14734 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

submission that otherwise satisfies the 

provisions of the Clean Air Act. 

Therefore, the requirements of section 

12(d) of the NTTA do not apply. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: March 22, 2007. 

Bharat Mathur, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. E7–5809 Filed 3–28–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2006–0859; FRL–8293–4] 

RIN 2060–AN85 

Risk and Technology Review, Phase II, 

Group 2 

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-rdocket@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 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. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 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 Facilities .................................................................................................... 336411 0701 

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 Production ........................................................................................................... 325212 1311 

Hypalon(TM) Production .................................................................................................................................... 325212 1315 

Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production ................................................................................................................ 325212 1321 

Polybutadiene Rubber Production .................................................................................................................... 325212 1325 

Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and Latex Production ........................................................................................... 325212 1339 

Group IV Polymers and Resins: 

Acrylic-Butadiene-Styrene Production .............................................................................................................. 325211 1302 

Methyl Methacrylate-Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene Production .................................................................... 325211 1317 

Methyl Methacrylate-Butadiene-Styrene Production ........................................................................................ 325211 1318 

Nitrile Resins Production .................................................................................................................................. 325211 1342 

Polyethylene Terephthalate Production ........................................................................................................... 325211 1328 

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 

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: 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
14736 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

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 twostep 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 Production .................................................................... 325212 1313 

Polysulfide Rubber Production .................................................................................. 325212 1332 

Neoprene Production ................................................................................................. 325212 1320

Group II Polymers and Resins: 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 14737 

TABLE 2.—SOURCE CATEGORIES AND CORRESPONDING NAICS AND MACT CODES INCLUDED IN RISK AND TECHNOLOGY

REVIEW PHASE II—Continued 

RTR Phase II group Source category name NAICS codes MACT code 

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 Production .................................................................... 325212 1311 

Hypalon(TM) Production ............................................................................................. 325212 1315 

Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Production ......................................................................... 325212 1321 

Polybutadiene Rubber Production ............................................................................. 325212 1325 

Styrene-Butadiene Rubber and Latex Production .................................................... 325212 1339 

Group IV Polymers and Resins: 

Acrylic-Butadiene-Styrene Production ....................................................................... 325211 1302 

2 ................................ Group IV Polymers and Resins: 

Methyl Methacrylate-Acrylonitrile-Butadiene-Styrene Production ............................. 325211 1317 

Methyl Methacrylate-Butadiene-Styrene Production ................................................. 325211 1318 

Nitrile Resins Production ........................................................................................... 325211 1342

Polyethylene Terephthalate Production .................................................................... 325211 1328 

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 Electroplating ......................................................................... 332813 1610 

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 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
14738 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

1Environmental 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). 

2Environmental Protection Agency. Air Toxics 

Risk Assessment Reference Library, Volume I. EPA–

453K–04–001A. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/fera/ 

risk_atra_vol1.html. 

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. 

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. 

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 

biphenyls.

Polycyclic Organic Matter (POM) 

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 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 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 healthprotective 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, 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
14740 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

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: 

Æ Epichlorohydrin Elastomers 

Production 

Æ HypalonTM Production 

Æ Nitrile Butadiene Rubber 

Production 

Æ Polybutadiene Rubber Production 

Æ 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 categoryspecific 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 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 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, pressurevacuum 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. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
14742 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

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. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 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,Ndimethylformamide, 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, NNdimethylformamide, 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 prepolymerization, 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. 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
14744 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

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. Styrenebutadiene 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 StyreneButadiene 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 StyreneButadiene 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 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 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-butadienestyrene resin production is by batch 

emulsion. The primary HAP emissions 

during the acrylonitrile-butadienestyrene 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-butadienestyrene 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-AcrylonitrileButadiene-Styrene Resin Production 

Methyl methacrylate-acrylonitrilebutadiene-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-acrylonitrilebutadiene-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-AcrylonitrileButadiene-Styrene source category are 

acrylonitrile, butadiene, and styrene. 

The ANPRM data set for the Methyl 

Methacrylate-Acrylonitrile-ButadieneStyrene 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-ButadieneStyrene 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-ButadieneStyrene Production 

Methyl methacrylate-butadienestyrene 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-ButadieneStyrene 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 meltphase 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 fiberVerDate Aug<31>2005 18:15 Mar 28, 2007 Jkt 211001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\29MRP1.SGM 29MRP1

pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
14746 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

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 StyreneAcrylonitrile 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 styreneacrylonitrile, because much of the 

styrene-acrylonitrile resins that are 

produced are used as feedstock in the 

production of acrylonitrile-butadienestyrene. 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-ButadieneStyrene 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 StyreneAcrylonitrile 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, 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 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 wideweb 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. Wideweb 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 pisomers). 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 statesubmitted 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 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
14748 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

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 sourcecategory 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. 

Æ 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. 

Æ Facility name. 

Æ Facility address. 

Æ Facility category code (i.e., major or 

area source). 

• Emission point data 

Æ SCC and MACT codes 

Æ Emissions (tons per year (TPY)) of 

each HAP. 

Æ Emission release point type (i.e., 

fugitive, vertical, horizontal, gooseneck, 

vertical with raincap, or downward 

facing vent). 

Æ Emissions release characteristics: 

stack height and diameter, exit gas 

temperature, velocity, and flow rate. 

Æ Emission point latitude and 

longitude coordinates. 

• Data characteristics. 

Æ Acute emissions factors. 

Æ Speciation of metal HAP and POM. 

Æ 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 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 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° 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 pseudopoint 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 potentiallysignificant 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 

Facility Registry Identifier 

Stack Height 

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 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
14750 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 60 / Thursday, March 29, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

Facility data Emissions data 

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 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a 

Petition To List the Siskiyou Mountains 

Salamander and Scott Bar Salamander 

as Threatened or Endangered 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of 90-day petition 

finding. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 

90-day finding on a petition to list the 

Siskiyou Mountains salamander 

(Plethodon stormi) and Scott Bar 

salamander (Plethodon asupak) as 

threatened or endangered, under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). We find that the petition 

presents substantial scientific or 

commercial information indicating that 

listing these species may be warranted. 

Therefore, with the publication of this 

notice, we are initiating status reviews 

of these species, and we will issue a 12- 

month finding to determine if the 

petitioned action is warranted. To 

ensure that the status review of the 

Siskiyou Mountains and Scott Bar 

salamanders is comprehensive, we are 

soliciting scientific and commercial data 


pwalker on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS