Opinion ID: 186114
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Reasonableness of PM as a Surrogate

Text: 23 In National Lime, this court established a three-part analysis for determining whether the use of PM as a surrogate for HAPs is reasonable: PM is a reasonable surrogate for HAPs if (1) HAP metals are invariably present in ... PM; (2) PM control technology indiscriminately captures HAP metals along with other particulates; and (3) PM control is the only means by which facilities `achieve' reductions in HAP metal emissions. 233 F.3d at 639. If these criteria are satisfied and the PM emission standards reflect what the best sources achieve — complying with Section 7412(d)(3) — EPA is under no obligation to achieve a particular numerical reduction in HAP metal emissions. Id. 24 The use of PM as a surrogate in this case is reasonable. First, it is undisputed that HAPs are invariably present in PM. Second, EPA determined that the PM control technologies used by primary copper smelters inevitably removed HAPs as part of PM. See Proposed Rule, 63 Fed. Reg. at 19,592/3 (The control technologies used for the control of PM emissions achieve equivalent levels of performance on metallic HAP emissions.). There is some dispute, however, whether copper smelters use other control technologies besides PM control to limit HAPs. 25 Sierra Club claims that the record shows that two copper smelters use ore-switching to control PM. A 1995 EPA report cites 1992 impurity data to conclude that the Phelps Dodge-Chino smelter had no control of secondary hood or matte and slag tapping gases but achieves low HAP emissions through low-input-impurity feeds. EPA, A-96-22 No. II-A-1, Final Summary Report: Primary Copper Smelters National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants 5 (July 1995) (Final Report). The report further stated that the Phelps Dodge-Hidalgo smelter also has very low levels of HAPs in ore concentrate feeds.... Id. 26 The record, however, shows that between the 1995 report and the proposed rulemaking, both of these smelters installed PM controls to regulate their emissions. In 1996, the Hidalgo smelter installed a baghouse to control matte and slag tapping hood emissions. EPA, A-96-22 No. II-E-8, File Memorandum from E. Crumpler, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (July 28, 1997). During EPA emissions testing at the Chino smelter in April 1997, EPA reported that the smelter used a secondary hood system to route off-gases to a baghouse prior to discharge to the atmosphere. EPA A-96-22 No. II-I-2, Emissions Test Report: Primary Copper Smelter Converter Aisle Fugitive Emissions; Phelps Dodge Hurley, New Mexico ¶ 2.1 (Chino smelter). When it came time to address the instant question, EPA consequently found that PM control was the only control technology used by the industry. See Proposed Rule, 63 Fed. Reg. at 19,585/3. We have no basis for rejecting that finding as arbitrary or capricious. See Ethyl Corp. v. EPA, 51 F.3d 1053, 1064 (D.C.Cir.1995) (If EPA acted within its delegated statutory authority, considered all of the relevant factors, and demonstrated a reasonable connection between the facts on the record and its decision, we will uphold its determination.). 27 Sierra Club uses National Lime 's statement that EPA must consider the potential impact upon emissions of changes in inputs, 233 F.3d at 639, as a basis to argue that PM is not a reasonable surrogate where other factors (in the instant case, the HAP content of the ore used) affect HAP metal emissions. Reply Br. at 5. The requirement in National Lime was that other inputs must affect HAP metal emissions in the same fashion that they affect the other components of PM. 233 F.3d at 639. Put another way, PM might not be an appropriate surrogate for HAP metals if switching fuels would decrease HAP metal emissions without causing a corresponding reduction in total PM emissions. Id. The reason is clear: if EPA looks only to PM, but HAPs are reduced by altering inputs in a way that does not reduce PM, the best achieving sources, and what they can achieve with respect to HAPs, might not be properly identified. 28 Nothing in the record, however, supports the proposition that switching to cleaner ore will decrease HAPs without a reduction in PM. HAP metals are a component of PM, see Proposed Rule, 63 Fed. Reg. at 19,585/1 (metallic impurities in the copper ore can be released into the atmosphere in the form of particulate matter (PM) during certain smelting operations), so any reduction in HAPs would in turn reduce PM. As EPA explained: 29 During the smelting process ... HAP metal species either are eliminated in the molten slag tapped from the process vessels or are vaporized and discharged in the process vessel off-gases. Upon cooling of the process off-gases, the volatilized HAP metal species condense, form aerosols, and behave as particulate matter. ... An emission characteristic common to all primary copper smelters and similar source categories is the fact that the metal HAP are a component of the particulate matter contained in the process off-gases discharged from smelting and converting operations. 30 Supplement, 65 Fed. Reg. at 39,329/1-2 (emphases added); see EPA Background Document, at 3-2 (metal HAP emissions from copper converters behave as particulate matter). 31 Sierra Club argues that the use of PM as a surrogate is not reasonable because the HAP content of PM will vary according to the feedrate. But as we explained in National Lime, even if the ratio of metals to PM is small and variable, or simply unknown, PM is a reasonable surrogate for the metals — assuming ... that PM control technology indiscriminately captures HAP metals along with other particulates. 233 F.3d at 639 (emphasis added). On the record before us, EPA concluded that [s]trong direct correlations exist between the emissions of total particulate matter and metal HAP compounds. Emission limits established to achieve good control of total particulate matter will also achieve good control of metal HAP. Supplement, 65 Fed. Reg. at 39,329/1-2. As EPA explained, [t]he control technologies used for the control of PM emissions achieve equivalent levels of performance on metallic HAP emissions. Proposed Rule, 63 Fed. Reg. at 19,592/3. On this record, the use of PM as a surrogate is reasonable, even in light of the potential variability of impurities in copper ore. 32