National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories: Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities; Amendments

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[AD-FRL-5468-1]

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for

Source Categories: Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities;

Amendments

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed amendments to rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes amendments to the national emission

standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for perchloroethylene

(PCE) dry cleaning facilities promulgated in the Federal Register on

September 22, 1993. The NESHAP was promulgated to minimize emissions of

PCE, which has been listed by EPA as a hazardous air pollutant (HAP).

The Administrator is proposing to implement a settlement agreement that

the EPA has entered into regarding a small number of transfer machines.

DATES: Comments. Comments on the proposed amendments must be received

by June 17, 1996.

Public Hearing. Persons requesting a public hearing should contact

Mr. George Smith at (919) 541-1549 by May 15, 1996. If anyone requests

a public hearing by May 15, 1996, a public hearing will be held in

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. Persons wishing to make oral

statements at this public hearing must contact Mr. Smith by May 15,

1996 at (919) 541-1549, Emission Standards Division, U.S. EPA, MD-13,

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. Persons interested in attending the

public hearing should also contact Mr. Smith for information on the

exact location of the public hearing, if one is requested.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments on the proposed amendments should be

submitted (in duplicate, if possible) to: The Air and Radiation Docket

and Information Center, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code

6102, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460, attention Docket Number

A-95-16.

Docket. Docket Number A-95-16, containing supporting information

used in developing the proposed amendments, is available for public

inspection and copying between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m.,

Monday through Friday (except for government holidays) at The Air and

Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, 401 M Street SW., Washington, DC 20460. A reasonable fee may be

charged for copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. George Smith at (919) 541-1549,

Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U. S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated entities. Entities regulated by

this action are dry cleaning facilities that use perchloroethylene.

Regulated categories and entities include:

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

Examples of regulated

Category entities

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

Perchloroethylene dry cleaning facilities. Perchloroethylene dry

cleaning facilities that

installed transfer machines

between proposal and

promulgation.

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

The above table is an exhaustive guide for readers regarding

entities to be regulated by this action.

The information presented in this preamble is organized as follows:

I. Background, Summary, and Rationale for Rule Changes

II. Administrative Requirements

A. Paperwork Reduction Act

B. Executive Order 12866 Review

C. Unfunded Mandates Act

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act

I. Background, Summary, and Rationale for Rule Changes

National emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP)

for perchloroethylene (PCE) dry cleaning facilities were promulgated on

September 22, 1993 (58 FR 49354), and amended on December 20, 1993 (58

FR 66287), as 40 CFR Part 63, subpart M. On December 20, 1993, the

International Fabricare Institute (IFI), a trade association

representing commercial and industrial dry cleaners nationwide,

submitted a statement of issues to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the

District of Columbia Circuit challenging the NESHAP. The Agency

subsequently entered into a settlement agreement with IFI, notice of

which was published prior to being lodged with the court (60 FR 52000,

October 4, 1995).

International Fabricare Institute raised the issue of new transfer

machines purchased or installed between proposal and promulgation. The

IFI's concern stems from the fact that the Agency did not propose to

ban new transfer machines, yet at promulgation did ban such machines.

The IFI argued that dry cleaners who installed new transfer machines

between proposal and promulgation did so with the understanding that

the Agency had not proposed any prohibitions against this. These dry

cleaners now have no recourse but to scrap these new transfer machines

and replace them with new dry-to-dry machines in order to comply with

the NESHAP. The IFI asserted that this is unfair, given these dry

cleaners acted in accordance with the law to the best of their

knowledge at the time.

At the time of proposal, the Agency believed that no new transfer

machines were being sold or installed, and for this reason did not

propose to ban purchase of new transfer machines. However, due to new

information that the Agency received after proposal that is explained

in the preamble to the final rule, the Agency banned the purchase of

new transfer machines. The ban was considered reasonable because the

Agency's analysis showed that emissions from clothing transfer could be

eliminated by requiring dry-to-dry machines in their place. Emissions

from clothing transfer account for about 25 percent of transfer machine

emissions. The Agency's analysis also showed that in the typical case

where a new dry-to-dry machine was installed instead of a new transfer

machine, a net savings of $300 per ton of emission reductions would be

realized by the dry cleaner. Hence, the Agency decided at promulgation

to effectively ``ban'' new transfer machines from being introduced

subsequent to promulgation, by making the emission limit for new

transfer machines impossible to achieve. It was believed this decision

would have no impact on dry cleaners, since no new transfer machines

were being purchased or installed. It was only after promulgation that

it became apparent that a few new transfer machines had been sold and

installed between proposal and promulgation of the NESHAP.

The Agency agrees with IFI on this issue. Consequently, the

Administrator proposes to subcategorize new transfer machines into two

types: new transfer machines installed after promulgation (i.e.,

September 22, 1993) and new transfer machines installed between

proposal (i.e., December 9, 1991) and promulgation (i.e., September 22,

1993). The requirements the Administrator is proposing today for new

transfer machines installed after promulgation

[[Page 19888]]

do not change from what they are in the NESHAP--under no circumstances

are new transfer machines installed after promulgation allowed to

operate. The requirements the Administrator is proposing today for the

new subcategory, new transfer machines installed between proposal and

promulgation, are similar to those for existing transfer machines.

Creation of the subcategory would recognize differences in the

technologies used at new sources and the achievability of the emissions

limit by these technologies. As noted, at the time it set the emissions

limit, the Agency failed to recognize that some owners and operators

had installed transfer machines after the proposal. Transfer machine

technology is fundamentally different than dry-to-dry technology. In

order to stay in business, an owner or operator that had installed new

transfer machines after proposal would have to purchase both a transfer

machine system and a dry-to-dry system in time period between December

9, 1991 (proposal) and September 22, 1996 (final rule compliance date),

while an owner and operator of a new source built after promulgation

would only have to purchase one dry-to-dry system. The investment

required for parties that had installed transfer machines would not be

achievable for these parties, which are mostly small businesses. The

proposal would not sacrifice significant emissions reductions because

the number of affected machines is approximately one-tenth of one

percent of all dry-cleaning machines. Today's proposal would allow for

the greatest achievable emissions reductions by both those who had

installed transfer machines prior to issuance of the final rule and all

other new sources and would maintain the prospective prohibition on new

transfer machines.

II. Administrative Requirements

A. Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection requirements of the previously

promulgated NESHAP for PCE Dry Cleaning Facilities were submitted to

and approved by the Office of Management and Budget. A copy of this

Information Collection Request (ICR) document (OMB control number 2060-

0234) may be obtained from Sandy Farmer, Information Policy Branch (PM-

223Y); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 401 M Street, SW;

Washington, DC 20460 or by calling (202) 260-2740. Today's changes to

the NESHAP for PCE Dry Cleaning Facilities do not affect the

information collection burden estimates made previously.

B. Executive Order 12866 Review

Under Executive Order 12866 [58 FR 51735, (October 4, 1993)], the

Agency must determine whether the 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 result in 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, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public

health or safety, or 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 land 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.

This rule was classified ``non-significant'' under Executive Order

12866 and, therefore, was not reviewed by the Office of Management and

Budget.

C. Unfunded Mandates Act

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must prepare a statement to accompany any proposed rule where the

estimated costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the

private sector, will be $100 million or more in any one year. Under

Section 205, EPA must select the most cost-effective and least

burdensome alternative that achieves the objective of the rule and is

consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to

establish a plan for informing and advising any small governments that

may be significantly impacted by the rule. The unfunded mandates

statement under Section 202 must include: (1) a citation of the

statutory authority under which the rule is proposed, (2) an assessment

of the costs and benefits of the rule, including the effect of the

mandate on health, safety, and the environment, and the federal

resources available to defray the costs, (3) where feasible, estimates

of future compliance costs and disproportionate impacts upon particular

geographic or social segments of the nation or industry, (4) where

relevant, an estimate of the effect on the national economy, and (5) a

description of EPA's prior consultation with State, local, and tribal

officials.

The amendments to the NESHAP that the Administrator is proposing

today will not cause State, local, or tribal governments, or the

private sector to incur costs that will be $100 million or more in any

one year. Rather, the costs involved in this rulemaking are relatively

insignificant in comparison to the $100 million threshold of the

Unfunded Mandates Act. Therefore, the requirements of the Unfunded

Mandates Act are not applicable to this rulemaking.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 requires the identification

of potentially adverse impacts of federal regulations upon small

business entities. The Act specifically requires the completion of a

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in those instances where small business

impacts are possible. Because this rulemaking imposes no adverse

economic impacts, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has not been

prepared.

Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 605(b), I hereby certify

that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small business entities.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental

relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: April 26, 1996.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator.

Title 40, chapter I, part 63, of the Code of Federal Regulations is

proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS

FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

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

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

Subpart M--National Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for

Dry Cleaning Facilities

2. Section 63.320 is amended by revising paragraphs (c), (d), (e),

and (f) to read as follows:

Sec. 63.320 Applicability.

* * * * *

(c) Each dry cleaning system that commenced construction or

reconstruction before December 9, 1991 and each new transfer machine

system

[[Page 19889]]

and its ancillary equipment that commenced construction or

reconstruction on or after December 9, 1991 and before September 22,

1993 shall comply with Secs. 63.322 (c), (d), (i), (j), (k), (l), and

(m), 63.323(d), and 63.324 (a), (b), (d)(1), (d)(2), (d)(3), (d)(4),

and (e) beginning on December 20, 1993 and shall comply with other

provisions of this subpart by September 23, 1996.

(d) Each existing dry-to-dry machine and its ancillary equipment

located in a dry cleaning facility that includes only dry-to-dry

machines, and each existing transfer machine system and its ancillary

equipment and each new transfer machine system and its ancillary

equipment installed between December 9, 1991 and September 22, 1993 as

well as each existing dry-to-dry machine and its ancillary equipment,

located in a dry cleaning facility that includes both transfer machine

system(s) and dry-to-dry machine(s) is exempt from Sec. 63.322,

Sec. 63.323, and Sec. 63.324, except paragraphs 63.322 (c), (d), (i),

(j), (k), (l), and (m), 63.323(d), and 63.324 (a), (b), (d)(1), (d)(2),

(d)(3), (d)(4), and (e) if the total perchloroethylene consumption of

the dry cleaning facility is less than 530 liters (140 gallons) per

year. Consumption is determined according to Sec. 63.323(d).

(e) Each existing transfer machine system and its ancillary

equipment, and each new transfer machine system and its ancillary

equipment installed between December 9, 1991 and September 22, 1993

located in a dry cleaning facility that includes only transfer machine

system(s) is exempt from Sec. 63.322, Sec. 63.323, and Sec. 63.324,

except paragraphs 63.322 (c), (d), (i), (j), (k), (l), and (m),

63.323(d), and 63.324 (a), (b), (d)(1), (d)(2), (d)(3), (d)(4), and (e)

if the perchloroethylene consumption of the dry cleaning facility is

less than 760 liters (200 gallons) per year. Consumption is determined

according to Sec. 63.323(d).

(f) If the total yearly perchloroethylene consumption of a dry

cleaning facility determined according to Sec. 63.323(d) is initially

less than the amounts specified in paragraph (d) or (e) of this

section, but later exceeds those amounts, the existing dry cleaning

system(s) and new transfer machine system(s) and its (their) ancillary

equipment installed between December 9, 1991 and September 22, 1993 in

the dry cleaning facility must comply with Sec. 63.322, Sec. 63.323,

and Sec. 63.324 by 180 calendar days from the date that the facility

determines it has exceeded the amounts specified, or by September 23,

1996, whichever is later.

* * * * *

3. Section 63.322 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)

introductory text and (b) introductory text to read as follows:

Sec. 63.322 Standards.

(a) The owner or operator of each existing dry cleaning system and

of each new transfer machine system and its ancillary equipment

installed between December 9, 1991 and September 22, 1993 shall comply

with either (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this paragraph and shall comply with

(a)(3) of this paragraph if applicable.

* * * * *

(b) The owner or operator of each new dry-to-dry machine and its

ancillary equipment and of each new transfer machine system and its

ancillary equipment installed after September 22, 1993:

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 96-11079 Filed 5-2-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P