16088 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Final Rule 210.8

Paragraph (a) of final rule 210.8

discusses the number of copies of the

complaint and any motion for

temporary relief which each

complainant must file with the

Commission. The Commission proposes

to amend paragraph (a) to require the

complainant to file enough

nonconfidential copies for use by the

Commission and its staff, service by the

Commission on each proposed

respondent, and service by the

Commission on the government of the

country of each foreign respondent.

Subpart H—Temporary Relief

Final Rule 210.52

Paragraph (e) of final rule 210.52

identifies the rules to be followed if a

complaint, a motion for temporary

relief, or the documentation supporting

a motion for temporary relief contains

confidential business information as

defined in 19 CFR 201.6(a). The

Commission proposes to amend

paragraph (e) of final rule 210.52 to

include references to final rules 210.4(a)

and 210.8(a) (which the Commission

also proposes to amend).

PART 210—ADJUDICATIVE

PROCEDURES

1. The authority citation for part 210

will continue to read as follows:

Authority: 19 U.S.C. 1333, 1335, and 1337.

2. For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, the Commission proposes to

revise paragraph (f)(3) of § 210.4 to read

as follows:

§ 210.4 Written submissions;

representations; sanctions.

* * * * *

(f) Specifications; filing of documents.

* * *

(3) (i) If a complaint, a motion for

temporary relief, or the documentation

supporting a motion for temporary relief

contains confidential business

information as defined in § 201.6(a) of

this chapter, the complainant shall file

nonconfidential copies of the complaint,

the motion for temporary relief, or the

documentation supporting the motion

for temporary relief concurrently with

the requisite confidential copies, as

provided in § 210.8(a) of this part.

(ii) Persons who file the following

submissions that contain confidential

business information covered by an

administrative protective order, or that

are the subject of a request for

confidential treatment, must file

nonconfidential copies and serve them

on the other parties to the investigation

or related proceeding within 10

calendar days after filing the

confidential version with the

Commission:

(A) A supplement to a complaint and

all exhibits thereto;

(B) A response to a complaint and all

supplements and exhibits thereto;

(C) All submissions relating to a

motion to amend the complaint or

notice of investigation; and

(D) All submissions addressed to the

Commission.

Other sections of this part may require,

or the Commission or the administrative

law judge may order, the filing and

service of nonconfidential copies of

other kinds of confidential submissions.

If the submitter’s ability to prepare a

nonconfidential copy is dependent

upon receipt of the nonconfidential

version of an initial determination, or a

Commission order or opinion, or a

ruling by the administrative law judge

or the Commission as to whether some

or all of the information at issue is

entitled to confidential treatment, the

nonconfidential copies of the

submission must be filed within 10

calendar days after service of the

Commission or administrative law judge

document in question. The time periods

for filing specified in this paragraph

apply unless the Commission, the

administrative law judge, or another

section of this part specifically provides

otherwise.

3. For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, the Commission proposes to

revise paragraph (a) of § 210.5 to read as

follows:

§ 210.5 Confidential business information.

(a) Definition and submission.

Confidential business information shall

be defined and identified in accordance

with § 201.6(a) and (c) of this chapter.

Unless the Commission, the

administrative law judge, or another

section of this part states otherwise,

confidential business information shall

be submitted in accordance with

§ 201.6(b) of this chapter. In the case of

a complaint and a motion for temporary

relief filed under this part, the number

of nonconfidential copies shall be

prescribed by § 210.8(a) of this part.

* * * * *

4. For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, the Commission proposes to

revise paragraph (a) of § 210.8 to read as

follows:

§ 210.8 Commencement of preinstitution

proceedings.

(a) Upon receipt of complaint. A

preinstitution proceeding is commenced

by filing with the Secretary a signed

original complaint and the requisite

number of true copies. The complainant

shall file 14 confidential copies of the

complaint, 14 nonconfidential copies,

plus one confidential copy and one

nonconfidential copy for each person

named in the complaint as violating

section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930,

and one nonconfidential copy for the

government of each foreign country of

any person or persons so named. If the

complainant is seeking temporary relief,

the complainant must file 14

confidential copies of the motion, 14

nonconfidential copies, plus one

additional confidential copy and one

additional nonconfidential copy of the

motion for such relief for each proposed

respondent, and one nonconfidential

copy for the government of the foreign

country of the proposed respondent.

The additional copies of the complaint

and motion for temporary relief for each

proposed respondent and the

appropriate foreign government are to

be provided notwithstanding the

procedures applicable to a motion for

temporary relief, which require service

of the complaint and motion for

temporary relief by the complainant.

* * * * *

5. For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, the Commission proposes to

revise paragraph (e) of § 210.52 to read

as follows:

§ 210.52 Motions for temporary relief.

* * * * *

(e) If the complaint, the motion for

temporary relief, or the documentation

supporting the motion for temporary

relief contains confidential business

information as defined in § 201.6(a) of

this chapter, the complainant must

follow the procedure outlined in

§§ 210.4(a), 210.5(a), 201.6(a) and (c),

210.8(a), and 210.55 of this part.

Issued: March 23, 1995.

By Order of the Commission.

Donna R. Koehnke,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–7648 Filed 3–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Chapter I

[FRL–5174–3]

National Emission Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants Streamlined

Development: Announcement and

Request for Comments

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 1995 / Proposed Rules 16089

ACTION: Announcement and Request for

comments.

SUMMARY: Section 112(d) of the Clean

Air Act (CAA) directs EPA to reduce

emissions of hazardous air pollutants

(HAPs) by requiring new and existing

sources to achieve an emissions

standard attainable by the maximum

achievable control technology (MACT).

The HAPs regulated under Section 112

have been characterized as carcinogenic,

mutagenic, bioaccumulative, and

causing other adverse health and

environmental effects. MACT standards

are intended to significantly reduce

these effects.

This notice announces and requests

comments on EPA’s plan to use a

streamlined approach to promulgating

MACT standards, termed MACT

Partnerships. Section 112(e) requires

EPA to promulgate, on a strict schedule,

MACT standards for the more than 150

source categories of HAPs listed

pursuant to Section 112(c)(1). This large

number of MACT standards can not be

addressed by the traditional approach to

standards development. The MACT

Partnerships approach is designed to

expedite the regulatory development

process and provide information for

case-by-case emission limitation

determinations as required by Section

112(g) and 112(j) of the CAA. The

MACT Partnerships approach is

founded on the mutual interests of all

the major stakeholders, including EPA,

States and local agencies, industry, and

environmental organizations. This

notice also announces the availability

on the Technology Transfer Network

(TTN), one of EPA’s electronic bulletin

boards, of an initial list of MACT

standards being handled under MACT

Partnerships.

DATES: Comments: Comments must be

received on or before May 15, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments: Comments

should be submitted (in duplicate or as

a WP5.1 file, if possible) to: Policy,

Planning, and Standards Group;

Emission Standards Division (MD–13),

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

27711, telephone number (919) 541–

5623.

TTN: The TTN provides information

and technology exchange in various

areas of air pollution control. The

service is free, except for the cost of a

phone call. Dial (919) 541–5742 for up

to a 14,400 bps modem. If more

information on TTN is needed, call the

HELP line at (919) 541–5384.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For

general information concerning this

notice, contact Albert H. Wehe at (919)

541–5623; Policy, Planning and

Standards Group; Emission Standards

Division (MD–13), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Research Triangle

Park, NC 27711.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Pursuant to Section 112(c) and 112(e)

of the CAA, EPA published two Federal

Register notices laying out the source

categories of HAPs regulated under

Section 112(d) of the Clean Air Act. In

the first Federal Register notice (57 FR

31578, July 16, 1992), EPA published

the source categories of HAPs as

required under Section 112(c). In the

second Federal Register notice (58 FR

83941, December 3, 1993), EPA

presented the list in a regulatory

schedule as required by Section 112(e).

In addition to requiring the regulatory

schedule, Section 112(e) requires EPA to

develop MACT standards under Section

112(d) according to this regulatory

schedule.

There are consequences if EPA fails to

set the MACT standards on time. Thirtynine MACT standards were targeted for

promulgation by November 1994, fortythree more by Nov 1997, and an

additional eighty-seven by Nov 2000.

Section 112(j) of the CAA requires the

States to establish emission limitations,

using a case-by-case determination of

what the Federal standard would have

been if EPA fails to promulgate Federal

standards.

Case-by-case MACT determinations

under 112(j) will require substantial

information and resources from State

and local agencies, industry, and

environmental groups. Individually,

State and local agencies, industry and

environmental groups have expressed

their interest in avoiding a significant

number of case-by-case MACT

determinations. Accordingly, there

appears to be a strong incentive for EPA,

State and local agencies, industry and

environmental groups to work together

to enable EPA to promulgate the

standards on schedule and to gather

information for 112(j) case-by-case

MACT determinations.

II. Current Situation

The EPA is currently behind schedule

on a number of MACT standards due in

November 1994 and potentially behind

schedule on a number of MACT

standards due in November 1997. The

EPA has promulgated about one-half of

the MACT standards due in November

1994. The EPA is already under courtordered schedules to complete many of

the remaining MACT standards due in

November 1994. These schedules will

ensure that standards are promulgated

before case-by-case MACT

determinations would be required by

Section 112(j). The EPA has recently

been served notice by an environmental

group indicating the group plans to file

a petition to compel EPA to promulgate

the few standards due in November

1994 that are not done nor on an

existing court-ordered schedule.

In 1994, EPA had to postpone work

on several of the MACT standards due

in November 1997 and November 2000

(the 7-year and 10-year MACT

standards) as a result of resource

constraints. The EPA had to do so in

part to ensure that adequate resources

were available for the court-ordered

MACT standards. These resource

constraints have put EPA behind on

completing the 7-year and 10-year

MACT standards.

The amount of work (and therefore

resources) needed to complete the 7-

year and 10-year MACT standards on

time is difficult to predict. Nevertheless,

given the EPA’s experience of the

MACT standards completed to date,

EPA believes that the amount of work

can be significantly reduced by

streamlining and re-engineering the way

these standards are developed. This

work helps EPA appropriately

subcategorize source categories, define

the MACT floor (see Section 112(d)),

address emissions of special HAPs (e.g.,

Great Waters and urban air toxics), and

evaluate potential regulatory options

beyond the MACT floor.

Resources have been traditionally

used by EPA to gather and analyze

essentially all the data and information

necessary to reach the regulatory

decisions associated with standards

such as MACT standards. Many of the

7-year and 10-year MACT standards had

not been studied by EPA prior to recent

years. Traditionally, EPA has found that

it takes about 4 years to develop

national technology-based standards

such as MACT standards. Accordingly,

to complete the 7-year MACT standards

by November 1997, EPA had to begin in

earnest to work on these standards early

in 1994. Thus, to complete the 7-year

MACT standards on time, EPA needs to

reduce the amount of work and time

associated with these standards.

In order to meet both the 7-year and

10-year deadlines, EPA has concluded

that it must develop new approaches to

streamline the standard setting process

and to leverage its limited resources. To

that end, EPA is currently initiating a

new process for developing MACT

standards that involves a partnership

with states, industry, and environmental

organizations. This partnership, called

MACT Partnerships, is founded on the
16090 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 60 / Wednesday, March 29, 1995 / Proposed Rules

mutual interests of all the major

stakeholders in the air toxics program.

For many source categories for which

MACT standards are required, State and

local agency personnel have the

expertise, information and desire to

provide technical assistance for the

development of MACT standards.

Industry personnel are also invaluable

sources of technical expertise and data

needed to develop MACT standards. In

addition, environmental groups have a

thorough understanding of the interests

of the public and can assist in the

development of as many MACT

standards as practical.

III. Streamlined MACT Development

Approach

The MACT Partnerships program, as

currently envisioned, involves two

phases for each MACT standard. The

first phase involves development of a

‘‘presumptive MACT’’. A ‘‘presumptive

MACT’’ is not an emission standard; but

it serves as a statement of current

knowledge of maximum available

control technologies and a basis for a

decision on how to develop the

emission standard for the source

category involved. The second phase is

the formal standard development

process, which results in a promulgated

MACT standard for the source category.

In the first phase of the MACT

Partnerships program, the development

of a ‘‘presumptive MACT’’, begins with

two main steps: (1) A meeting between

EPA and State and local agencies,

known as the presumptive MACT

meeting and (2) consultations with

industry, environmental and other

interest groups. In the presumptiveMACT meeting, EPA, and States review

available information to estimate what

MACT would be if only this information

were used in the determination. This

draft presumptive MACT then goes

through a consultation stage where

industry and environmental groups are

invited to comment on the selected

presumptive MACT. After this

consultation, EPA and the State/local

agencies determine a final presumptive

MACT and how best to complete the

development of a standard, with the

normal opportunities for public

comment. This determination of a

presumptive MACT and a decision on

how to complete development of a

standard are the two products of the

first phase.

For the second phase of MACT

Partnerships, EPA envisions the use of

one of three basic regulatory

development paths: Adopt-a-MACT,

share-a-MACT, or a streamlinedtraditional approach. In all cases, EPA

would eventually propose and then

promulgate the MACT standard. The

‘‘Adopt-a-MACT’’ path allows EPA to

enter into an agreement with a State

wherein the State would accept primary

responsibility for data collection and

analysis. Alternatively, a ‘‘share-aMACT’’ path allows states, industry or

both to share with EPA the

responsibility for developing the

underlying data and analysis from

which EPA would determine the MACT

emission limitation. When no suitable

partners can be found, a ‘‘streamlinedtraditional’’ path is the last alternative.

In the ‘‘streamlined-traditional’’ path,

EPA would go through a streamlined

process of the traditional rule

development, with a presumptive

MACT specification as an intermediate

stage. No matter what path is chosen,

almost all standards would go through

phase one, namely, the presumptive

MACT meeting and the second

consultative stage.

The EPA has successfully worked

with States and industry in the

development of presumptive MACT in

two pilot projects. One project

concerned the MACT standard primary

aluminum manufacturing. The States of

Washington and New York worked with

EPA in the development of a

presumptive MACT. In addition, the

Aluminum Manufacturers Association

and its member companies participated.

For the second project, EPA worked

with the States of Wisconsin and

Maryland to develop a presumptive

MACT for bakers yeast manufacturing.

Both EPA and State partners have

worked with the industry to move from

the presumptive MACT to develop a

MACT standard that is scheduled to be

proposed in the fall of 1995.

Currently, EPA is beginning more

than 25 projects within the MACT

Partnerships program. Presumptive

MACT meetings are scheduled over the

next several months. For the

information of the public, EPA has

developed a table of these projects and

has added it to the Technology Transfer

Network bulletin board system (TTN

BBS) See ADDRESSES section above for

information on how to access the TTN

BBS. The list can be found under the

Clean Air Act (Rules/Guidance/Policy)

section, Tittle III: Hazardous Air

Pollutants subsection and then the

Status of Rules/Projects portion of the

TTN BBS.

In summary, the MACT Partnerships

program is one way to pursue new,

assertive ways to develop MACT

standards. MACT Partnerships is

characterized by EPA and State/

localities working together with

industry and environmentalists to fulfill

the mandate to set MACT standards for

sources of hazardous air pollutants.

Given the mutual interest of all the

stakeholders and EPA’s current

‘‘budgetary’’ situation within the air

toxics program, EPA has begun

redefining its role in selected areas of

MACT standard development for many

MACT standards as a coordinator and

facilitator.

IV. Request for Comments

With this notice the EPA is requesting

comments on:

(1) The concept of MACT

Partnerships as an approach for

streamlining the development of MACT

standards,

(2) How to improve the MACT

Partnership approach,

(3) Alternative ways to streamline the

MACT development process, and

(4) Using presumptive MACT as a

starting point for case-by-case MACT

determinations.

V. Administrative Requirement

A. Paperwork Reduction Act

The request for comments detailed in

this notice seeks voluntary responses

and does not affect information

collection burdens.

B. Executive Order 12866 Review

This notice is a request for comments

and, therefore, was not reviewed by the

Office of Management and Budget under

Executive Order 12866. It was not

considered significant.

Dated: March 14, 1995.

Mary D. Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation.

[FR Doc. 95–7492 Filed 3–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 63

[AD-FRL–5175–9]

RIN 2060–AE37

National Emission Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions

From the Production of Acrylonitrile

Butadiene Styrene (ABS) Resin,

Styrene Acrylonitrile (SAN) Resin,

Methyl Methacrylate Acrylonitrile

Butadiene Styrene (MABS) Resin,

Methyl Methacrylate Butadiene Styrene

(MBS) Resin, Polystyrene Resin, Poly

(Ethylene Terephthalate) (PET) Resin,

and Nitrile Resin (Group IV Polymers

and Resins)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule and notice of

public hearing.