pollution control facility as defined in section 169(d), with respect to qualified railroadrolling stockas definedin section 184(d), withrespect to certified coal mine safety equipment as defined in section 187(d), and with respect to on-the-job training and child care facilities as defined in section 188(b), in the same manner and 'to the same extent as in the case of an individual. However, the principles governing the apportionment of the deductions for depreciation and depletion between fiduciaries and the beneficiaries of an estate ortrust (see sections 167(h) and 611(b) and the regulations thereunder)shall be applicable withrespect to such amortization deductions.

JEROME KURTZ,

Commissioner of

- Internal Revenue.

(FRDoc. 78-24620Filed 8-30-78; 8:45am] 

### [6560-01]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[40 CFR Part 601

S[FRL933-3J
STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed Rule andNotice of Public Hearing.
SUMMARY: This action contains EPA's proposed list of major source categories for which standards of performance must be promulgated by August 1982. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 require EPA to publish by August 1978, a list of the .categories of major stationary sources which have not been previously listed

as source categories for which standards of perforamce will be established, The intent of this action is to provide interested parties an opportunity to comment onthe proposed list.

A public hearing will be held to pro. vide interested persons an opportunity for oral presentation of data, views, or arguments concerning the proposed list.

Comments. Comments must be re- ceived on orbefore October 30, 1978.

Pyblic Hearing.The public hearing will be held on Friday, September 20, 1978.

Request to Speak at Hearing.Per-

sons wishing to attendthe hearing or present oral testimony should contact EPA by September 25, 1978.

Comments. Comments should be submitted to Gary D. McCutchen, 'Standards Development Branch (MD13), Emission Standards and Engineering Division, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711.

PublicHearing.The public hearing will be held Friday, September 29, 1978, at 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., in room 3906, Waterside Mall, 401 M Street SW, Washington, D.C. Persons wishing to present oral testimony should notify Mary Jane Clark, Emission Standards and Engineering Tivision (MD-13), Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,N.C. 27711, telephone number 919-541-5271.

Background Document. The background document for the proposed priority list may be obtained from the U.S. EPA Library (MD-35), Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711, telephone number 919-541-2777. Please refer to "priorities for New Source Perform-

ance Standards Under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977 (EPA-450/3- 78-019)."

Docket.EPA has determined that a docket is not required for this action, but public comments received and a copy ofthe background report used in

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 43, NO. 170-THURSDAY, AUGUST 31, 1978 

### 38872

HeinOnline -- 43 Fed. Reg. 38872 1978PROPOSED RULES

the development of this list will be available for public inspection and copying at the Public Information Reference Unit, Room 2922, 401 M Street SW., Washington, D.C. 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION -CONTACT.

Mr. Gary McCutchen, Emission Standards and Engineering Division (MD-13, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711, telephone number 919- 541-5421.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
-The new source performance standard

(NSPS) program began in December 1970, when the Clean Air Act was signed into law. Authorized under sec- tion 111 of the act, NSPS were to re- quire thebest control system (considering cost) for new facilities, and were intended to complement the other air quality management approaches authorized by the 1970 act.A total of 28

source categories are regulated by NSPS, withNSPS for an additional 25

source categdries under development.

During the 1977 hearings on the CleanAir Act,-Congress received testimony on the need for more rapid development of NSPS. There was concern-that not all.sources which had the potential to endanger public health or welfare were controlled by NSPS and that the potentia, existed for "environmental blackmail" from

source categoriesnot subject to NSPS. ,This concern was explicitly expressed by the Governor of New Jersey, who felt that industry could threaten to leave, or simply not locate in, States with more stringent regulations than their neighbors. These concerns were reflected inthe Clean AirAct Amendments of 1977, Specifically in section 111(f).

Section 111(f) requires that EPA publish a list of major stationary

sources of air pollution not already listed under section 111(b)(1)(A); that is, for Which NSPS have not yet been proposed orpromulgated. The listis to be promulgated by August 7, 1978, after EPA hasprovided notice of and opportunity for public hearings and consulted with Governors and State air pollution control agencies. In developing priorities, EPA is to consider: (1) The quantity, of emissions from each source category, (2) the extent to which each pollutant endangers public health orwelfare, and (3) themobility and competitive nature of each stationary source category, e.g., the capability of a new or existing source to locate in areas with less stringent air pollution control .egulations. After the list is promulgated, Governors may submit applications under section 111(g) to add major source categories
to thelist,add any source category to the list which may endanger public health or welfare, change the priority ranking, or revise promulgated NSPS.

DEVELOPING TlE LsT
EPA initiated development of this list by compiling information on a large number of source categories from anumber ofliterature resources. This preliminary list was evaluated using the criteria specified in section 111(f). A draft report describing this analysis was reviewed by the National Air Pollution Control Techniques Advisory Committee on April 6, 1978. A finalreport is now- available which, In addition to,describing the methodology used to apply the criteria, provides the resource material used in developingthelist.

The background report may be obtained from the U.S. EPA Library (MD-35), Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711 (specify "Priorities for NSPS Under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977," EPA-450/3-78- 019).

The data were first analyzed to determine those sources which have the potential to emit 100 tons or more per year of any one pollutant. These major source categories were then subjected to a priority ranking procedure using the three criteria specified In the act. In summary, this procedure, which is described in more detail In the following section, first ranks

source categories on a pollutant by pollutant basis. This results In nine lists [one for each pollutant-hydrocarbons (HC),nitrogen oxides (NO.). particulate matter (PM), sulfur dioxide (SO,), carbon-monoxide (CO), lead (Pb);fluorides (F),acidmist (AM). and hydrogen sulfide (H-S)] with each list rankedusing the criteria inthe act. In this ranking, first priority Is given to quantity of emissions, second priority
topotential impact on health and welfare, and third priority to mobility. Thus. sources with the greatest growth rates and emission reduction potential are high on each list;sources with limited choice of location, low growth and small emission potential

arelowbneach list.

- The nine lists are combined into one by selecting pollutant goais-a procedure which, in effect, assigns arelative priority to pollutants based upon the potential impact of NSPS. After the pollutant goals are selected, the final prioritylist Isestablished through the selection of source categories which will have maxirhum impact on attaining the selected goals, The effect of this procedure isto emphasize control of organic (hydrocarbon), particulate matter, and NO. emissions and to give carbon monoxide and noncrlteria pollutants alowerpriority.

The ranking of source categories on thelistand, infact, thedifferentiation between major and minor sources Is sensitive to the accuracy of the data utilized. The ranking isespecially sen-

-sitive to emission factors, source sizes,

and source category growth rates. Be-

cause the data.base used to establish the priority list was obtained from a number of literature sources and because time was not available to perform an independent verification of these data, it is expected that further study wll identify certain inaccuracies in the original data base If such

errors are Identified after promulgation, EPA may, as described below, take actiontoreorderpriorities, delete

sources fromthelist, oraddsources to thatlist.

In developing standards for source categories onthelist,EPA's firstactivIty will be a screening study. This ac- tivity takes approximately 2 months
to complete for each source category and involves gathering basic data concerning the industry for which a standard is planned. This information is obtained from State and local agencies and from owners and operators of

sources inthe affected industry,and is

more accurate and representative than the data base used in developing the priority list. EPA expects to initiate the screening studies for all source categories listed within 18 to 24 months after promulgation of the list and, therefore, even very large errors In the priority ranking will have-little effect on the date a project is started. If the screening study indicates that

anNSPS would havelittleornoeffect

on emissions, or that an NSPS would be impractical, a source category can be removed from the list at the com-- pletionof thescreening studybefore a standard is developed. Finding that uncontrolled emission rates arebelow 100 tons per year or that the source category exhibits a low growth rate

are examples of cases which could

cause EPA to remove a. category or lower Its priority. EPA may, however, develop standards for sources which emitless than 100 tonsper year, especlally certain. minor sources which, in aggregate, represent a large quantity ofemissions.

The proposed list identifies major

source categories, defined ascategories which have average size sources with the potential (uncontrolled) to emit 100 tons per year (TPY) or more of
any pollutantregulatedunderthe act. Certain new sources of smaller than
average size within these categories may have less than a 100 tonper year emission potential, just as very large units fromnonlisted minorsource categories may have more than this potential. Thus, this list ofmajor source categories was developed only for the purpose of defining NSPS priorities and should not be used to define

sources subject to new source review (NSR), which is conducted on a caseFEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 43, NO. 170-THURSDAY, AUGUST 31, 1978

.f 

### 38873

HeinOnline -- 43 Fed. Reg. 38873 1978PROPOSED RULES

by-case basis. Moreover, Some NSR programs such asprevention ofsignificant deterioration have separate and' distinct criteria for defining-a major

source (e.g., 100 tons per year potential for certain source types and 250
tonsper yearfor others).

Two groups ofsources in addition to minor sources are not included on the proposed list. One group includes

sources which could not be -evaluated due to insufficient data. This lack of data suggests that these sources, which are identified' in the background report, "Priorities for NSPS under the CleanAir Act of 1977,"have
not previously been regulated or studied and, therefore, are probably not major sources. Nevertheless, EPA will continue to investigate these sources and will add to the list any which are identified as beingmajor.

The second group ofunlisted source categories consists of those already listed under section 111(b)(1)(A). These are: Fossil-fuel-fired steamgenerators. Incinerators. Protlandcement plants. Nitricacidplants. Sulfuric acidplants. Asphalt concrete plants. Petroleumrefineries. Storagevessels forpetroleumliquids. Secondaryleadsmelters. Secondary brass and bronze ingot produc-

tionplants. Ironand steelplants. Sewagetreatment plants. Primarycopper smelters. Primaryzincsmelters. Primaryleadsmelters. Primaryaluminumreductionplants. Phosphate fertilizer industry: Wet process

phosphoric acidplants. Phosphate fertilizer industry: Superphosphoricacid plants. Phosphate fertilizer industry: Diammonium

phosphate plants. Phosphate fertilizer industry: Triple superphosphate plants. Phosphate fertilizer industry: Granular

triple-superphosphate storage facilities. Coalpreparation plants. Ferroalloy productionfacilities. Steelplants:Electric arcfurilaces. Kraftpulpmills. Limeplants. Grain elevators. Stationarygasturbines.
There are, however, some facilities (or subcategories) within these soured categories forwhich NSPS have not been developed, but which may by themselves be significant sources of airpolluti6n. A 'nuimber- of these facilities

were evaluated as if they were sepaxate source categories; three which ranked high in priority are included

on the priority list to indicate that EPA plans to develop standards for them: Petroleum refinery fugitive emissions, industrial fossil-fuel-fired
steam generators, and idustrial-commertial incinerators. In addition to these, EPA will continue to evaluate affected facilities within listed source categoriesand may from time to time add these to the list. Sintering plants in the iron and steel industry is an ex- ample of a facility now being studied. Although the growth rate for new sintering capacity is presently very low, giving this facility a very lowpriority, EPA is continuing to assess emission control and measurement technology with a view toward possible development ofa standard for sintering plants
at alaterdate.

DETERMINING PRIORITIES

The methodology used to establish priorities is explained in detail in the report "Priorities forNew Source Performance Standards Under the Clean AirAct Amendments of 1977." The description that follows conveys the basic concepts used, but does not detail theentire procedure.

The first task in the ranking procedure was to develop a method for applying the three criteria specified by the CAA, amendments to each of the nine pollutants. The second task was to establish goalsfor each pollutant so that a single multipollutant priority list could be compiled.

The first CAA criterion, quantity of emissions, is represented by the emissions an NSPS would prevent after being in" effect for aspecified period of time; in this case, 10 years. Emissions for 1990 are first calculated assuming -thatthe present'level of control con- tinues to be applied to new sources; the resulting 1990 emission level is termed Ts. Then 1990 emissions are calculated agsuming a best level of control, representative of an NSPS, is applied to.all new sources constructed between 1980 and 1990; this 1990 emission level is termed TN. The emissions that could be prevented by an NSPS after' 10 years-is represented by the difference between Is and TN. The value of (Ts-Tg) represents the first CAA 8riterion.

The approach used to derivean objective measure of the impact or extent to which public health or welfare could be endangered consists of. first determining the ambient air concent ration (X) for each pollutant in the vicinity of a typical facility. This involves several assumptions, including the tape of meteorology and dispersion equations, concentration and quantity of emissions, and average stack' heights and stack gas emission flowrates and temperatures. Since one pollutant could have no discernible effects at a concentration at which an- other pollutant could be dangerous, a method was needed to relate each of these ambient air concentrations to their health or welfare effects. The approach selected was to divide each ambient air concentration by an appropriate ambient thieshold value (ATV) for that pollutant. The ATV represents a level at which public health or welfare may be endangered. The ATVisrepresented by the nation. al ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for criteria pollutants and by a concentration based on the threshold limit value for the other pollutants studied. These "normalized" values range from 0.QO01 to 170 and are used to represent health or welfare endangerment. A normalized value of 1.0 would mean that ambient concentrations in the vicinity of a typical facility are approximately equalto theATV level.

Evaluation of the mobility and com- petitive nature of source categories

was subjective. "Mobility and competitive nature" in this analysis refers to the feasibility of stationary source categoriestorelocate to,or locate new facilities In, areas with less stringent air pollution control regulations. Nonmovable stationary source categories

were identified on the basis of being tied either to the market (e.g., dry cleaners) or to a supply of materials (e.g., mining operations). All other stationary source categories were consid. eredmovable bydefault.

For each pollutant, source categories

were first separated Into three groups: high, medium, and low emmissions prevention potential (Ts-TN). Each of these three emissions groups was then divided into three subgroups: high, medium, and low ambient air impact (X/ATV). Each of these subgroups 'was then split into two subdivisions: movable and nonmovable. Finally, within each of the 18 resulting subdilisions, source categories were ranked

m order of emission prevention potential (Ts-TN), from highest to lowest, Priority Was given to high (TN-TN), highX/ATV, and movability, sothat a prioritized listing of these subdivisions is as follows, with highest priority first:

(1) Iigh(T-T),highX/ATV,movable. (2) High (Ts-TN), high X/ATV, nonmova ble.

(3) High (Ts-TN), medium X/ATV, 

### movable.

(4) High (Ts-TN), mediumX/ATV,nonmo. vable.

(5)High (Ts-TN), lowX/ATV.movable. (6) High (Ts-TN), low X/ATV, nonmova- ble.

(7) Medium (Ts-T), high X/ATV, 

### movable.

(8)Medium (Ts-TN), high

### X/ATV,nonmo. vable.

(9) Medium (Ts-TN), medium X/ATV, movable.

(10) Medium (Ts-TN), medium X/ATV, nonmovable. t

(1") Medium (Ts-TN), low X/ATV, mov. able.

(12) Medium (Ts-TN), lowX/ATV, nonmo. vable.

(13) Low(TN-T), highX/ATV,movable. (14) Low (TN-TN), highX7ATV, nonmova. ble.

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 43, NO. 170-THURSDAY, AUGUST 31, 1978 

### 38874

HeinOnline -- 43 Fed. Reg. 38874 1978PROPOSED RULES

(15) Low (T-T.j), medium X/ATV, movable.

-

(16) Low (Ts-TX). mediumX/ATV. nomo- vable.

(17) Low (Ts-T,;),lowX/ATV,movable. (18) Low (Ts-T.), low X/ATV, nonmova- ble.

This provides -a separate priority ranking foreach pollutant.Developing

acombined multipollutant prioritylist requires the selection of pollutant goals.

A compuiter program was-written to calculate 1990 emissions from each source/pollutant combination, then determine which 1990 pollutant estimate was furthest from its goal. This became the prioritypollutant, and the top priority source category from that pollutant list was selected and an NSPS (E,- level of emissions) assumed for new sources in that category from that time on. It was assumed that NSPS were promulgated at the same time for any other pollutants emitted from that source category. The com- puter program then recalculates 1990 emissions, selects the newpriority pollutant, and repeats the selection procedure. A standard-setting rate was as- sumed that,beginning in 1980, results in the promulgation by the end of 1982 6fNSPS for all the source categories listed. The resulting list canbe found in thebackground report (Table 3-12, p. 113), and is the basis for the listing of major source categories that appears inthisnotice.

ThegoalsforPM, SO,, NO., HC, and Pb were determined by assuming all NSPS are promulgated in 1980 and then calculating 1990 emissions based

on NSPS control of all new sources

- during that 10-year period. For S02 and NO., emission§ will still increase, but for PM, HC, and Pb, 1990 emis. sions would be lower than 1980 emissions despite growth. Although EPA
cannot set all NSPS in 1980, the emission changes that result from such an assumption provide reasonable goals

to aim for.

Thesegoals are summarized below:

1990 emission 1990goal withoutNSPS." percentchange Pollutant percentchange from 1980 from 1980 em'ssIons" emissions

Particulate

matter (PM).-. +30 -5 Sulfur dioxide

(SO.) +20 +10 Nitrogenoxides

(NO.)

_ +55 +20 Hydrocarbons

(HC)

- . +70 -30 Lead (Pb).- +55 -20

*Doesnot take into account emission reductions that will accrue from State Implementation Plan revisions orNewSource Review decisions(including preventionofsignificant deterioration andemission offsets). -

"Determined by assuming that allNSPS are effective in 1980 and apply to-all new sources con- structedduringthe 10-yearperiod 1980-90. For the other pollutants (CO, AM, HS, and F), 1990 emissions would be lower than 1980 emissions if allNSPS

were set in 1980, but these reductions

are of lower priority than those listed in thepreceding paragraph. The lower priority is based on prior EPA policy. AM, H.S, and F are not regulated by National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), and are considered lowerpriority than NAAQS or criteria pollutants. Although CO Is a crlterl. pollutant, CO from statiomy sources hasnotbeenconsidered apriority con- cern; emphasis has Instead been on emissions from vehicles. Therefore, a 1990 goal of no increase over 1980 emissions was selected, which in effect deemphasizes CO,AM,HS,and F.

The goals calculated for these pollutants, based on the change in emission levels between 1980 and 1990, are shownbelow:

1990 emissions 1090goal. withoutNSPS.' percent change Pollutant percent chance from 19O from1980 emissions emiL" ons

Carbon

monoxide (CO) +30 "0 Acld mist(AM)- +135

.. o Hydrogen

sulfide(H.S)

_ +30

..0 Fluorides (F)_ +35 .0

*Does not take Into account emLssion reduclons thatwillaccruefromState Implementation planre- visions or new source review decst sn (Including prevention ofsignificantdeterioration andemInsson offsets).

-Setting a goal of 0 percent chance has the effect ofdeemphasizing these pollutants sincere- ductionsbelow 1980emissonlevelsarepossble.

At the beginning of the computer program, the priority pollutant is determined by the difference In tons of emissions per year between the first column (projected 1990 emissions) and the second column (the 1990 emissions goal).

IDENTIFICATION OFSOURCE CATE0RIES

There are some differences between the list in the background report (table 3-12) and the listwhich appears below.These differences are primarily

a result of aggregation of subcategories which had been subdivided forsize classification and priority ranking analysis. Nonmetallic mineral mining, for example, is composed of nine subcategories, eight of which were ana- lyzed separately (stone, sand and gravel, clay, gypsum, lime, borax, fluorspar, andphosphate rock mining) and oneofwhich Is considered aminor

source (mica mining). EPA plans to study the entire non-metallic mining industry at one time, since many of the processes and control techniques

are similar. Forthis reason, the industry is Identified by a single listing. This does notnecessarily implythat a single standard would apply to all 

### 38875

sources within the listed category. Rather, asdescribed below in the case of synthetic organic chemical manu- facturing, the nature and scope of standards will be determined only after A. detailed study of sources withinthe category.

Also, 'in addition to the major
sources, three source categories not identified as being major source categories have been added to the list-organlc solvent degreasing, industrial surface coating: metal furniture, and lead acidbatterymanufacture.

Organic solvent degreasing was chosen for study because this source category accounts. for some 5 percent of stationary source emissions in a typical air quality control region. Thus, although Individual facilities typically emitless than 100 TPY, this is a significant source oforganic emissions and EPA considers it prudent to continue the development of a standardforthis sourcecategory.

The metal furniture coating industry-Is also a significant source of or- ganic emissions, andthereare over 300 existingfacilities withthe potential to emit more than 100 TPY. For this
reason, EPA has placed this source category onthelist.

Lead acid battery manufacture is a significant source of lead emissions. An NSPS for this source category is expected to assistin attainment ofthe proposed National Ambient Air Quality Standard forlead.

EPAinitiated workto develop standards for each of these source categories prior tdthe 1977 amendments to the CAA and plans to continue work

on them. Interrupting work on these categories is not considered justified,

asthis wouldrequirethat a significant amount ofworkberepeated.

One listed source category which de-

serves special attention isthe synthetIc organic chemical manufacturing industry (SOCMI). Preliminary estimates indicate that there may beover 600 differentprocesses includedin this

source category, but only 27 of these processes have beenevaluated andpriority-ranked. For the other 575, there

was not enough information available. As Isthe casewith several otheraggregate source categories, EPAexpects to

usegeneric standards tocover asmany ofthe 600processes aspossible, soseparate NSPS for each process are un- likely. Based on an effort which has beenunderway within EPAfor2years tostudy this complex sourcecategory, the-generic standards could regulate nearly all emissions by covering four broad areas: process facilities; storage facilities; leakage; and transpQrt and handling losses. Also, since a number of the pollutants emitted are potentially toxic or carcinogenic, regulation under section 112, national-emission standards for hazardous air pollutants

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 43, NO. 170-THURSDAY, AUGUST 31, 1978

HeinOnline -- 43 Fed. Reg. 38875 1978

### 38876

'(NESHAP) rather than NSPS may be

more appropriate. Therefore SOCMI Is listed as a single source -category. The 27 processes evaluated are considered the most likely candidates for NSPS or NESHAP coverage through generic standards, and are listed below:

Acrylonitrile Plants. AeetioAcidPlants. AcrylicAcid. Acetic Anhydride Plants. Cyclohexane Plants. C1cohexanol/Cyclohexanone Plants. DimethylTerephthalate Plants. Ethylene DichloridePlants. Ethylene Oxide Plants. Ethylbenzene Plants. Ethylene Plants. Ethylene GlycolPlants. Formaldehyde Plants. MaleieAnhydride Plants. MethanolPlants. MethylMethacrylate Plants. PhenolPlants. Propylene Oxide Plants.. Terephthalic Acid Plants. 'VinylAcetatePlants." PhthalicAnhydride (PAN) Plants. AcetonePlants. CarbonTetrachloride Plants. AdipicAcidPlants. Methyl Chloroform Plants. StyrenePlants. Allyl ChlorldgPlants.
Additional information has resulted in the exclusion from the list of some

source categories which are shown in the background report. Mixed fuel boilers and feed and grain milling are regulated by the NSPS for fossil-fuel
steam generators and grain elevators, respectively. Beer manufacture has a much lower emission level than had been assumed in the background report, and whiskey manufacture was deleted due to a.lack of any demonstrated control.technology.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The CAA requires thatEPA, prior to promulgating this list of source categories, consult with Governors and State air pollution control agencies. An invitation was extended onFebruary 28, 1978, to the state and TerritorialAir PollutionProgram Administrators (STAPPA) and the National Governors' Association (NGA) to attend the first Working Group meeting, March 16, 1978, and review the draft background report and the methods' used to apply the criteria. On March 24, 1978, EPA notified each Governor and the director of each State airpollution control agency by letter of this project, inviting them to participate and/or comment:

(1) At the April 5-6, 1978, National Air Pollution Control Techniques Advisoiy Committee NAPCTAC) meeting inAlexandria, Va.;

(2) When the final background reportwas mailed to them; PROPOSED RULES

(3) When the list is proposed in the
FEDERAL REGISTER; or

(4) Ata publichearing to beheld on theproposed list.

The draft background report was mailed to allNAPCTAC members, five ofwhich represent State orlocal agencies, two of which represent environmental groups, and eight ofwhich represent industry. Copies were mailed to six environmental groups and three

consumer groups at the same time, and to arepresentative oftheNGA.

Copies of the final report were sent to the Governors State, and local air pollution control agencies, NAPCTAC members, environmental groups, the NGA, and other requesters in early July..

A'public'hearing will be held to dis-

cuss the proposed priority list in accordance with section 111(g)(8) ofthe Clean Air Act. Persons wishing to make oral presentations should contact,EPA at the address above. Any member of the public may file a written statement with EPA before, during, 6r within 30 days after the hearing.Written statements should be addressed to Mr. Gary D. McCutchen
atthe address above.

A verbatim transcript ofthe hearing and written statements will be available for public inspection and copying duringnormalworking hours inWashington, D.C., at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Public Information Reference Unit (address same
as above).

Note that application forrevision of the list at any time by a Governor is specifically permitted in section 111(g). EPA must evaluate an application-within 90 days, explain why an application isnot accepted, and implementacceptable applicationsfollowing

a public hearing on the proposed action. Applications relating to NSPS maybe to (1) add a major sourcecategory to the list, (2) add a source category to the list,.whether major or minor,ifit has thepotential to endanger health or welfare, (3) revise priorities if the criteria specified in the Act have notbeen properly applied, or (4) revise a promulgated NSPS that no longer reflects best control technology.

DEvELoPrmEN 

### oFSTANDARDS

When the list ofsource categories is promulgated in the FEDERAL REGISTER, EPA will undertake a program to promulgate standards for those source categories by August 7, 1982. EPAhas already initiated the development of standards fornearly half ofthe source categories listed; work on the remaining source categories will be initiated within thenext 2 years.

It'should be pointedout that several ofthe source categories listedcouldbe subject to standards which may be adopted under section 112 of the Clean Air Act (national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants

or NESHAP). Included are byproduct coke ovens and several source categories within the petroleum transport and marketing Industry. If standards

are developed under section 112 for these or any other source categories

onthe list beingproposed today, then standards would not be developed for those source categories under section 

### ill.

The priority ranking is indicated by the number to the left of each source category andwill beused to decide the order in which new projects are initiated, although this is not necessarily

an indication of the order in which projects will be completed. In fact, higher priority source categories often present difficult technical and regulatory problems, and may be among the later source cttegories for which standards are promulgated.

It should be noted also that the

source categories Identified on this proposed list are not subject to the .provisions of section 11l(b)(1)(B) which would requireproposal 120 days after adoption ofthe list.Rather, the promulgation of standardr for sources contained on the list being proposed here will be undertaken in accord;nce with the time schedule prescribed in section 111(f(1) of the Clean Air Act amendments. That is, 25 percent are to be promulgated by August 1980, 75 percent by August 1981, and all ofthe standards byAugust 1982.

Dated: August 24, 1978.

DOUGLAS M. CosTLE, Administrator.

It is proposed to amend Part 60 of Chapter I of Title 40 of the Code of l'ederal Regulations by adding §60.16
to SubpartAasfollows:
§60.16 Priority List. Priority number

STATIONARY FUELCOMBUSTION

16. Fossil-fuel-fired steam generators: Industrial boilers. 14. Stationary internal combustion engines.

METALLURGICAL 

### PROCESSES

10. By-product coke ovens. 23. Foundries: Grey iron. 41. Foundries: Steel. 42. Secondary aluminum., 20. Secondary copper. 66, Secondaryzinc. 67. Uraniumrefining.

MINERALPRODUCTS

57. Asphalt roofing.

2Lownumbers have highest priority: e.g., No. 1Ishighpriority, No.72 Islow priority,

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 43, NO. 170-THURSDAY, AUGUST 31, 1978

HeinOnline -- 43 Fed. Reg. 38876 197849. Brick andrelated clayproducts. 60. Castable refractories. 58. Ceramic clay. 48. Fiberglass. 38. Glass. 45. 

### Gypsum.

- 19. Metallic mineral processing. 13. Mineral wool 18. Non-metallicmineral processing. 64. Perlite. 21. Phosphaterockpreparation. 43. Sintering: Clayandflyash. "

POLYMERS AND RESINS
54. Polymers and resins: ABS-SAN resins. 12. Polymers and resins: Acrylic resins.

- 50. Polymers and resins: Phenolic resins. 62. Polymers and resins: Polyester resins. 30. Polymers and resins: Polyethylene. 55. Polymers and resins: Polypropylene. 53. Polymers and resins: Polystyrene. 51. Polymers and resins: Urea-melamineresins.

FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL
68. Alfalfadehydrating. 44. Ammonium sulfate. 59. Ammoniumnitrate fertilizer. 69. Animal feed defluorination. 63. Starch. 70. Urea (forfertilizer and polymers). 27. Vegetable oil.

WASTE INCINERATION
11. Incineration: Industrial-commercial.

-BASIC CEEMICAL MANUFACTURE
1. Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing. 61. Borax andboric acid. 47. Hydrofluoric acid. 65. Phosphoric acid: Thermal proc-
ess. 40. Potash. 46. /Sodium carbonate.

CH CAL PRODUCTS MANUFACTURE
52. Ammonia.

2. Carbonblack. 

### 31. Charcoal. 71. Detergent. 17. Explosives.

7. Fuelconversion. 34. Printingink.

- 35. SynthetiEfibers. 28. Synthetic rubber.

- 29- Varnish.

EVAPORATIVE Loss SOURCES
6. Dry cleaning. 9. Graphic arts. 15. Indugtrial surface coating: Automobiles. 3. Industrial surface coating: Cans. 8. Industrial surface coating: Fabric. PROPOSED RULES

37. Industrial surface coating: Large appliances. 32. Industrial surface coating: Metal coil. 5. Industrial surface coating: Paper.

PETROLEUMINDUSTRY
25. Crude oil and natural gas production. 72. Gasoline additives.

4. Petroleum refinery: Fugitive

_sources. 33. Transportation andmarketing.

WOODPROCESSING
24. Chemical wood pulping: Acid sulfite. 22. Chemical wood pulping: Neutral 

### sulfite (NSSC). 36. Plywood manufacture.

CONSUMER PRODUCTS

56.. Textileprocessing.

MINORSOURCE CATEGORIES

Lead acidbattery manufacture. I Solvent metal cleaning (degreasing).' Industrial surface coating: metal furniture. I Aumopxr. Section 111 and301(a) ofthe Clean Air Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 7411. 7601).

[FR Doc.78-24441 Filed8-30-78; 8:45am]

[4110-35]

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Health Care Financing Administration (42 CFR Part 4501

MEDICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS

Reimbursement far Eyeglassos and Hearing Aids

AGENCY: Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA), HEW.
ACTION: Notice ofIntent to regulate.
SUMMARY: This notice asks for suggestions on how to lolver the cost and improve the quality of eyeglases and hearing aids paidforunder State medicaid programs (medical assistance, title XIX of the Social Security Act). Current regulations establish "customary charges which are reasonable" as the upper limit for payment for eye- glasses and hearing aids. The Departmentis considering whether torequire

use ofvolume purchasing ormaximum allowable cost. DATES: Closing date for receipt of comments October 16, 1978. Please refer to MMB-217-NI. Agencies and organizations are requested to submit comments induplicate.
ADDRESS: Comments in writing to: Administrator, Health Care Financing

'Not prioritized, butincluded on list. See explanation Inpreamble. 

### 38877
Administration, Department of Health. Education, and,Welfare, P.O. Box2366,Washington,D.C. 20013.Beginning2weeksfromtoday,thepublic may review the comments onMonday through Friday of each week, from 8:30am. to5 p.m.inroom 5225 ofthe Department's offices at 330 C Street SW.,Washington.D.C. 202-245-0950.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Henry Splegelblatt, 202-245-0398.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
BACKGROUND During the past decade the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, the Federal Trade Commission, the U.S. Congress, and several con-- sumer groups have investigated the production and delivery systems for eyeglasses and hearing aids. All have concluded thatprices are often unreasonably high,which makes it difficult for many people who need these devices to get them. A comprehensive discussiod ofthe historyandproblems 

### surrounding the production anddistribution ofeyeglasses and hearing aids may be obtained by writing to the Medicaid Bureau,Health CareFixncingAdministration, 330 C Street SW., Washington,D.C. 20201.Following isa . brief discussion of State experience andof studies ofreimbursement practices.

PREsENTCOVERAGEANDREniMuRSEnENT PoLiciEs


### Provision of eyeglasses and hearing aids for medicaid recipient is optional,except that these devices,aswell as othervisionandhearingservices, must be provided by all States to eligible children under the early and periodic screening, diagnosis and treatment (EPSDT) program. Most States also provide special eyeglasses or contact lenses to medicaid patients following cataract surgery.

Currently 33 States,Guam, andthe Virgin Islands provide eyeglasses, and 27 States, Guam, and the Virgin Islands provide hearing aids. However, increasing State medicaid budgets have recently forced a few States to drop these optional services. Unless costs can-bereduced,otherStates may alsobeforcedtodropthem.

Current regulations at 42 CER 450.30(b)(4) define customarycharges which arereasonableas "the prevailingcharges inthe locality for compa- rable services under comparable circumstances". Sincemedicare andmost third-party insurers do not pay for hearing aids, and medicare pays only for special eyeglasses, thereare insufficient data about prices available for comparison.

Based on investigations of the eye- glasses andhearing aidproduction and

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 43, NO. 170-THURSDAY, AUGUST 31, 1978

HeinOnline -- 43 Fed. Reg. 38877 1978