Daily Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices of the Federal Government
The Environmental Protection Agency published a final rule on June 24, 2008 that contained the following: (1) Final amendments to the existing refineries new source performance standards (NSPS) in 40 CFR part 60, subpart J; and (2) a new refineries NSPS in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ja (73 FR 35838). The preamble to that rule contained an incorrect effective date and contained an error in the Congressional Review Act (CRA) statement in the Statutory and Executive Order Reviews section. To address that error, the effective date of NSPS subpart Ja was stayed for 60 days until September 26, 2008. The amendments in NSPS subpart J were not affected and remained effective from June 24, 2008.
On June 13, 2008, the American Petroleum Institute (API), the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association (NPRA), and the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) (collectively referred to as “Industry Petitioners”) requested an administrative stay under Clean Air Act (CAA) section 307(d)(7)(B) of certain provisions of 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ja. On July 25, 2008, the Industry Petitioners sought reconsideration of the provisions of NSPS subpart Ja for which they had previously requested a stay. Specifically, Industry Petitioners requested that EPA reconsider the following provisions in NSPS subpart Ja: (1) The definition of “modification” (40 CFR 60.100a(c)); (2) the definition of “flare” (40 CFR 60.101a); (3) the fuel gas combustion device sulfur limits as they relate to flares (40 CFR 60.102a(g)(1)); (4) the flow limit for flare systems (40 CFR 60.102a(g)(3)); (5) the total reduced sulfur and flow monitoring requirements for flares (40 CFR 60.107a(d), (e)); and (6) the nitrogen oxide (NO
On August 25, 2008, HOVENSA, LLC (“HOVENSA”) filed a petition for reconsideration of the following provisions of 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ja: (1) the NO
EPA received a third petition for reconsideration on August 25, 2008, from the Environmental Integrity Project, Sierra Club, and Natural Resources Defense Council (“Environmental Petitioners”) requesting EPA reconsider several aspects of 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ja. The petition identifies the following issues for reconsideration: (1) EPA's decision not to promulgate NSPS for carbon dioxide and methane emissions from refineries; (2) the flaring requirements (40 CFR 60.100a(c), 60.101a, 60.102a(g)-(i), 60.103a(a)-(b)); (3) the NO
EPA has begun reviewing all of these petitions and is addressing in this notice only those issues for which Industry Petitioners and HOVENSA sought reconsideration
In this action, EPA is granting reconsideration with respect to the following provisions: (1) The definition of “modification;” (2) the definition of “flare;” (3) the fuel gas combustion device sulfur limits as they apply to flares; (4) the flow limit for flare systems; (5) the total reduced sulfur and flow monitoring requirements for flares; and (6) the NO
EPA is also granting Industry Petitioners and HOVENSA's request for a 90-day stay of the following provisions that are under reconsideration (see CAA section 307(d)(7)(B)): (1) The definition of “modification;” (2) the definition of “flare;” (3) the fuel gas combustion device sulfur limits; (4) the flow limit for flare systems; (5) the total reduced sulfur and flow monitoring requirements for flares; and (6) the NO
We are staying the sixth provision listed above because information provided by Industry Petitioners and HOVENSA has led the Agency to question whether the emission limits in the final rule are achievable and represent best demonstrated technology. The information provided has convinced us that certain facilities may suffer undue hardship in attempting compliance with this limit. Granting a stay of this requirement while we reconsider this limit is, therefore, necessary to prevent any possible harm that may occur.
EPA is denying HOVENSA's request for a 90-day stay of the depressurization work practice standard for delayed coking units. HOVENSA provided no individual demonstration regarding its need for EPA to stay this work practice standard. HOVENSA provided no specific information or explanation of why staying this provision of a nationally applicable rule is the appropriate recourse for protecting its individual facility. HOVENSA's generalized assertions of incurring compliance costs absent a stay are not enough reason for granting this request for a stay. EPA, therefore, denies HOVENSA's request for a stay of this provision.
All other requirements promulgated in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Ja become effective as of September 26, 2008.
EPA will address the substantive aspects of this reconsideration in a separate notice in the
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and, therefore, is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). In addition, this action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded mandate as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L.104-4), or require prior consultation with State officials as specified by Executive Order 12875 (58 FR 58093, October 28, 1993), or involve special consideration of environmental justice related issues as required by Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Because this action is not subject to notice-and-comment requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute, it is not subject to the regulatory flexibility provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601,
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801,
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping.
42 U.S.C. 7401,
2. In § 60.100a, paragraph (c) is stayed from September, 26, 2008, until December 25, 2008.