April 8 , 2013

The Honorable Robert Perciasepe
, Acting Administrator U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20460

Re: Request for Administrative Reconsideration of the Commercial and Industrial Waste Incin eration Units: Reconsideration and Final Amendments; Non

- Hazardous Secondary Materials That Are Solid Waste (EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2003

- 0119 and EPA

- HQ

- RCRA

- 2008

- 0329 )

Dear Administrator Perciasepe;

The American Petroleum Institute (“API”) hereby submits this reque st for administrative
reconsideration of the Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units: Reconsideration and Final Amendments; Non

- Hazardous Secondary Materials That Are Solid
Waste , published at 78 Fed. Reg. 911 2 (February 7, 2013).

Pursu ant to Clean Air Act § 307(d)(7)(B), 42 U.S.C. § 7607(d)(7)(B), where it was impracticable to raise an objection during the period of public comment or if the grounds for such an objection arise after the public comment period (but within the time specifi ed for judicial review), and if such objections are of central relevance to the outcome of the rule, EPA is authorized to reconsider the rule. As we stated in our previous submissions, key provisions of the final rule were not raised in the proposed rule, leaving many companies with compliance deadlines that they had no opportunity to plan for and will have little or no ability to meet. Matthew Todd

Regulatory and Scientific Affairs
1220 L Street, NW Washington, DC 20005 Telepho ne: 202

- 682

- 8 319 Email: toddm@api.org www.api.orgHence, there was no opportunity to raise objections to these provisions during the public

comment period and they are ce ntral relevance to the ability of the refining industry to comply.

We are seeking reconsideration of two issues:

1. The applicability of the National Emission Standard for Hazar dous Air Pollutants for Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters (January 31, 2013) should not be based on a recordkeeping requirement
established in the Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incinerator Rule.

The definitions of commercial and industrial solid waste incineration (CISWI) un it in the February 7, 2013 final amendments to the CISWI NSPS standard and the associated emission guideline include the sentence “If the operating unit burns materials other than traditional fuels as defined in §241.2 that have been discarded, and you do not keep and produce records as required by [§60.2740(u) or §60.2175(v)], the operating unit is a CISWI unit.” Traditional fuels as defined in §241.2 are:

Traditional fuels means materials that are produced as fuels and are unused products that have not b een discarded and therefore, are not solid wastes, including: (1) Fuels that have been historically managed as valuable fuel products rather than being managed as waste materials, including fossil fuels ( e.g., coal, oil and natural gas), their derivatives (e.g., petroleum coke, bituminous coke, coal tar oil, refinery gas, synthetic fuel, heavy recycle, asphalts, blast furnace gas, recovered gaseous butane, and coke oven gas) and cellulosic biomass (virgin wood); and (2) alternative fuels developed from vir gin materials that can now be used as fuel products, including used oil which meets the specifications outlined in 40 CFR 279.11, currently mined coal refuse that previously had not been usable as coal, and clean cellulosic biomass. These fuels are not se condary materials or solid wastes unless discarded.

Thus, it appears that any boiler or process heater (BPH) that uses any material not specifically listed in the traditional fuels definition above is a CISWI unit, rather than a BPH MACT unit
unless it ke eps specific records that the CISWI rule rather than the BPH rule requires.It is unreasonable to have BPH MACT applicability determined based on a recordkeeping

requirements contained in another rule that we had no reason to review or comment upon as par t of our commenting on the BPH MACT proposal. Nothing in the BPH MACT proposal called our attention to the need to comment on the CISWI definition. Thus, we request EPA reconsider this portion of the CISWI definitions in the CISWI NSPS and Emission Guide line rules and only base CISWI and BPH MACT applicability on the materials burned in each type of unit, rather than on a recordkeeping requirement found only in the CISWI rule.

Recommendation: Delete the cited recordkeeping sentence from the definition o f “commercial and industrial solid waste incineration (CISWI) unit” in the Fe bruary 7, 2013 final amendments to the CISWI NSPS standard and the associated emission guideline.

2. EPA should reconsider the standards for small remote incinerators (SRIs)

API s upports the petition for reconsideration filed by the Alaska Oil & Gas Association (“AOGA”) and Alaska Miners Association (“AMA”) and Conoco Phillips Alaska, Inc., (“Conoco Phillips”) (hereinafter “Alaskan Petitioners”). Data developed after the close of t he comment period support the Alaskan Petitioners contention that the SRI standards are based

upon non

- representative data that does not adequately take into account variability for the best performing units.

Thank you for your consideration of these iss ues. If you have any questions, do not
hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

/s/

Matthew Todd

cc: Toni Jones, EPA Amy Hambrick, EPA