OAR-2008-0708-DRAFT-0328[1]

-----Forwarded by Melanie King/RTP/USEPA/US on 02/15/2010 09:27PM -----

To: Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov 

From: Melanie King/RTP/USEPA/US 

Date: 02/12/2010 11:22AM 

cc: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Michael Horowitz/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Fred 

Talcott/DC/USEPA/US@EPA, Larry Sorrels/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Subject: latest draft of RICE package 

Cortney, 

Attached is the revised preamble and regulation text and revised RIA for the RICE NESHAP. 

 Also attached is the revised RIA. You will notice a few changes to the package. 

1) We were still referencing some recordkeeping and reporting requirements ior startup, 

shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) in the Part 63 General Provisions that didn't make sense 

anymore in light of the recent Court decision on the SSM exemption. Therefore what we 

have done is instead of referencing those sections, we have included the appropriate text 

from the General Provisions directly in subpart ZZZZ itself, and removed the text that wasn't 

applicable anymore. You will see those changes in 63.6650(c)(4), 63.6655(a)(2), and Table 

7. In Table 7 we have removed the requirement for an immediate SSM report and limited 

line 1.c. to malfunction only. We are not adding new requirements, just eliminating ones that 

didn't make sense to include anymore. OGC also made a few edits to the SSM discussion in 

the preamble. 

2) OGC preferred that we not the references to subpart E into subpart ZZZZ. They said that 

it was a freestanding subpart and there was no need to reference it here. We do still 

mention it in the preamble. 

Larry is going to send you the RIA separately. 

In response to the issues that are still outstanding with SBA, we reiterate that we have 

focused the requirements for emission controls on a the subset of the population of 

stationary CI engines that has the greatest impact on people. The total estimated population 

of existing stationary CI engines is 936,000. The estimated number of engines that have 

emission standards based on the use of oxidation catalyst control is 44,000, which is 5 

percent of the total population. While these engines are only 5 percent of the population, 

they emit an estimated 44 percent of the total HAP emissions from existing stationary CI 

engines. We cover the remaining HAP emissions through work or management practice 

standards on the remaining population of stationary CI engines (except the 100-300 HP 

engines at major sources which have emission limits that are based on data from engines 

without oxidation catalyst control). 

We have made several changes since the proposed rule that further reduce the burden of 

the rule on affected sources. These changes include: 

1) The final rule has no numerical emission limits for emergency engines and for engines 

<100 HP at major sources 

2) Residential/institutional/commercial emergency engines at area sources are not subject to 

the final rule 

3) We revised the management practice frequencies and added the option to use an oil 

analysis program 

We performed economic impact analysis which showed that the rule would not result in 

significant economic impacts for a substantial number of small entities. There have been no 

facts provided by SBA to support the claim that there are tens of thousands of agricultural 

engines that will be heavily impacted by this rulemaking. The rule imposes management 

practice standards for engines at area sources that are less than 300 HP. The information 

that we received from comment letters indicated that engines used by the agricultural sector 

were predominately smaller than 300 HP. See for example the comment from the American 

Farm Bureau Federation (-0174) which states "In most instances, the engines are of the 

Page 1
OAR-2008-0708-DRAFT-0328[1]

compression ignition type rated at 300 hp or less." The comment letter from Southern 

Gardens Citrus Holding Corporation (-0189) stated that they operate 74 stationary RICE, of 

which one is greater than 300 HP. That means 1.4 percent of their engines are >300 HP. 

 Other commenters provided similar information. 

EPA does not believe that a limited use subcategory is warranted or justified. For engines 

smaller than 300 HP, if we created a limited use subcategory, the requirements would not be 

different than for other non-emergency engines, since we are already requiring the MACT 

floor emission limits for major sources and management practices for area sources of that 

size. For engines greater than 300 HP, we believe that the costs of control are acceptable 

given the reductions that would be achieved from these engines. 

We believe a broad national rule that provides equal environmental protection to populations 

in both urban and rural areas is appropriate for stationary CI engines. The emission controls 

that are the basis of the rule are equally available in urban and rural areas, and the cost of 

control is not significantly higher in rural areas. EPA does not have precise information on 

the location of these engines such that we could do air quality modeling on the emissions and 

impact on specific populations. However, even if the engines are located in rural areas, 

many of them would be upwind of more highly populated areas. SBA has proposed that 

rural engines be excluded from retrofits if no person resides within 300 meters. We do not 

find that it is appropriate to incorporate this provision in the rule because we do not believe 

that the emissions from these engines only travel 300 meters or less. Attached is a 

document that discusses this issue in much more detail. 

(See attached file: OMB Draft RICE NESHAP FRM Preamble and Reg Text 2-12-10.doc) (See 

attached file: OMB Draft RICE NESHAP FRM Preamble and Reg Text 2-12-10 redline from 2-

9 version.doc) (See attached file: Response on urban-rural issue.doc) 

 

Thanks, 

Melanie King 

Energy Strategies Group 

Sector Policies and Programs Division 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Mail Code D243-01 

RTP, NC 27711 

Phone: (919) 541-2469 

Fax: (919) 541-5450 

king.melanie@epa.gov 

Page 2