Jump to main content or area navigation.

Contact Us

Regulatory Development and Retrospective Review Tracker

NESHAP Risk and Technology Review for the Mineral Wool and Wool Fiberglass Industries;NESHAP for Wool Fiberglass Area Sources

a.k.a. NESHAP RTR for Mineral Wool and Wool Fiberglass (subparts DDD and NNN); and Area Source for Wool Fiberglass


RIN: 2060-AQ90 (What's this?)

Docket No.: EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-1041, EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-1042 (What's this?)

Current Phase: Proposal (What's this?)

Abstract:
The Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standard for Mineral Wool Production was promulgated on June 1, 1999, and the MACT for Wool Fiberglass Production was promulgated on June 14, 1999. The Clean Air Act requires EPA to evaluate the risk remaining to human health within 8 years of promulgation of each MACT standard; for these regulations, that date expired in June 2007.

Along with risk, the EPA is also required to review new technology in the industry that can reduce hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions from regulated sources in the industry, and may consider costs under this technology review. EPA is addressing these Clean Air Act requirements under a combined risk and technology review (RTR). EPA was petitioned to review the risk for these source categories, and also to determine MACT floors for pollutants and processes that were not regulated by the MACT standards. The Court entered into an agreement with EPA and the litigants; the resulting deadline for proposal was November 4, 2011, the supplemental proposal was published in the Federal Register on April 15, 2013 (78 FR 22370), and the promulgation of the two RTRs and a final rule for wool fiberglass area sources is scheduled for July 31, 2014.
Timeline

MilestoneDate
Initiated02/18/2011
NPRM: Sent to OMB for Regulatory Review10/07/2011
NPRM: Received by OMB10/11/2011
NPRM: Regulatory Review Concluded11/04/2011
NPRM: Published in FR11/25/2011
NPRM: Comment Period Open11/25/2011
Public Meeting: Published in FR12/20/2011
Public Meeting: Public Meeting01/04/2012
NPRM: Comment Period Extension Published in FR01/23/2012
NPRM: Comment Period Closed01/24/2012
Public Meeting: Comment Period Closed with Extension02/03/2012
NPRM: Comment Period Closed with Extension02/03/2012
Supplemental NPRM: Sent to OMB for Regulatory Review02/26/2013
Supplemental NPRM: Received by OMB02/26/2013
Supplemental NPRM: Regulatory Review Concluded03/15/2013
Supplemental NPRM: Comment Period Open04/15/2013
Supplemental NPRM: Published in FR04/15/2013
Supplemental NPRM: Comment Period Closed05/30/2013
Final Rule: Published in FR07/2015 (projected)

Potential Effects

Environmental Justice
This rulemaking involves a topic that is likely to be of particular interest to or have particular impact upon minority, low-income, tribal, and/or other vulnerable populations because:

  • The topic is likely to have the following impact: The Kansas City, Kansas neighborhoods are impacted by two wool fiberglass facilities, one of which is the highest emitter of hexavalent chromium in the industry. The other is an area source emitting at levels above the proposed chromium limits. Both these facilities would have to reduce their chromium emissions to comply with the proposed emission limits. Region 7 has conducted over 10 community outreach engagements over the last 2 years in response to community requests for information regarding this rule and other environmental issues in the area. The local chapter of the Sierra Club is active in the community and both the Sierra Club and local citizens groups participated in the public hearing, submitted comments on the proposed major source rule, and have attended meetings held by EPA Region 7. While this action has been downtiered (see attachments below), OAR continues to work with Region 7 to address EJ issues and to provide available materials to the Region for meaningful involvement at the community level.

Small Entities
EPA notifies the public when a rulemaking is likely to 1) have any adverse economic impact on small entities even though a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis may not be required and/or 2) have significant adverse economic impacts on a substantial number of small entities. The term "small entities" includes small businesses, small governments, and small not-for-profits. (Read a longer explanation on our Small Entities web page.) This rulemaking is likely to impact small entities in the following way(s):
  • Likely to have any adverse economic impact on:
    • small businesses

Participate / Learn More Regulatory Review

Some of EPA's rulemakings undergo regulatory review (What's this?), as prescribed by Executive Order 12866 and coordinated by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The following list describes which of this rulemaking's stages have completed review and published in the Federal Register, if any, and provides links to the review documents where available. Consult the "Timeline" section of this Web page for the dates of each review.

  • NPRM - This stage of the rulemaking underwent review.
  • Final Rule - No Information Available.
  • Final Rule - No Information Available.
  • Supplemental NPRM - This stage of the rulemaking underwent review.
Citations & Authorities

Federal Register Citations

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Citation
40 CFR 63 1175-1196;40 CFR 63 1380-1399

Legal Authority
42 USC 7401

Disclaimer

This site provides summaries of priority rulemakings and priority retrospective reviews of existing regulations. We update most of the site at the beginning of each month, though some data is updated more frequently if it is time sensitive. The information on this site is not intended to and does not commit EPA to specific conclusions or actions. For example, after further analysis, EPA may decide the effects of a rule would be different or it may decide to terminate a rulemaking.


Jump to main content.