[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 166 (Tuesday, August 29, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40970-40981]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18211]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-1042; FRL-9967-01-OAR]
RIN 2060-AT13


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Wool 
Fiberglass Manufacturing; Rotary Spin Lines Technology Review

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In this action, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is 
proposing amendments to previous proposals to the National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for the Wool Fiberglass 
Manufacturing source category. In the July 29, 2015, final rulemaking, 
the EPA deferred action on previously proposed formaldehyde, methanol 
and phenol emission limits from rotary spin (RS) lines at wool 
fiberglass manufacturing facilities. In this action, the EPA is 
proposing to readopt the existing emission limits for formaldehyde, to 
establish emission limits for methanol, and to establish a work 
practice standard for phenol emissions from bonded RS lines at wool 
fiberglass manufacturing facilities. In addition, the EPA is proposing 
amendments to the emission limits promulgated on July 29, 2015, for 
formaldehyde, methanol, and phenol from flame attenuation (FA) lines at 
wool fiberglass manufacturing facilities. The EPA is only taking 
comments on the specific proposed requirements and revisions set forth 
in this proposed rulemaking, which are based on information contained 
in this proposal. The EPA is not taking comment on any aspect of 
previous rulemakings, including the November 25, 2011, April 15, 2013, 
and November 13, 2014, proposals.

DATES: The EPA must receive written comments on this proposed rule on 
or before October 13, 2017.
    Public Hearing. If a public hearing is requested by September 5, 
2017, then we will hold a public hearing on September 13, 2017. The 
last day to pre-register in advance to speak at the public hearing will 
be September 11, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2010-1042, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or withdrawn from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any 
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA 
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located 
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other 
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA 
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, 
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
    Public Hearing. If a hearing is requested, it will be held at the 
EPA WJC East Building, 1201 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 
20004. If a public hearing is requested, then we will provide 
additional details about the public hearing on our Web site at https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/wool-fiberglass-manufacturing-national-emissions-standards. To request a hearing, to 
register to speak at a hearing, or to inquire if a hearing will be 
held, please contact Aimee St. Clair at (919) 541-1063 or by email at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5d2e293e313c342f733c343038381d382d3c733a322b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d0a3a4b3bcb1b9a2feb1b9bdb5b590b5a0b1feb7bfa6">[email protected]</span></a>. The EPA does not intend to publish any future 
notices in the Federal Register regarding a public hearing on this 
proposed action and directs all inquiries regarding a hearing to the 
Web site and contact person identified above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this proposed 
action, contact Mr. Brian Storey, Office of Air Quality Planning and 
Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D243-04), 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; 
telephone number: (919) 541-1103; fax number: (919) 541-5450; email 
address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#aedddac1dccbd780ccdcc7cfc0eecbdecf80c9c1d8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3241465d40574b1c50405b535c725742531c555d44">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Docket. The EPA has established a docket for 
this rulemaking under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-1042. All documents 
in the docket are listed in the Regulations.gov index. Although listed 
in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or 
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain 
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the 
Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly 
available docket materials are available either electronically at 
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, 
Room 3334, EPA WJC West Building, 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 EPA Docket Center is (202) 566-1742.
    Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2010-1042. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be 
included in the public docket without change and may be made available 
online at https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal 
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed 
to be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by 
statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or 
otherwise protected through https://www.regulations.gov or email. The 
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, 
which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information 
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email 
comment directly to the EPA without going through https://www.regulations.gov, your email 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, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other 
contact information in the body of your comment and with any

[[Page 40971]]

disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the 
EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should 
not include special characters or any form of encryption and be free of 
any defects or viruses. For additional information about the EPA's 
public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
    Public Hearing. If requested by September 5, 2017, a public hearing 
will be held on September 13, 2017 at the EPA WJC East Building, 1201 
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004. If a public hearing is 
requested, then we will provide additional details about the public 
hearing on our Web site at https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/wool-fiberglass-manufacturing-national-emissions-standards. 
In addition, you may contact Aimee St. Clair at (919) 541-1063 or email 
at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#661512050a070f1448070f0b03032603160748010910"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5b282f38373a3229753a32363e3e1b3e2b3a753c342d">[email protected]</span></a> with public hearing inquiries. The last day to 
pre-register to speak at a hearing, if one is held, will be September 
11, 2017. Additionally, requests to speak will be taken the day of the 
hearing at the hearing registration desk, although preferences on 
speaking times may not be able to be fulfilled. Please note that 
registration requests received before the hearing will be confirmed by 
the EPA via email.
    The EPA will make every effort to accommodate all speakers who 
arrive and register. If the hearing is held at a U.S. governmental 
facility, individuals planning to attend the hearing should be prepared 
to show valid picture identification to the security staff to gain 
access to the meeting room. Please note that the REAL ID Act, passed by 
Congress in 2005, established new requirements for entering federal 
facilities. If your driver's license is issued by Alaska, American 
Samoa, California, Guam, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, 
Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, 
New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Northern Mariana Islands, 
Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South 
Carolina, Texas, Virgin Islands, Virginia, or the state of Washington, 
you must present an additional form of identification to enter the 
federal building. Acceptable alternative forms of identification 
include: Federal employee badges, passports, enhanced driver's 
licenses, and military identification cards. In addition, you will need 
to obtain a property pass for any personal belongings you bring with 
you. Upon leaving the building, you will be required to return this 
property pass to the security desk. No large signs will be allowed in 
the building, cameras may only be used outside of the building and 
demonstrations will not be allowed on federal property for security 
reasons.
    Preamble Acronyms and Abbreviations. We use multiple acronyms and 
terms in this preamble. While this list may not be exhaustive, to ease 
the reading of this preamble and for reference purposes, the EPA 
defines the following terms and acronyms here:

BACT best available control technology
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI Confidential Business Information
CD-ROM Compact Disc Read-Only Memory
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FA lame attenuation
FR Federal Register
FTIR Fourier Transform Infrared
HAP hazardous air pollutants
ICR information collection request
LAER lowest achievable emission rate
lb/ton pounds per ton
MACT maximum achievable control technology
MIR maximum individual risk
NESHAP national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
NRDC Natural Resource Defense Council
OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PF phenol-formaldehyde
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RS rotary spin
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
tpy tons per year

    Organization of this Document. The information in this preamble is 
organized as follows:

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to me?
    B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related 
information?
    C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?
II. Background
    A. What is the statutory authority for this action?
    B. What is the regulatory history for wool fiberglass 
manufacturing?
    C. What is the purpose of this proposal?
III. What are the proposed rule requirements for RS lines and what 
is our rationale?
    A. What are the proposed rule requirements for formaldehyde 
emissions from bonded RS lines?
    B. What are the proposed rule requirements for methanol 
emissions from bonded RS lines?
    C. What are the proposed rule requirements for phenol emissions 
from bonded RS lines?
IV. What are the proposed rule amendments resulting from our 
technology review and our proposed decisions?
    A. What are the results and proposed decisions for formaldehyde 
emissions from RS lines based on our technology review?
    B. What are the proposed requirements for methanol emissions 
from RS lines?
    C. What are the proposed requirements for phenol emissions from 
RS lines?
    D. What compliance dates are we proposing?
V. What other changes are we proposing to the NESHAP in this action?
VI. What are the proposed amendments applicable to FA lines?
VII. Summary of Cost, Environmental and Economic Impacts
    A. How many sources are affected?
    B. What are the air quality impacts?
    C. What are the cost impacts?
    D. What are the economic impacts?
    E. What are the benefits?
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Table 1 of this preamble lists the NESHAP and associated regulated 
industrial source category that is the subject of this proposal. Table 
1 of this preamble is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather 
provides a guide for readers regarding the entities likely to be 
affected by this proposed action.

[[Page 40972]]



    Table 1--NESHAP and Industrial Source Categories Affected By This
                             Proposed Action
------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Source category                  NESHAP          NAICS code \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing...  Subpart NNN...........          327993
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.

    The proposed standards, once promulgated, will be directly 
applicable to the affected sources. Federal, state, local, and tribal 
government entities are not affected by this proposed action.
    In 1992, the EPA defined the Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing source 
category as any facility engaged in producing wool fiberglass from 
sand, feldspar, sodium sulfate, anhydrous borax, boric acid, or any 
other materials. In the wool fiberglass manufacturing process, molten 
glass is formed into fibers that are bonded with an organic resin to 
create a wool-like material that is used as thermal or acoustical 
insulation. The category includes, but is not limited to, the following 
processes: Glass-melting furnace, marble forming, refining, fiber 
forming, binder application, curing, and cooling. Facilities produce 
bonded building insulation using an RS manufacturing line, and bonded 
pipe insulation and other heavy-density products using an FA 
manufacturing line. If you have any questions regarding the 
applicability of the proposed amendments, contact the person listed in 
the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related 
information?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of 
this action is available on the Internet. A redline version of the 
regulatory language that incorporates the proposed changes in this 
action is available in the docket for this action (Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2010-1042). Following publication in the Federal Register, the 
EPA will post the Federal Register version of the proposal and key 
technical documents at this same Web site. Information on the overall 
residual risk and technology review (RTR) program is available at 
https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html.

C. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for the EPA?

    For comments on this proposal, do not submit information containing 
CBI to the EPA through https://www.regulations.gov or email. 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 the EPA, 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 comments that includes 
information claimed as CBI, you must submit a copy of the comments that 
does not contain the information claimed as CBI for inclusion in the 
public docket. If you submit a CD-ROM or disk 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 the EPA's electronic public docket without prior 
notice. Information marked as CBI will not be disclosed except in 
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 Code of Federal Regulations 
(CFR) part 2. Send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the 
following address: OAQPS Document Control Officer (C404-02), OAQPS, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North 
Carolina 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-1042.
    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.

II. Background

A. What is the statutory authority for this action?

    The statutory authority for this action is provided by sections 112 
and 301 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401 et 
seq.). Section 112 of the CAA establishes a comprehensive regulatory 
process to address emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from 
stationary sources. In the first stage, after the EPA has identified 
categories of sources emitting one or more of the HAP listed in CAA 
section 112(b), CAA section 112(d) requires us to promulgate 
technology-based NESHAP for those sources. ``Major sources'' are those 
that emit or have the potential to emit 10 tons per year (tpy) or more 
of a single HAP or 25 tpy or more of any combination of HAP. For major 
sources, the technology-based NESHAP must reflect the maximum degree of 
emission reductions of HAP achievable (after considering cost, energy 
requirements, and non-air quality health and environmental impacts) and 
are commonly referred to as maximum achievable control technology 
(MACT) standards. Additionally, CAA section 112(h) allows the agency to 
adopt a work practice standard in lieu of a numerical emission standard 
only if it is ``not feasible in the judgment of the Administrator to 
prescribe or enforce an emission standard for control of a hazardous 
air pollutant.'' This phrase is defined as applying where ``the 
Administrator determines that the application of measurement 
methodology to a particular class of sources is not practicable due to 
technological and economic limitations.'' CAA section 112(h)(1) and 
(2).
    The EPA is required to review the technology-based standards and 
revise them ``as necessary (taking into account developments in 
practices, processes, and control technologies)'' no less frequently 
than every 8 years. CAA section 112(d)(6). In conducting this review, 
the EPA is not required to recalculate the MACT floor. Natural 
Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. EPA, 529 F.3d 1077, 1084 (D.C. Cir. 
2008). Association of Battery Recyclers, Inc. v. EPA, 716 F.3d 667 
(D.C. Cir. 2013).
    In this action, the EPA is proposing to complete a technology 
review for RS lines in accordance with section 112(d)(6) of the CAA. In 
addition, the EPA is proposing to amend certain emission limits 
promulgated on July 29, 2015, as part of the RTR for the standards for 
FA lines at wool fiberglass manufacturing facilities.

B. What is the regulatory history for wool fiberglass manufacturing?

    The EPA promulgated the Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing NESHAP on 
June 14, 1999 (62 FR 31695). The 1999 NESHAP, which is codified at 40 
CFR part 63, subpart NNN, includes emissions standards for formaldehyde 
emissions from new and existing RS lines. On July 29, 2015, we 
published the final rule amendments to the Wool Fiberglass 
Manufacturing NESHAP resulting from our completion of certain aspects 
of the CAA section 112(f)(2) residual risk review and the CAA section 
112(d)(6) technology review for that NESHAP RTR. 80 FR 45280.

[[Page 40973]]

Specifically, the July 29, 2015, final rule:
    (1) Established a chromium emissions limit for gas-fired, glass-
melting furnaces under CAA section 112(f)(2);
    (2) revised the particulate matter limit for gas-fired, glass-
melting furnaces at major sources under CAA section 112(d)(6);
    (3) established work practice standards for hydrogen chloride and 
hydrogen fluoride emissions from glass-melting furnaces at wool 
fiberglass manufacturing facilities under CAA section 112(h);
    (4) eliminated the use of formaldehyde as a surrogate and 
established revised limits for formaldehyde and first-time limits for 
methanol and phenol emitted from FA lines under CAA sections 112(d)(2) 
and (d)(3);
    (5) eliminated FA line subcategories;
    (6) removed the exemption for startup and shutdown periods and 
established work practice standards that apply during startup and 
shutdown periods; and
    (7) established a chromium emission limits for both new and 
existing gas-fired, glass-melting furnaces at area sources in the Wool 
Fiberglass Manufacturing source category under CAA section 112(d)(5).
    In the July 2015 rule, we did not finalize proposed emissions 
limits for formaldehyde, methanol, and phenol emissions from forming 
cooling and collection processes on bonded RS lines under CAA sections 
112(d)(2) and (3). We explained that this decision was based on 
comments we received on our various proposals indicating that the 
proposed limits likely relied on incorrect data. We explained that we 
had issued an Information Collection Request (ICR) under CAA section 
114 for purposes of obtaining the requisite data. 80 FR 45293. Since 
then, we have received and evaluated responses to the ICR. More 
recently, we have received new information and data from a facility 
that operates FA lines that cast doubts on information and data that 
the agency relied on in promulgating the July 2015 final rule emissions 
limits for FA lines.

C. What is the purpose of this proposal?

    This notice proposes the following amendments to the NESHAP for the 
Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing source category:
    <bullet> Readopting formaldehyde emission limits from bonded RS 
lines under CAA section 112(d)(6);
    <bullet> Establishing new emission limits for methanol from bonded 
RS lines under CAA section 112(d)(2) and (3);
    <bullet> Establishing work practice standards for phenol from 
bonded RS lines under CAA section 112(h);
    <bullet> Amending the incinerator operating limits to include 
cooling emissions from both RS and FA limits under CAA section 
112(d)(2) and (3);
    <bullet> Establishing new subcategories of FA lines under CAA 
section 112(d)(1);
    <bullet> Establishing new emission limits for formaldehyde, 
methanol, and phenol from most of the newly proposed FA line 
subcategories under CAA section 112(d)(2) and (3); and
    <bullet> Setting work practice standards for phenol from one newly 
proposed FA line subcategory under CAA section 112(h).
    We are requesting comments on only the specific proposed revisions 
to the Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing NESHAP that are presented in this 
notice. We are not reopening or accepting comment on any other aspect 
of the 2015 final rule or prior proposals. Taking final action on the 
proposed revisions to the standards for RS lines would complete the 
required CAA section 112(d)(6) review for the Wool Fiberglass 
Manufacturing NESHAP.

III. What are the proposed rule requirements for RS lines and what is 
our rationale?

A. What are the proposed rule requirements for formaldehyde emissions 
from bonded RS lines?

    In the July 29, 2015, final rule, we did not finalize the proposed 
revisions to the formaldehyde, methanol, and phenol emissions limits 
from bonded RS lines based on comments indicating that emission data we 
relied on for the proposed limits were not representative of either 
contemporaneous operations or emissions from bonded RS lines. We 
explained that the proposals were based on emissions and process data 
available to the EPA at the time the various proposals were issued, and 
since that time, approximately 95 percent of RS lines had undergone 
process modifications that involved phasing out the use of a phenol-
formaldehyde (PF) binder and switching to HAP-free binders. We further 
explained that we had determined that the product lines continuing to 
operate using PF binders are not similar to the tested product lines in 
size, end use, production rate, or loss on ignition (LOI) percent. In 
sum, we posited that available data did not represent current industry 
conditions, most notably, the significant reduction in the use of PF 
binders in wool fiberglass manufacturing. We further explained that we 
had issued an ICR, pursuant to our authority under CAA section 114, to 
wool fiberglass facilities that operate bonded RS lines in order to 
obtain updated emissions, process, and control device data for existing 
RS manufacturing lines. 80 FR 45293. The first part of the ICR 
requested general information regarding RS line process equipment and 
control devices. ICR Part 1. Based on the information obtained under 
ICR Part 1, the EPA issued the second part of the ICR that required 
facilities to conduct emissions testing for formaldehyde, methanol, and 
phenol from bonded RS line processes. ICR Part 2. Specifically, ICR 
Part 2 required subject facilities to collect stack emissions data from 
RS lines during several testing events that represented operations 
during multiple seasonal ambient conditions. In response to ICR Part 2, 
the EPA received emissions test reports from the Johns Manville, Knauf 
Insulation, and Owens Corning facilities. Table 2 of this preamble 
summarizes the sampling program conducted under ICR Part 2.

                                    Table 2--Summary of RS Line Test Program
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Facility                       Bonded RS line         Test dates          Sampling locations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Johns Manville--Defiance, OH..........  Line 89..................      6/28/2016,  Collection Module A (Venturi
                                                                        8/24/2016   scrubber 1 outlet).
                                                                                   Cooling table (Venturi
                                                                                    scrubber 2 outlet).
                                                                                   Curing oven (regenerative
                                                                                    thermal oxidizer (RTO)
                                                                                    outlet).
Knauf Insulation--Shelbyville, IN.....  Lines 611, 612, 613, and       6/15/2016,  Combined exhaust from Lines
                                         614.                            8/2/2016   611-614 forming process and
                                                                                    Lines 613 and 614 cooling
                                                                                    process (wet electrostatic
                                                                                    precipitator outlet).
                                                                                   Curing oven (RTO outlet)
Owens Corning--Waxahachie, TX.........  Line V1..................    5/17-18/2016  Forming process (spray
                                                                                    chamber outlet).
                                                                                   Cooling (high-efficiency air
                                                                                    filter outlet).
                                                                                   Curing oven (incinerator
                                                                                    outlet).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 40974]]

    In reviewing and evaluating responses to the CAA section 114 ICR, 
we have now determined that there are currently three facilities 
operating six bonded RS lines, as compared to 54 RS manufacturing lines 
at the time of our November 2011 proposal (76 FR 72799). As shown in 
Table 2 of this preamble, we have also determined that all RS lines are 
equipped with air pollution control devices and, most importantly, that 
emissions from all RS lines are significantly lower than the existing 
MACT standards. Additionally, we were able to confirm the phase out or 
elimination of PF binders which facilities have achieved by switching 
to HAP-free binders in wool fiberglass manufacturing processes. This is 
consistent with our November 2011 proposal where we explained that 
``[d]ue to industry's efforts to replace phenol-formaldehyde binders 
more than 95 percent of formaldehyde, phenol and methanol emissions had 
been reduced (or will be by 2012).'' 76 FR 72803.
    As previously explained, CAA section 112(d)(6) requires us to 
``review, and revise as necessary (taking into account developments in 
practices, processes, and control technologies), emission standards 
promulgated under this section.'' We have interpreted CAA section 
112(d)(6) as providing us the authority ``to review the section 112(d) 
standards considering developments in practices, processes, and control 
technologies.'' 70 FR 2008, April 15, 2008. The agency previously 
promulgated a limit for formaldehyde emissions from RS lines under CAA 
112(d) and, thus, has decided that it is more appropriate to set limits 
for formaldehyde emissions from RS lines under CAA section 112(d)(6) 
instead of under CAA section 112(d)(2) and (3), as previously proposed.
    As also explained in our November 2011 proposal, our technology 
review, under CAA section 112(d)(6), focuses on the identification and 
evaluation of developments in practices, processes, and control 
technologies that have occurred since the 1999 NESHAP was promulgated. 
Where we identify developments to inform our decision of whether it is 
``necessary'' to revise the emissions standards, we analyze the 
technical feasibility of applying these developments and the estimated 
costs, energy implications, non-air environmental impacts, as well as 
considering the emission reductions. We also consider the 
appropriateness of applying controls to new sources versus retrofitting 
existing sources. Based on our analyses of the available data and 
information, we identified developments in practices, processes, and 
control technologies.
    For RS bonded lines, we considered any of the following to be a 
``development'':
    <bullet> Any add-on control technology or other equipment that was 
not considered during development of the original MACT standards.
    <bullet> Any improvements in the performance of any add-on control 
technology or other equipment (that were identified and considered 
during development of the original MACT standards) that could result in 
additional emissions reduction.
    <bullet> Any work practice or operational procedure to reduce 
emissions that was not identified or considered during development of 
the original MACT standards.
    <bullet> Any process changes or pollution prevention alternatives 
that could be broadly applied to the industry and that was not 
identified or considered during development of the original MACT 
standards.
    <bullet> Any significant changes in the cost (including cost 
effectiveness) of applying controls (including controls the EPA 
considered during the development of the original MACT standards).
    In addition to reviewing the responses to the ICR, we reviewed 
facility operating permits and searched the EPA's RACT/BACT/LAER 
Clearinghouse (RBLC) in our investigation of developments in practices, 
processes, or control technologies for RS lines at wool fiberglass 
manufacturing facilities.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The EPA established the RBLC to provide a central database 
of air pollution technology information (including technologies 
required in source-specific permits) to promote the sharing of 
information on control technologies among regulatory agencies. The 
RBLC contains over 5,000 air pollution control permit determinations 
made by states, local, and tribal agencies. Control technologies, 
classified as Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT), Best 
Available Control Technology (BACT), or Lowest Achievable Emission 
Rate (LAER) apply to stationary sources depending on whether the 
sources are existing or new, and on the size, age, and location of 
the facility. BACT and LAER (and sometimes RACT) are determined on a 
case-by-case basis, usually by state or local permitting agencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As shown in Table 2 of this preamble above, various processes on RS 
lines are equipped with air pollution control devices as compared to at 
the time of the promulgation of the 1999 MACT. As also previously 
explained, current formaldehyde emissions are well below the 1999 
levels for two reasons:
    (1) Almost all bonded lines have replaced the older PF resins with 
non-PF resins. These reduced the source category formaldehyde emissions 
by approximately 95 percent:
    (2) Improvements in control technology being used have reduced 
emissions on the remaining lines that still use PF resins.
    In light of the most notably significant reduction of formaldehyde 
emissions, we are, thus, proposing to conclude that there are 
developments in practices, processes, and control technologies that 
warrant revisions to the MACT standards for RS lines under CAA section 
112(d)(6).

B. What are the proposed rule requirements for methanol emissions from 
bonded RS lines?

    We are proposing to establish emission standards for methanol 
emissions from combined fiber/collection, curing, and cooling processes 
on new and existing bonded RS lines at wool fiberglass manufacturing 
facilities based on our evaluation of the data submitted in response to 
the ICR discussed above. These proposed standards differ from the 
methanol limits proposed in April 2013 and November 2014 under CAA 
section 112(d)(2) and (3). As previously explained, we did not finalize 
those proposed standards based on comments we received on our various 
proposals, indicating that our proposals were premised on questionable 
data given industry changes since collection of the data. In addition, 
as previously explained, we issued and collected additional data that 
is representative of current industry operations under an ICR 
subsequent to promulgation of our July 29, 2015, final rule. The 
revised limits proposed in this action are based on data received in 
response to the recent ICR discussed above.

C. What are the proposed rule requirements for phenol emissions from 
bonded RS lines?

    We are proposing work practice standards for phenol emissions from 
combined fiber/collection, curing, and cooling processes on new and 
existing bonded RS lines at wool fiberglass manufacturing facilities 
under CAA section 112(h). In order to promulgate a work practice 
standard in lieu of an emission standard, the EPA must demonstrate that 
measurement of emissions is not practicable due to technological and 
economic limitations. In the case of bonded RS lines, our review of 
more recent CAA section 114 test data indicated that over 60 percent of 
the test results were values showing that phenol emissions in the 
exhaust gas stream were below the detection limit of EPA Method 318. 
This proposal represents a change from the standards for phenol 
emissions from bonded RS

[[Page 40975]]

lines that were proposed in April 2013 and November 2014.
    We regard situations where, as here, the majority of measurements 
are below detection limits as measurements that are not 
``technologically practicable'' within the meaning of CAA section 
112(h). We reasoned that ``application of measurement methodologies'' 
under CAA section 112(h) must also mean that a measurement has some 
reasonable relation to what the source is emitting (i.e., that the 
measurement yields a meaningful value). We further explained that 
unreliable measurements raise issues of practicability, feasibility, 
and enforceability. Additionally, we posited that the application of 
measurement methodology would also not be ``practicable due to . . . 
economic limitation'' within the meaning of CAA section 112(h) because 
it would result in cost expended to produce analytically suspect 
measurements. 78 FR 22387. This proposal to establish a work practice 
standard for phenol differs from previous proposals where emission 
limits were proposed for phenol because the EPA has concluded that the 
data that supported setting emission limits in previous proposals is no 
longer valid.
    We are seeking comments on only these issues or aspects of 
requirements that are being presented in this notice. We are not 
reopening any other aspects of the July 29, 2015, final rule and thus, 
are not soliciting comments on them.

IV. What are the proposed rule amendments resulting from our technology 
review and our proposed decisions?

A. What are the results and proposed decisions for formaldehyde 
emissions from RS lines based on our technology review?

    We are proposing to readopt the current 1.2 pound per ton (lb/ton) 
glass pulled emissions limits for formaldehyde from combined fiber/
collection, curing, and cooling processes on existing, new, and 
reconstructed bonded RS lines at wool fiberglass manufacturing 
facilities under CAA section 112(d)(6) as part of our technology 
review. Based on the technology review conducted for the bonded RS 
lines at wool fiberglass manufacturing facilities, we have determined 
that emissions are well controlled on bonded RS line processes. As 
previously explained, our evaluation of the ICR also led us to conclude 
that actual formaldehyde emissions from RS lines at all wool fiberglass 
manufacturing facilities are significantly lower than are allowed under 
the 1999 NESHAP. We believe that reductions in formaldehyde emissions 
since promulgation of the 1999 MACT rule are mainly directly related to 
improvements in two areas: (1) Improvements in control technology 
(e.g., improved bag materials, replacement of older baghouses) and (2) 
the use of electrostatic precipitators. We also note that total 
formaldehyde emissions have been significantly reduced (by 
approximately 95 percent) since promulgation of the 1999 NESHAP due 
primarily to the use of non-PF binders.
    Based on these data and new information, we evaluated what 
formaldehyde emission limit might be appropriate. The EPA's approach 
for developing the proposed formaldehyde emission limits for existing 
and new bonded RS lines sources under CAA section 112(d)(6) are 
explained in the memorandum titled ``Technology Review for Formaldehyde 
Emitted from Rotary Spin Lines,'' which is available in the docket for 
this proposed action. Data and information presented in this memorandum 
could support amended limits of 0.23 lb/ton glass pulled for existing 
sources and 0.24 lb/ton glass pulled for new sources. Further, 
according to the emissions data collected from the ICR, all wool 
fiberglass manufacturing facilities operating bonded RS lines would be 
able to meet these emission limits, given that the ICR suggests that 
the formaldehyde emissions from RS lines are much lower than the 
current MACT standard. Therefore, these limits would not require 
additional HAP emission controls or limits for other equipment or 
process. In addition, if adopted, regulated sources would not be 
expected to incur any additional costs.
    However, we are not proposing to lower the formaldehyde limits, and 
are instead proposing to readopt the current limits. This is because, 
as previously explained, the source category has already achieved 
approximately 95-percent reduction in formaldehyde emissions due to the 
replacement of the PF binders with non-PF binders, and which, as 
explained below, results in major sources becoming area sources. We 
also believe that the industry trend will likely result in the 
replacement of PF binders completely and, thus, view the lowering of 
standards as likely penalizing sources that have been slower in 
embracing the industry trend. As also previously explained, our review 
of the ICR indicated that all bonded RS lines are equipped with air 
pollution control devices as compared to the time of promulgation of 
the 1999 MACT standards, and that these various control technologies 
have resulted in significantly lower emissions than the existing MACT 
standards. We believe that sources will not uninstall these control 
technologies at this stage and, thus, that the lower emissions remain 
somewhat assured even without our lowering of the existing MACT 
standards.
    As part of the technology review, we also considered mandating the 
use of non-PF binders for lines currently using them, and/or mandating 
the use of non-PF binders for all bonded lines. We are not proposing 
this option, however, because, as explained in our April 15, 2013, 
proposal, facilities cease to be subject to the major source standards 
once they phase out the use of PF binders. ``A facility that does not 
use phenol-formaldehyde binders does not manufacture a bonded product, 
and therefore does not have a rotary spin manufacturing line or a flame 
attenuation manufacturing line as defined in the NESHAP. If the 
facility does not have a rotary spin manufacturing line or a flame 
attenuation manufacturing line it does not meet the definition of wool 
fiberglass manufacturing facility and therefore, would no longer be 
subject to the Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing NESHAP,'' 78 FR 22375, 
April 15, 2013. As also previously explained, industry continues to 
actively engage in the phase-out of PF binders and have achieved 
approximately 95-percent reduction in formaldehyde emissions as a 
result. We also believe this industry trend will continue given 
industry indications that non-PF binders are actually less expensive 
than PF binders. Therefore, cost considerations will move the industry 
in this direction without the need for regulation.
    We also note that for some products, customer specifications 
preclude the use of any currently available non-PF binders. If PF 
binders were banned, these products would likely no longer be produced.
    We are specifically requesting comment on the proposed readoption 
of the current formaldehyde limit rather than setting new limits based 
on information and data submitted under the ICR.

B. What are the proposed requirements for methanol emissions from RS 
lines?

    Based on the new information and data that the agency received 
pursuant to the ICR, we are proposing to establish limits for methanol 
emissions from combined fiber/collection, curing, and cooling processes 
on existing, new, and reconstructed bonded RS lines at wool fiberglass 
manufacturing facilities.

[[Page 40976]]

    To determine the MACT floor for methanol, we applied the 99-percent 
upper predictive limit (UPL) method to the best-performing five sources 
in the test data collected under Part 2 of the ICR. The UPL analysis is 
explained in the memorandum titled ``Development of Proposed Emission 
Limits for Methanol Emissions from Rotary Spin Lines in the Wool 
Fiberglass Manufacturing Source Category,'' which is available in the 
docket for this proposed action. We considered beyond-the-floor options 
for methanol for all combined collection and curing operation designs 
as required by CAA section 112(d)(2). However, we are not proposing any 
limits based on the beyond-the-floor analyses for methanol for these 
sources because of the potential adverse impacts of additional 
controls, including the cost of control devices, non-air environmental 
impacts, and energy implications associated with use of these 
additional controls. The beyond-the-floor analysis is presented in the 
memorandum titled ``Control Costs for Rotary Spin Lines,'' which is 
available in the docket for this proposed action. Table 3 of this 
preamble presents the proposed methanol emission limits for the 
combined fiber collection/formation, curing, and cooling processes on 
existing, new, and reconstructed RS lines at wool fiberglass 
manufacturing facilities.

 Table 3--Proposed Methanol Emission Limits (lb/ton of Glass Pulled) for
                                RS Lines
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              New and
                    Existing sources                       reconstructed
                                                              sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.06....................................................            0.65
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The emission limits for methanol in this proposed action, if 
finalized, would codify the level of emissions currently being achieved 
on RS line processes by add-on control devices (e.g., gas scrubbers, 
thermal oxidizers).
    This proposal differs from and modifies our prior proposals. 
Details regarding previously proposed methanol emission limits can be 
found in the April 2013 (78 FR 22387) and November 2014 (79 FR 68029) 
proposals.

C. What are the proposed requirements for phenol emissions from RS 
lines?

    We are proposing to establish work practice standards for phenol 
emissions from combined fiber/collection, curing, and cooling processes 
on existing, new, and reconstructed bonded RS lines at wool fiberglass 
manufacturing facilities under CAA section 112(h). The EPA's review of 
the test data collected under Part 2 of the ICR identified that 
approximately 60 percent of the concentration values were reported as 
below the detection limit of EPA Method 318 (Extractive Fourier 
Transform Infrared (FTIR) Method for Measurement of Emissions from the 
Mineral Wool and Wool Fiberglass Industries). Considering statistical 
validity, we concluded that, in cases where at least 55 percent of the 
test data are below the detection limit of the respective test method, 
it is not feasible to prescribe or enforce an emission standard for 
phenol from RS lines. Under CAA section 112(h), we are instead 
proposing a work practice that represents MACT.
    To identify an appropriate work practice standard for phenol, the 
EPA reviewed the current NESHAP requirements regarding testing, 
monitoring, and recordkeeping of resins and binders used in 
manufacturing wool fiberglass products. The EPA also discussed possible 
phenol work practice standards with industry representatives.
    Because of difficulties in measuring phenol, we cannot develop 
numerical emission limits; however, we believe that a requirement to 
establish the free-phenol content of the binder resin used during the 
compliance demonstration for formaldehyde and methanol and the 
associated recordkeeping requirements for resin shipments and binder 
formulations represents MACT for phenol. Consequently, we are proposing 
to require owners or operators to establish the free-phenol content of 
the binder resin used during the formaldehyde and methanol compliance 
demonstration based on vendor specifications, and to require 
recordkeeping of the free-phenol contents of each resin shipment 
received and each resin used in binder formulation. We are also 
proposing to revise the emission standards specified in 40 CFR 
63.1382(c)(9) to require that owners or operators must not use a resin 
in binder formulations that contains a higher free-phenol content than 
they established during the initial or 5-year compliance demonstrations 
for formaldehyde and methanol.
    This proposal differs from and modifies our prior proposals. 
Details regarding previously proposed phenol emission limits can be 
found in the April 2013 (78 FR 22387) and November 2014 (79 FR 68029) 
proposals.

D. What compliance dates are we proposing?

    We are proposing that wool fiberglass manufacturing facilities that 
operate bonded RS lines that commenced construction or reconstruction 
on or before August 29, 2017 must demonstrate compliance with the 
requirements of this subpart no later than 2 years after the effective 
date of this rule. Affected sources that commenced construction or 
reconstruction after August 29, 2017 must demonstrate compliance with 
the requirements of this subpart no later than the effective date of 
the rule or upon start-up, whichever is later. CAA section 112(i)(3) 
requires that existing sources must comply as expeditiously as 
practicable, but no later than 3 years after promulgation of standards 
under CAA section 112(d). (``Section 112(i)(3)'s three-year maximum 
compliance period applies generally to any emissions standard . . . 
promulgated under [section 112].'' Ass'n of Battery Recyclers v. EPA, 
716 F.3d 667, 672 (D.C. Cir. 2013)). This proposal reflects our belief 
that sources would need this amount of time to comply with the various 
proposed requirements and is a result of our review of the more recent 
information and data that these proposed requirements are based on. For 
instance, the proposed work practice standards for phenol, which call 
for vendor specifications, would likely require vendor bids and 
selections as well as time to establish the free-phenol content of 
binder resin and the likely institution of new practices to address the 
record keeping requirements when finalized.

V. What other changes are we proposing to the NESHAP in this action?

    In this action, we are also proposing amendments to the incinerator 
operating limits specified in 40 CFR 63.1382(c)(6) to clearly indicate 
that the subsection applies to cooling emissions. Incinerators would be 
required to control the final formaldehyde, methanol, and, where 
applicable, phenol emissions from forming, curing, and cooling 
processes on both FA and bonded RS lines.
    We are proposing to allow owners or operators that conducted 
emissions tests in 2016 in response to the EPA's ICR to submit those 
performance test results to demonstrate initial compliance with the new 
methanol emission limits for RS lines, rather than conducting 
additional tests.

VI. What are the proposed amendments applicable to FA lines?

    We are proposing the following three subcategories for FA lines 
based on recent information indicating that there are technical or 
design differences that distinguish sources that utilize FA lines:

[[Page 40977]]

(1) Aerospace and Air Filtration (Aerospace); (2) Heating, Ventilation, 
and Air Conditioning (HVAC); and (3) Original Equipment Manufacturer 
(OEM). (In establishing standards under CAA section 112(d), the EPA may 
``distinguish among classes, types, and sizes of sources within a 
category or sub-category.'' CAA section 112(d)(1). NRDC v. EPA, 489 
F.3d 1364 (D.C. Cir. 2007)). We are also proposing revisions to the 
July 2015 final rule formaldehyde, methanol, and phenol limits to 
reflect these new subcategories.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ On July 27, 2017, the EPA published a direct final rule to 
extend the compliance date for the FA lines in order to provide time 
for the EPA to review new emissions data and revise the standards 
where appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In March 2017, the EPA received notification from Johns Manville 
that several of the emission test reports the company submitted to the 
EPA to support development of the 2015 NESHAP emission limits for FA 
lines contained errors in the analytical results for formaldehyde, 
methanol, and phenol. According to Johns Manville and their testing 
contractor, the errors caused the test run-level values for pollutant 
mass to be biased low, particularly for methanol and phenol (i.e., 
actual pollutant emissions were higher than reported). Johns Manville 
provided the corrected reports for the facilities affected by the 
miscalculations to the EPA after promulgation of the July 29, 2015, 
final rule. Upon further review of the data, including the rationale 
for setting the 2015 NESHAP emission limits, the EPA has determined 
that there are several technical questions regarding the 2015 NESHAP 
emission limits that cannot be resolved using the corrected reports 
provided by Johns Manville. Consequently, in May 2017 Johns Manville 
provided the EPA with more recent test data for FA lines that were 
collected in 2016 and 2017.
    The EPA's review of the new test data confirmed that all FA line 
emissions points at each facility were sampled and pollutant 
concentrations were measured using test methods allowed by 40 CFR 63, 
subpart NNN (EPA Methods 316 and 318 for formaldehyde, EPA Methods 308 
and 318 for methanol, and EPA Method 318 for phenol). However, the EPA 
identified that the phenol emissions from certain FA lines were 1 to 2 
orders of magnitude higher than the phenol emissions from other FA 
lines. The EPA discussed this observation with Johns Manville 
representatives who acknowledged that they use different binder 
formulations on certain FA lines to manufacture specific types of wool 
fiberglass products, and that the different binder formulations result 
in higher or lower phenol emissions, depending on the composition of 
the binder. As previously explained, in cases where we identify 
differences in size, class, or type that significantly affect emissions 
levels, we may create subcategories when setting emission limits. This 
is the case here, where the phenol content of the resins is different 
based on the product type. The industry identified three types of FA 
line products: (1) Aerospace; (2) HVAC; and (3) OEM. The type of 
product determines the phenol content of the resin and, ultimately, the 
level of phenol emissions.
    Based on the EPA's review of the new emissions data, the EPA is 
proposing standards for the three subcategories of FA line products as 
shown in Table 4.

                                 Table 4--Proposed Emission Limits for FA Lines
                                                    [lb/ton]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                      New and
                  Subcategory                               Pollutant                Existing      reconstructed
                                                                                      sources         sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aerospace.....................................  Formaldehyde....................           26.25           16.83
                                                Methanol........................            8.69            3.98
HVAC..........................................  Formaldehyde....................            2.81            2.38
                                                Methanol........................            7.29            1.44
                                                Phenol..........................            0.38            0.38
OEM...........................................  Formaldehyde....................            4.66            2.60
                                                Methanol........................            5.32            0.98
                                                Phenol..........................           27.19           20.69
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the Aerospace subcategory, we are proposing a work practice 
standard that represents MACT for phenol because approximately 80 
percent of the available phenol data are below the detection limit of 
the respective test method. Consistent with our proposed work practice 
for phenol emissions from RS lines, we are proposing to require owners 
or operators to establish the free-phenol content of the binder resin 
used during the formaldehyde and methanol compliance demonstration for 
the Aerospace subcategory, based on vendor specifications, and to 
require recordkeeping of the free-phenol contents of each resin 
shipment received and each resin used in binder formulation. We are 
also proposing to revise the emission standards specified in 40 CFR 
63.1382(c)(9) to require that owners or operators must not use a resin 
in binder formulations that contain a higher free-phenol content than 
they established during the initial or 5-year compliance demonstrations 
for formaldehyde and methanol.
    We are specifically requesting comments and supporting process and 
emissions data related to the proposed revisions to the promulgated 
emissions limits for FA lines.

VII. Summary of Cost, Environmental and Economic Impacts

A. How many sources are affected?

    Based on the responses to the 2016 ICR, only three wool fiberglass 
manufacturing facilities continue to use RS lines to manufacture a 
bonded product. These three facilities operate six bonded RS lines that 
would be affected by the revised emission limits. The EPA is not 
currently aware of any planned or potential new or reconstructed bonded 
RS lines.

B. What are the air quality impacts?

    The proposed standards codify and maintain the emissions reductions 
achieved by the industry due primarily to the phase-out of PF binders 
since promulgation of the 1999 NESHAP. Based on the test data received 
in response to the CAA section 114 ICR, all facilities with bonded RS 
lines currently meet the proposed emission limits for formaldehyde and 
methanol. Therefore, the proposed emission limits for

[[Page 40978]]

formaldehyde and methanol will not result in further HAP emissions 
reductions. Also, we do not anticipate secondary environmental impacts 
from the proposed amendments to the Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing 
NESHAP because owners or operators will not need to install additional 
control devices to meet the proposed standards.

C. What are the cost impacts?

    Because the existing facilities will not need to install add-on 
control devices or implement process modifications to comply with the 
proposed emissions standards, and because the EPA is allowing 
facilities to use the test reports submitted in response to the ICR 
Part 2 to demonstrate initial compliance with the proposed emission 
limits, the three facilities subject to the proposed emission limits 
will not incur increased costs for installing or upgrading emissions 
control systems. However, the three facilities subject to this proposal 
will each incur costs ($4,377/year/facility, 2016 dollars) related to 
the submission of initial notifications and notifications of compliance 
status for the formaldehyde and methanol emission limits, and 
additional monitoring and recordkeeping activities related to the 
phenol work practice standard.

D. What are the economic impacts?

    Economic impact analyses evaluate changes in market prices and 
output levels. If changes in market prices and output levels in the 
directly affected markets are significant, impacts on other markets are 
also examined. Both the magnitude of costs needed to comply with the 
rule and the distribution of these costs among affected facilities can 
have a role in determining how the market will change in response to a 
rule.
    The proposed standards for RS lines at wool fiberglass facilities 
do not impose control costs or additional testing costs on affected 
facilities. However, affected facilities will have reporting 
requirements (i.e., an initial notification and a notification of 
compliance status) associated with the proposed formaldehyde and 
methanol emission limits and monitoring and recordkeeping requirements 
associated with the phenol work practice standard. We estimate that the 
total annual burden for each facility associated with the proposed 
monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements to be 
approximately $4,377/year/facility, and the total annual cost of this 
proposal is approximately $13,131/year (2016 dollars). The economic 
impacts associated with the costs of this proposal are quite low; each 
affected firm is estimated to experience an impact of less than 0.01 
percent of their revenues.

E. What are the benefits?

    Based on the data collected under ICR Part 2, the actual 
formaldehyde emissions from all bonded RS lines are lower than the 
level allowed under the 1999 NESHAP. Although the proposed standards do 
not achieve further emissions reductions, the proposed emission limits 
for formaldehyde and methanol ensure that the emissions reductions that 
have been achieved since promulgation of the original 40 CFR 63, 
subpart NNN in 1999 will persist into the future and that emissions 
will not increase.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders 
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This proposed action is not a significant regulatory action and 
was, therefore, not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden 
under the PRA. OMB has previously approved the information collection 
activities contained in the existing regulations and has assigned OMB 
control number 1160.10. This action does not change the information 
collection requirements.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this proposed action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the 
RFA. This action will not impose any requirements on small entities. 
None of the three entities affected by this proposal are small 
entities, using the Small Business Administration definition of small 
business for the affected NAICS code (327993), which is 1,500 employees 
for the ultimate parent company.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This proposed action does not contain any unfunded mandate of $100 
million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The proposed action 
imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments 
or the private sector.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This proposed action does not have federalism implications. It will 
not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship 
between the national government and the states, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This proposed action does not have tribal implications, as 
specified in Executive Order 13175. This proposed action would revise 
the existing emissions limit for formaldehyde and establish new 
emission limits for methanol and a work practice standard for phenol 
emissions. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this proposed 
action.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks 
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect 
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in 
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This proposed action is not 
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an 
environmental health risk or safety risk.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This proposed action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 
because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 
12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This proposed action involves technical standards. Therefore, the 
EPA conducted searches for the Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing Area 
Source NESHAP through the Enhanced National Standards Systems Network 
(NSSN) Database managed by the American National Standards Institute 
(ANSI). We also contacted voluntary consensus standards (VCS) 
organizations and accessed and searched their databases.
    As discussed in the November 2014 supplemental proposal (79 FR 
68029), under 40 CFR part 63, subpart NNN, we conducted searches for 
EPA Methods 5,

[[Page 40979]]

318, 320, 29, and 0061 of 40 CFR part 60, Appendix A. These searches 
did not identify any VCS that were potentially applicable for this rule 
in lieu of EPA reference methods.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately 
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority 
populations, low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples, as 
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). It 
does not establish an environmental health or safety standard. This 
action would make corrections and updates to an existing protocol for 
assessing the precision and accuracy of alternative test methods to 
ensure they are comparable to the methods otherwise required; thus, it 
does not modify or affect the impacts to human health or the 
environment of any standards for which it may be used.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, 
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Wool fiberglass manufacturing.

    Dated: August 18, 2017.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend 
title 40, chapter I, part 63 of the Code of the Federal Regulations as 
follows:

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS 
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart NNN--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants for Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing

0
2. Section 63.1381 is amended by adding the definitions, in 
alphabetical order, for ``Aerospace and Air Filtration Products,'' 
``Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Products,'' and 
``Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) Products'' to read as follows:


Sec.  63.1381   Definitions.

* * * * *
    Aerospace and air filtration products means bonded wool fiberglass 
insulation manufactured for the thermal and acoustical insulation of 
aircraft and/or the air filtration markets.
* * * * *
    Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) products means 
bonded wool fiberglass insulation manufactured for use in HVAC systems 
for the distribution of air or for thermal and acoustical insulation of 
HVAC distribution lines.
* * * * *
    Original equipment manufacturer (OEM) products means bonded wool 
fiberglass insulation manufactured for OEM entities that fabricate the 
insulation into parts used as thermal or acoustical insulation in 
products including, but not limited to, appliances, refrigeration 
units, and office interior equipment.
* * * * *
0
3. Section 63.1382 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(6), (c)(8)(i), 
and (c)(9) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.1382  Emission standards.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (6) The owner or operator must operate each incinerator used to 
comply with the emissions limits for rotary spin or flame attenuation 
lines specified in Table 2 to this subpart such that any 3-hour block 
average temperature in the firebox does not fall below the average 
established during the performance test as specified in Sec.  63.1384.
* * * * *
    (8) * * *
    (i) The owner or operator must initiate corrective action within 1 
hour when the monitored process parameter level(s) is outside the 
limit(s) established during the performance test as specified in Sec.  
63.1384 for the process modification(s) used to comply with the 
emissions limits for rotary spin or flame attenuation lines specified 
in Table 2 to this subpart, and complete corrective actions in a timely 
manner according to the procedures in the operations, maintenance, and 
monitoring plan.
* * * * *
    (9) The owner or operator must use a resin in the formulation of 
binder such that the free-formaldehyde and free-phenol contents of the 
resin used do not exceed the respective ranges contained in the 
specification for the resin used during the performance test as 
specified in Sec.  63.1384.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 63.1383 is amended by revising paragraphs (g)(1), (h), 
(i)(1), and (j) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.1383  Monitoring requirements.

* * * * *
    (g) * * *
    (1) The owner or operator who uses an incinerator to comply with 
the emissions limits for rotary spin or flame attenuation lines 
specified in Table 2 to this subpart shall install, calibrate, 
maintain, and operate a monitoring device that continuously measures 
and records the operating temperature in the firebox of each 
incinerator.
* * * * *
    (h) The owner or operator who uses a wet scrubbing control device 
to control formaldehyde and methanol emissions must install, calibrate, 
maintain, and operate monitoring devices that continuously monitor and 
record the gas pressure drop across each scrubber and the scrubbing 
liquid flow rate to each scrubber according to the procedures in the 
operations, maintenance, and monitoring plan. The pressure drop monitor 
must be certified by its manufacturer to be accurate within <plus-
minus>250 pascals (<plus-minus>1 inch water gauge) over its operating 
range, and the flow rate monitor must be certified by its manufacturer 
to be accurate within <plus-minus>5 percent over its operating range. 
The owner or operator must also continuously monitor and record the 
feed rate of any chemical(s) added to the scrubbing liquid.
* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (1) The owner or operator who uses process modifications to control 
formaldehyde and methanol emissions must establish a correlation 
between formaldehyde and methanol emissions and the process 
parameter(s) to be monitored.
* * * * *
    (j) The owner or operator must monitor and record the free-
formaldehyde and free-phenol content of each resin shipment received 
and of each resin used in the formulation of binder.
* * * * *
0
5. Section 63.1384 is amended by revising introductory paragraph (a), 
(a)(3), (a)(9), and introductory paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.1384  Performance test requirements.

    (a) The owner or operator subject to the provisions of this subpart 
shall conduct a performance test to demonstrate compliance with the 
applicable emission limits in Sec.  63.1382. Compliance is demonstrated 
when the emission rate of the pollutant is equal to or less than each 
of the applicable emission limits in Sec.  63.1382. The owner or 
operator shall conduct the

[[Page 40980]]

performance test according to the procedures in 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
A and in this section. If the owner or operator conducted an emissions 
test in 2016 according to the procedures specified in Sec.  
63.1384(a)(9) and Sec.  63.1385 in response to the EPA's Information 
Collection Request, the owner or operator can use the results of the 
emissions test to demonstrate initial compliance with the emission 
limits for rotary spin lines specified in Table 2 to this subpart.
* * * * *
    (3) During each performance test, the owner or operator must 
monitor and record the glass pull rate for each glass-melting furnace 
and, if different, the glass pull rate for each rotary spin 
manufacturing line and flame attenuation manufacturing line. Record the 
glass pull rate every 15 minutes during any performance test required 
by this subpart and determine the arithmetic average of the recorded 
measurements for each test run and calculate the average of the three 
test runs. If a rotary spin or flame attenuation line shares one or 
more emissions points with another rotary spin or flame attenuation 
line(s), owners or operators can conduct the performance test while 
each of the process lines with the shared emissions point(s) is 
operating as specified in paragraph (a)(8) of this section, rather than 
testing each of the shared lines separately. In these cases, owners or 
operators must use the combined glass pull rate for the process lines 
with the shared emissions point(s) to demonstrate compliance with the 
emissions limits specified in Table 2 to this subpart.
* * * * *
    (9) The owner or operator of each rotary spin manufacturing line 
and flame attenuation manufacturing line regulated by this subpart must 
conduct performance tests using the resin with the highest free-
formaldehyde content. During the performance test of each rotary spin 
manufacturing line and flame attenuation manufacturing line regulated 
by this subpart, the owner or operator shall monitor and record the 
free-formaldehyde and free-phenol contents of the resin, the binder 
formulation used, and the product LOI and density.
* * * * *
    (c) To determine compliance with the emission limits specified in 
Table 2 to this subpart, for formaldehyde and methanol for RS 
manufacturing lines; formaldehyde, phenol, and methanol for FA 
manufacturing lines; and chromium compounds for gas-fired glass-melting 
furnaces, use the following equation:
* * * * *
0
6. Section 63.1385 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(8) as follows:


Sec.  63.1385  Test methods and procedures.

    (a) * * *
    (8) Method contained in appendix B of this subpart for the 
determination of the free-formaldehyde content of resin. The owner or 
operator shall use vendor specifications to determine the free-phenol 
content of resin.
* * * * *
0
7. Section 63.1386 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(2)(v) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  63.1386  Notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (v) The free-formaldehyde and free-phenol contents of each binder 
batch and the LOI and density for each product manufactured on a rotary 
spin manufacturing line or flame attenuation manufacturing line subject 
to the provisions of this subpart, and the free-formaldehyde and free-
phenol contents of each resin shipment received and of each resin used 
in the binder formulation;
* * * * *
0
8. Table 2 to subpart NNN of part 63 is amended by:
0
 a. Revising entries 7 and 8;
0
b. Redesignating entries 9 through 13 as entries 11 through 15;
0
c. Adding new entries 9 and 10;
0
d. Revising newly redesignated entries 13 through 15;
0
e. Adding new entries 16 through 19; and
0
 g. Adding new footnote 5.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

                    Table 2 to Subpart NNN of Part 63--Emissions Limits and Compliance Dates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          And you commenced       Your emission limits   And you must comply by:
         If your source is a:               construction:               are: \1\                   \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
7. Rotary spin manufacturing line....  On or before March 31,   1.2 lb formaldehyde per  June 14, 2002.
                                        1997.                    ton of glass pulled
                                                                 \5\.
8. Rotary spin manufacturing line....  After March 31, 1997...  0.8 lb formaldehyde per  June 14, 1999.
                                                                 ton of glass pulled
                                                                 \5\.
9. Rotary spin manufacturing line....  On or before November    0.32 lb formaldehyde     Date 3 years after
                                        25, 2011.                per ton of glass         publication of the
                                                                 pulled.                  final rule.
                                                                1.06 lb methanol per
                                                                 ton of glass pulled.
10. Rotary spin manufacturing line...  After November 25, 2011  0.24 lb formaldehyde     Date of publication of
                                                                 per ton of glass         the final rule.\4\
                                                                 pulled.
                                                                0.65 lb methanol per
                                                                 ton of glass pulled.
11. Flame attenuation line             After March 31, 1997     7.8 lb formaldehyde per  June 14, 1999.
 manufacturing a heavy-density          but on or before         ton of glass pulled
 product.                               November 25, 2011.       \5\.
12. Flame attenuation line             On or before March 31,   6.8 lb formaldehyde per  June 14, 2002.
 manufacturing a pipe product.          1997.                    ton of glass pulled
                                                                 \5\.
13. Flame attenuation line             After March 31, 1997     6.8 lb formaldehyde per  June 14, 1999.
 manufacturing a pipe product.          but before November      ton of glass pulled
                                        25, 2011.                \5\.
14. Flame attenuation line             On or before November    26.25 lb formaldehyde    Date 1 year after
 manufacturing an Aerospace product.    25, 2011.                per ton of glass         publication of the
                                                                 pulled.                  final rule.
                                                                8.69 lb methanol per
                                                                 ton of glass pulled.

[[Page 40981]]

 
15. Flame attenuation line             After November 25, 2011  16.83 lb formaldehyde    Date of publication of
 manufacturing an Aerospace product.                             per ton of glass         the final rule.\4\
                                                                 pulled.
                                                                3.98 lb methanol per
                                                                 ton of glass pulled.
16. Flame attenuation line             On or before November    2.81 lb formaldehyde     Date 1 year after
 manufacturing an HVAC product.         25, 2011.                per ton of glass         publication of the
                                                                 pulled.                  final rule.
                                                                7.29 lb methanol per
                                                                 ton of glass pulled.
                                                                0.38 lb phenol per ton
                                                                 of glass pulled.
17. Flame attenuation line             After November 25, 2011  2.38 lb formaldehyde     Date of publication of
 manufacturing an HVAC product.                                  per ton of glass         the final rule.\4\
                                                                 pulled.
                                                                1.44 lb methanol per
                                                                 ton of glass pulled.
                                                                0.38 lb phenol per ton
                                                                 of glass pulled.
18. Flame attenuation line             On or before November    4.66 lb formaldehyde     Date 1 year after
 manufacturing an OEM product.          25, 2011.                per ton of glass         publication of the
                                                                 pulled.                  final rule.
                                                                5.32 lb methanol per
                                                                 ton of glass pulled.
                                                                27.19 lb phenol per ton
                                                                 of glass pulled.
19. Flame attenuation line             After November 25, 2011  2.60 lb formaldehyde     Date of publication of
 manufacturing an OEM product.                                   per ton of glass         the final rule.\4\
                                                                 pulled.
                                                                0.98 lb methanol per
                                                                 ton of glass pulled.
                                                                20.69 lb phenol per ton
                                                                 of glass pulled.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ This limit does not apply after date 3 years after publication of the final rule.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-18211 Filed 8-28-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>