Air pollutants, hazardous; national emission standards: Oil and natural gas production and natural gas transmission and storage,

[Federal Register: January 15, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 10)]

[Proposed Rules]

[Page 2611-2615]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr15ja99-37]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[AD-FRL-6220-8]

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Natural Gas Transmission and Storage

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposal; reopening of public comment period and notice of public hearing.

SUMMARY: On February 6, 1998 (63 FR 6288), the EPA proposed standards (the proposal or proposed standards) to limit emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from existing and new natural gas transmission and storage facilities under section 112 of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (Act). The public comment period on the proposed standards ended April 7, 1998. This action announces the availability of supplemental information, the reopening of the public comment period on the supplemental information, and the notice of public hearing.

During the public comment period, the EPA received comments that the data collected by the EPA to support development of the proposed rule did not adequately characterize the HAP emission sources and controls in the natural gas transmission and storage source category. The EPA agreed to solicit and consider additional data pertaining to the development of maximum available control technology (MACT) standards for the natural gas transmission and storage source category. The EPA plans to consider comments received on this action, along with comments received on the proposal, and take final action by May 15, 1999.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before February 16, 1999. For information on submitting electronic comments see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. If a public hearing is held, comments referring to new information resulting from the public hearing must be received by March 1, 1999.

Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the EPA requesting to speak at a public hearing by January 22, 1999, a public hearing will be held on February 1, 1999, beginning at 9:30 a.m. Persons wishing to present oral testimony must contact the EPA by January 22, 1999. For information on requesting a public hearing see the ADDRESSES section of this notice. For detailed information on the public hearing see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments should be submitted (in duplicate, if possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (MC- 6102), Attention: Docket No. A-94-04, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460. The docket is located at this address in Room M-1500, Waterside Mall (ground floor). The EPA requests that a separate copy of comments also be sent to Greg Nizich, Waste and Chemical Processes Group (MD-13), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone: (919) 541-3078; fax: (919) 541-0246 or electronically at: nizich.greg@epa.gov. Comments and data may be submitted electronically by following the instructions listed in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. No confidential business information (CBI) should be submitted electronically.

Public Hearing: Persons interested in speaking at a hearing should notify Ms. JoLynn Collins, telephone (919) 541-5671, Waste and Chemical Processes Group (MD-13), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. Persons interested in attending the hearing should contact Ms. Collins to verify that a hearing will occur.

Docket. A docket, No. A-94-04, containing information considered by the EPA in the development of the proposed standards, public comments received on the proposal, and the information discussed in today's notice, is available for public inspection and copying between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday (except Federal holidays), at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center. See the above address. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning today's action,

[[Page 2612]]

contact Mr. Greg Nizich, Waste and Chemical Processes Group (MD-13), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone: (919) 541-3078; fax (919) 541-0246; or electronically at: nizich.greg@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public Hearing. A public hearing will be held, if requested, to provide interested persons an opportunity for oral presentation of data, views, or arguments concerning the supplemental data for the natural gas transmission and storage proposed standards. If a public hearing is requested and held, the EPA may ask clarifying questions regarding the oral presentation but will not respond to the presentation or comments. Written statements and supporting information will be considered with equivalent weight as any oral statement and supporting information subsequently presented at a public hearing, if held.

Electronic Comments. Electronic comments can be sent directly to the EPA at: A-and-R-Docket@epa.gov. Electronic comments must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Comments and data will also be accepted on disks in WordPerfect in 5.1 and 6.1 file format or ASCII file format. All comments and data in electronic form must be identified by the docket number A-94-04. Electronic comments on this notice may be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.

The information presented in this notice is organized as follows:

1. Background II. Collection of Additional Information III. MACT Floor for Existing Sources IV. MACT Floor for New Sources V. Throughput and Benzene Emissions Cutoffs VI. Solicitation of Comments VII. Administrative Requirements

   1. Docket

   2. Public Hearing

   3. Paperwork Reduction Act

   4. Executive Order 12866: A Significant Regulatory Action Determination

   5. Regulatory Flexibility Act

   6. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

   7. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership

   8. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks.

1. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments

   10. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

1. Background

   On February 6, 1998 (63 FR 6288), the EPA proposed standards to limit emissions of HAP from existing and new natural gas transmission and storage facilities under the authority of section 112 of the Act. These standards would be codified under 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHH. The EPA proposed that process vents on existing or new glycol dehydration units that are located at major HAP sources, must be controlled for HAP unless: (1) The actual annual average flowrate of natural gas to the unit is less than 85 thousand cubic meters per day (m\3\/day) (3.0 million standard cubic feet per day (MMSCF/D)), or (2) if actual annual benzene emissions from the unit are less than 0.9 megagram per year (Mg/yr) (1 ton per year (tpy)). Glycol dehydration units required to use air emission controls would also be required under the proposed standard to reduce HAP emissions by 95 percent or more or to reduce HAP emissions to an outlet concentration of 20 parts per million by volume (ppmv) or less for combustion devices. In addition, pollution prevention measures, such as process modifications that reduce the amount of HAP emissions generated, could be used, alone or in combination with a control device, provided they are demonstrated to achieve a HAP emission reduction of 95 percent or greater.

   The proposed standards were developed under the authority of section 112(d) of the Act, which requires the EPA to establish standards to reflect the maximum degree of reduction in HAP emissions. The EPA is required to establish standards that are no less stringent than the level of control defined under section 112(d)(3), referred to as the MACT floor. Under section 112 of the Act, the minimum level (the floor) at which standards may be set, for existing sources, is the ``average emission limitation achieved by the best performing 12 percent of the existing sources'' (section 112(d)(3) of the Act). The EPA collects and reviews available information on emission limitations achieved by each of: (1) The best performing 12 percent of existing sources in a category consisting of more than 30 sources, or (2) the best performing five sources in a category consisting of 30 sources or less. The Agency then determines an average of those limitations. ``Average'' is interpreted by the Agency to mean a measure of central tendency such as the arithmetic mean, median, or mode or some other central tendency within the available data.

   The EPA collected information to support the proposal through: (1) A questionnaire developed under the authority of section 114 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) that was distributed to one company with 31 glycol dehydration units in the natural gas transmission and storage source category, and (2) a search of the available literature. Based on the available information collected, the EPA estimated that five facilities in the natural gas transmission and storage source category would be impacted by the proposed rule. Further, the Agency concluded at that time that the floor for existing and new sources in the natural gas transmission and storage source category was a 95-percent HAP emission reduction.

   During the public comment period, which closed on April 7, 1998, the EPA received several comment letters stating that the EPA did not collect information sufficient to properly characterize the natural gas transmission and storage source category for the purpose of developing MACT standards. In particular, the commenters were concerned that the proposed control level of 95 percent and the throughput level cutoff of 85 thousand m\3\/day (3.0 MMSCF/D) were not appropriate for glycol dehydration units in the natural gas transmission and storage source category. No comments were received requesting a change in the 0.9-Mg/ yr (1-tpy) benzene emissions cutoff. The commenters requested that the EPA collect additional information to characterize HAP emissions and controls in the industry properly.

2. Collection of Additional Information

   The EPA addressed these concerns by collecting additional information on glycol dehydration units in the natural gas transmission and storage source category. The EPA conducted site visits to five natural gas transmission and storage facilities to gain additional first-hand knowledge of the processes and operations at existing facilities in this source category. The EPA also met with stakeholders from the natural gas transmission and storage industry to understand their concerns. The EPA developed a questionnaire for distribution to selected natural gas transmission and storage companies under the authority of section 114 of the CAA. In the questionnaire, the EPA requested data on the processes, operations, and control technologies in use at existing natural gas transmission and storage facilities and relevant to the development of HAP emissions standards.

   Through the questionnaire and site visits, the EPA collected additional information on approximately 81 facilities in the natural gas transmission and storage source category. The EPA is considering this new information, along

   [[Page 2613]]

   with previously collected information on the natural gas transmission and storage source category, to develop a MACT floor for process vents on glycol dehydration units located at existing and new facilities in this source category. The EPA is also considering the development of appropriate natural gas throughput and benzene emissions threshold levels for which sources below these cutoffs would not be subject to the control requirements.

   The purpose of this notice is to announce the availability of, and to discuss the consideration of, the additional information on the natural gas transmission and storage source category collected by the EPA since proposal. The additional data being announced today includes the following items located in Air Docket A-94-04: (1) Completed responses to the EPA's section 114 survey questionnaire, items IV-G-24, and IV-G-26 through IV-G-32; (2) site visit information, items IV-G-21, IV-G-22, and IV-G-25; and (3) summary of the meeting with representatives of the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America, the Gas Research Institute, and industry, item IV-E-02. The EPA has also prepared analyses of these data, items MACT floor memo docket number and throughput and benzene emissions cutoff memo docket number.

3. MACT Floor for Existing Sources

   According to the information collected from 112 facilities through the section 114 questionnaire, site visits, and data previously collected during the development of the proposed standards, 69 glycol dehydration units are controlled. Fifty-nine of these units utilize combustion as the control technology for process vents on glycol dehydration units. Of these, 51 utilize flares, seven utilize enclosed combustion devices, and one uses an in-stack flare system. Six units utilize a combination of condensation and combustion to control glycol dehydration unit process vents and four utilize condensation.

   The MACT floor analysis for the natural gas transmission and storage source category is based on information available on the top 14 performing glycol dehydration units, which corresponds to 12 percent of 112 glycol dehydration units.

   The EPA compared the data on the average emission limitation achieved by the 14 best performing units to the proposed control level of 95 percent for process vents on glycol dehydration units at existing and new natural gas transmission and storage facilities. The available information indicates that the best performing 12 percent of the facilities, i.e., 14 units, utilize some form of combustion and achieve an average HAP emission reduction of 98 percent. However, among all sources that apply combustion, the reported control efficiency ranged from 95 to 98 percent. The EPA has been unable to determine the technical basis for the reported differences in the control efficiencies for these combustion devices. Therefore, in order to account for the observed variability in HAP emission reduction efficiency, the EPA has selected 95 percent as the required HAP emission reduction for this source category associated with this technology. The EPA solicits comments and supporting information on the MACT floor level of 95-percent HAP emission reduction. As noted in the ADDRESSES section of today's notice, the docket (Docket No. A-94-04) contains the information collected from industry, as well as a more detailed analysis of these data (item MACT floor memo docket number).

4. MACT Floor for New Sources

   Under the proposed standards, the MACT floor for new sources was the same as the MACT floor for existing sources (i.e., 95-percent control). In the review of the new additional information, the EPA did not identify a method of control applicable to all types of new sources that would achieve a greater level of HAP emission reduction than the MACT floor for existing sources. Therefore, as with the proposal, the EPA is considering a MACT floor for new sources in the natural gas transmission and storage source category to be the same as the MACT floor for existing sources.

5. Throughput and Benzene Emissions Cutoff

   In the proposal, glycol dehydration units operating at an actual annual average natural gas throughput less than 85 thousand m\3\/day (3 MMSCF/D) or having benzene emissions less than 0.9 Mg/yr (1 tpy) are exempt from the control requirements. The EPA evaluated the data collected from the 112 facilities in the natural gas transmission and storage source category to determine whether there was a natural gas throughput level, or a benzene emission level for which glycol dehydration units operating below this level were not controlled.

   In the new data, the Agency did not identify evidence to suggest that glycol dehydration units operating with actual annual average natural gas throughput rates less than 283 thousand m\3\/day (10 MMSCF/ D) or having actual benzene emissions less than 0.9 Mg/yr (1 tpy) are controlled at the MACT floor. The EPA does not believe that it would be cost effective to go beyond the floor for these glycol dehydration units.

   In addition, the Agency does not have any information indicating that, there are any sources in the natural gas transmission and storage source category operating below 283 thousand m\3\/day (10 MMSCF/D) or having benzene emissions less than 0.9 Mg/yr (1 tpy) that have emissions greater than the major source thresholds of 10 tpy for individual HAP or 25 tpy for any combination of HAP.

   Based on the available information, the EPA is considering raising the throughput cutoff from the proposed level of 85 thousand m\3\/day (3 MMSCF/D) to 283 thousand m\3\/day (10 MMSCF/D) on an actual annual average basis; glycol dehydration units operating below this level would not have to apply controls. Further, the EPA believes that the 0.9-Mg/yr (1-tpy) benzene cutoff provided in the proposed standards is appropriate for glycol dehydration units in the natural gas transmission and storage source category. Therefore, no changes have been made to the benzene emissions cutoff.

6. Solicitation of Comments

   Specifically, the EPA is requesting comments and supporting information on the consideration of a 95-percent HAP emission reduction as the floor level of control for new and existing facilities in the natural gas transmission and storage source category as required under section 112 of the Act. The EPA is also requesting comments on the 283- thousand m\3\/day (10-MMSCF/D) actual annual average throughput and the 0.9-Mg/yr (1-tpy) benzene emission cutoffs for the control of glycol dehydration units in this source category.

7. Administrative Requirements

   1. Docket

      The docket for this rulemaking is A-94-04. The docket is an organized and complete file of all the information considered by the EPA in the development of this rulemaking. The principal purposes of the docket are (1) to allow interested parties a means to identify and locate documents so that they can effectively participate in the rulemaking process and (2) to serve as the record in case of judicial review (except for interagency review materials) (section 307(d)(7)(A) of the Act). This docket contains copies of the regulatory text, BID, BID references, and technical memoranda documenting the

      [[Page 2614]]

      information considered by the EPA in the development of the proposed rule. The docket is available for public inspection at the EPA's Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, the location of which is given in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.

   2. Public Hearing

      A public hearing will be held, if requested, to discuss this supplemental information in accordance with section 307(d)(5) of the Act. If a public hearing is held, the EPA will ask clarifying questions during the oral presentations but will not respond to the presentations or comments. To provide an opportunity for all who may wish to speak, oral presentations will be limited to 15 minutes each. Any member of the public may file a written statement (see DATES and ADDRESSES). Written statements and supporting information will be considered with equivalent weight as any oral statement and supporting information subsequently presented at a public hearing, if held.

   3. Paperwork Reduction Act

      The information requirements of the proposed NESHAP were submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on May 15, 1997 under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An Information Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared by the EPA (ICR No. 1789.01), and a copy may be obtained from Sandy Farmer, OPPE Regulatory Information Division; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2137); 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460 or by calling (202) 260-2740. The information requirements are not effective until OMB approves them.

      Today's notice will have no impact on the information collection burden estimates made previously. This notice announces the availability of additional data and presents the EPA's consideration of these new data and therefore does not mandate any new requirements. Consequently, the ICR has not been revised.

   4. Executive Order 12866: A Significant Regulatory Action Determination

      Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 5173 (October 4, 1993)), the EPA must determine whether the proposed regulatory action is ``significant,'' and therefore, subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The order defines a ``significant'' regulatory action as one that is likely to lead to a rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, public health or safety in State, local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order.

      It has been determined that today's notice of data availability is not a ``significant'' regulatory action, since it does not establish or lead to new regulatory requirements (and therefore is not a regulatory action). Therefore, today's notice did not require OMB review.

   5. Regulatory Flexibility Act

      The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions. Today's notice announces the availability of additional information and the EPA's consideration of these new data and does not establish any binding rules of general applicability.

   6. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

      Title II of the Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. L. 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost- benefit analysis, for the proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires the EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost- effective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows the EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost- effective, or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before the EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of the EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.

      The EPA has determined that today's action does not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate or to the private sector. Therefore, the requirements of the Unfunded Mandates Act do not apply to today's action.

   7. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership

      Under Executive Order 12875, the EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local, or tribal government unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those governments, or the EPA consults with those governments. If the EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires the EPA to provide the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) a description of the extent of the EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected State, local, and tribal governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875 requires the EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other representatives of State, local, and tribal governments to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.

      While the proposed rule, published on February 6, 1998, does not create mandates upon State, local, or tribal governments, the EPA involved State and local governments in its development. Because today's action is

      [[Page 2615]]

      announcing the availability of additional data and the EPA's consideration of this new data, today's action does not create a mandate upon State, local, or tribal governments.

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

      Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that the EPA determines (1) is economically significant as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) the environmental health or safety risk addressed by the rule has a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the EPA must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the EPA.

      Today's action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not involve decisions on environmental health or safety risks that may disproportionately affect children.

1. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

   Under Executive Order 13084, the EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on those communities unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments, or the EPA consults with those governments. If the EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084 requires the EPA to provide to the OMB, in a separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of the EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires the EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other representatives of Indian tribal governments to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.

   Today's action does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal governments. The proposed rule, published on February 6, 1998, does not create mandates upon tribal governments. Because today's action announces the availability of additional data and the EPA's interpretation of that data, today's action does not create a mandate on tribal governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this action.

   10. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

   Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) directs all Federal agencies to use voluntary consensus standards instead of government-unique standards in their regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, business practices) that are developed or adopted by one or more voluntary consensus standards bodies. Examples of organizations generally regarded as voluntary consensus standards bodies include the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA requires Federal agencies like the EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, with explanations when an agency decides not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.

   Today's notice does not involve any new technical standards or the incorporation by reference of existing technical standards. Therefore, consideration of voluntary consensus standards is not relevant to this action.

   Dated: January 7, 1999. Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation.

   [FR Doc. 99-1031Filed1-14-99; 8:45 am]

   BILLING CODE 6560-50-U