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 Incineration 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 request 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. 9112 (February 7, 2013). 

Pursuant 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 specified 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

Telephone: 202-682-8319

Email: toddm@api.org

www.api.org
Hence, there was no opportunity to raise objections to these provisions during the public 

comment period and they are central 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 Hazardous 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) unit 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 been 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 virgin 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 secondary 

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 keeps 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 part 

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 Guideline 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 of “commercial 

and industrial solid waste incineration (CISWI) unit” in the February 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 supports 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 the 

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 issues. If you have any questions, do not 

hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

/s/

Matthew Todd

cc: Toni Jones, EPA

Amy Hambrick, EPA