exposure), we typically use them as an additional comparative measure,
as they provide an upper bound for exposure levels above which exposed
individuals could experience effects.
    The highest estimated 1-hour concentration is less than 10 percent
of the AEGL-1 and ERPG-1, well below the level at which mild,
reversible effects would be anticipated. As stated previously, only one
facility has an HQ (REL) that exceeds 1. In addition, the acute
screening assessment includes the conservative (health protective)
assumptions that every process releases its peak hourly emissions at
the same hour, that the worst-case dispersion conditions occur at that
same hour, and that an individual is present at the location of maximum
concentration for that hour. As discussed previously in section
III.C.3, we used a default multiplication factor of 10. A review of
stack test data from turbines that were tested at different times shows
that formaldehyde emissions during individual test runs generally vary
by much less than a factor of 10 from the turbine's overall average
emissions. Emissions of both acrolein and formaldehyde from stationary
combustion turbines are primarily the result of incomplete combustion,
so we expect acrolein emissions would not vary more significantly than
formaldehyde emissions. Together, these factors lead us to conclude
that adverse effects from acute exposure to emissions from this
category are not anticipated.
    Considering all of the health risk information and factors
discussed above, including the uncertainties discussed in section III
of this preamble, the EPA proposes that the risks are acceptable for
this source category.
2. Ample Margin of Safety Analysis
    As directed by CAA section 112(f)(2), we conducted an analysis to
determine whether the current emissions standards provide an ample
margin of safety to protect public health. Under the ample margin of
safety analysis, the EPA considers all health factors evaluated in the
risk assessment and evaluates the cost and feasibility of available
control technologies and other measures (including the controls,
measures, and costs reviewed under the technology review) that could be
applied to this source category to further reduce the risks (or
potential risks) due to emissions of HAP identified in our risk
assessment. In this analysis, we considered the results of the
technology review, risk assessment, and other aspects of our MACT rule
review to determine whether there are any emission reduction measures
necessary to provide an ample margin of safety with respect to the
risks associated with these emissions.

    Our risk analysis indicated the risks from the source category are
low for both cancer and noncancer health effects, and, therefore, any
risk reductions from further available control options would result in
minimal health benefits. Moreover, as noted in our discussion of the
technology review in section IV.C of this preamble, no additional cost-
effective measures were identified for reducing HAP emissions from
affected sources in the Stationary Combustion Turbine source category.
Thus, we are proposing that the current Stationary Combustion Turbine
NESHAP provides an ample margin of safety to protect public health.
    Regarding the facility-wide risks due to ethylene oxide (described
above), which are due to emission sources that are not part of the
Stationary Combustion Turbines source category, we intend to evaluate
those facility-wide estimated emissions and risks further and may
address these in a separate future action, as appropriate. In
particular, the EPA is addressing ethylene oxide based on the results
of the latest NATA released in August 2018, which identified the
chemical as a potential concern in several areas across the country
(NATA is the Agency's nationwide air toxics screening tool, designed to
help the EPA and state, local, and tribal air agencies identify areas,
pollutants, or types of sources for further examination). The latest
NATA estimates that ethylene oxide significantly contributes to
potential elevated cancer risks in some census tracts across the U.S.
(less than 1 percent of the total number of tracts). These elevated
risks are largely driven by an EPA risk value that was updated in late
2016. The EPA will work with industry and state, local, and tribal air
agencies as the EPA takes a two-pronged approach to address ethylene
oxide emissions: (1) Reviewing and, as appropriate, revising CAA
regulations for facilities that emit ethylene oxide--starting with air
toxics emissions standards for miscellaneous organic chemical
manufacturing facilities and commercial sterilizers; and (2) conducting
site-specific risk assessments and, as necessary, implementing emission
control strategies for targeted high-risk facilities. The EPA will post
updates on its work to address ethylene oxide on its website at:
https://www.epa.gov/ethylene-oxide.
3. Adverse Environmental Effect
    Based on the results of our environmental risk screening
assessment, we conclude that there is not an adverse environmental
effect from the Stationary Combustion Turbine source category. We are
proposing that it is not necessary to set a more stringent standard to
prevent, taking into consideration costs, energy, safety, and other
relevant factors, an adverse environmental effect.

C. What are the results and proposed decisions based on our technology
review?

    As described in section III.B of this preamble, our technology
review focused on identifying developments in practices, processes, and
control technologies that have occurred since the Stationary Combustion
Turbine NESHAP was originally promulgated in 2004. Our review of the
developments in technology for the Stationary Combustion Turbine source
category did not reveal any changes that require revisions to the
emission standards. The only add-on HAP emission control technology
identified in the original NESHAP rulemaking was an oxidation catalyst.
No new or improved add-on control technologies that reduce HAP
emissions from turbines were identified during the technology review.
Our review also did not identify any new or improved operation and
maintenance practices, process changes, pollution prevention
approaches, or testing and monitoring techniques for stationary
combustion turbines. Therefore, we propose that no revisions to the
Stationary Combustion Turbine NESHAP are necessary pursuant to CAA
section 112(d)(6). Additional details of our technology review can be
found in the Technology Review for Stationary Combustion Turbines Risk
and Technology Review (RTR) memorandum, which is available in the
docket for this action.

D. What other actions are we proposing?

    In addition to the proposed actions described above, we are
proposing additional revisions to the NESHAP. We are proposing
revisions to the SSM provisions of the MACT rule in order to ensure
that they are consistent with the Court decision in Sierra Club v. EPA,
551 F. 3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008), which vacated two provisions that
exempted sources from the requirement to comply with otherwise
applicable CAA section 112(d) emission standards during periods of SSM.
We also are proposing to require electronic submittal of performance
test results and semiannual compliance reports, and to remove the stay
of standards for new lean premix and diffusion flame gas-fired
stationary combustion turbines. Our analyses and proposed changes
related to these issues are discussed below.
1. SSM
    In its 2008 decision in Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019 (D.C.
Cir. 2008), the Court vacated portions of two provisions in the EPA's
CAA section 112 regulations governing the emissions of HAP during
periods of SSM. Specifically, the Court vacated the SSM exemption
contained in 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1) and 40 CFR 63.6(h)(1), holding that
under section 302(k) of the CAA, emissions standards or limitations
must be continuous in nature and that the SSM exemption violates the
CAA's requirement that some CAA section 112 standards apply
continuously.
    We are proposing the elimination of the SSM exemption in this rule
which appears at 40 CFR 63.6105(a). Consistent with Sierra Club v. EPA,
we are proposing standards in this rule that apply at all times. We are
also proposing several revisions to Table 7 as is explained in more
detail below. For example, we are proposing to eliminate the
incorporation of the General Provisions' requirement that the source
develop an SSM plan. We also are proposing to eliminate and revise
certain recordkeeping and reporting requirements related to the SSM
exemption as further described below.
    The EPA has attempted to ensure that the provisions we are
proposing to eliminate are inappropriate, unnecessary, or redundant in
the absence of the SSM exemption. We are specifically seeking comment
on whether we have successfully done so. In proposing the standards in
this rule, the EPA has taken into account startup and shutdown periods
and, for the reasons explained below, has proposed alternate standards
for startup and has not proposed alternate standards for shutdown.
    The EPA has determined that emissions from stationary combustion
turbines during startup are significantly different than emissions
during normal operation. The Gas Turbine Association provided the
following information regarding the differences in turbine operation
during startup that lead to changes in emissions: ``During startup the
gas turbine combustor(s) transition through a variety of operational
modes to ensure stable combustion and to minimize transient stresses on
the gas turbine equipment. The equipment experiences extreme
temperature transients during a startup event. The various operating
modes result in low combustion efficiencies and incomplete combustion
of the fuel which causes variations in the pollutant concentrations and
fluctuations in the flow rate of the exhaust gas. Other

exhaust parameters/characteristics including temperature, molecular
weight, water concentration, oxygen concentration, etc. change rapidly
as the gas turbine is loaded from idle to a higher, steady state
operating load.'' \21\ In addition, oxidation catalysts may not be
fully effective until sufficient exhaust gas temperatures are reached.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Email from Leslie Witherspoon, Solar Turbines to Melanie
King, U.S. EPA. October 9, 2018. Available in the rulemaking docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA has determined that it is not feasible to prescribe or
enforce a numerical emission limit during periods of startup for
stationary combustion turbines because the application of measurement
methodology during startup is not practicable. Test methods were
developed for sampling stable operations. Changes in turbine operations
during startup create rapid variations in exhaust gas flow rate, as
well as pollutant and diluent gas concentrations. A concentration
average over the startup period does not accurately reflect emissions
over such a dynamically shifting concentration and flow scenario.
Determining representative average emissions concentrations would
require correlating the exhaust gas flow rates and the gas components
concentration data for each fraction of time over the entire period of
startup operation in order to apportion the values appropriately. The
rapidly changing temperature (from ambient to approximately 1,800
degrees Fahrenheit for a simple cycle unit), concentration, and flow
profile would make it practically impossible to employ the proportional
sampling technique that would be necessary to properly account for the
effect of the variability in emissions. Additionally, the
stratification of the gas stream with respect to both flow and
concentration would be in flux over the startup period until steady
state conditions are achieved. With existing methodologies, the ability
to perform replicate testing within the normal bounds of variability of
the test methods (typically 15-20 percent) under the conditions present
at startup is not practicable, and work practice or operational
standards are appropriate.
    The EPA is, therefore, proposing an operational standard in lieu of
a numeric emission limit during periods of startup, in accordance with
CAA section 112(h). The EPA is proposing that during turbine startup,
owners and operators must minimize the turbine's time spent at idle or
holding at low load levels and minimize the turbine's startup time to a
period needed for appropriate and safe loading of the turbine, not to
exceed 1 hour for simple cycle stationary combustion turbines and 3
hours for combined cycle stationary combustion turbines, after which
time the formaldehyde emission limitation of 91 ppbvd or less at 15-
percent O2 applies. Minimizing the time spent at idle or low
load operation will minimize the time the turbine's combustion system
is not at peak efficiency and the emission controls are not at minimum
operating temperatures.
    For shutdown, the EPA does not have any information to show that
emissions from stationary combustion turbines would be higher during
shutdown than during normal operation. Therefore, the EPA is not
proposing a different standard that applies during shutdown.
    Periods of startup, normal operations, and shutdown are all
predictable and routine aspects of a source's operations. Malfunctions,
in contrast, are neither predictable nor routine. Instead they are, by
definition, sudden, infrequent, and not reasonably preventable failures
of emissions control, process, or monitoring equipment (40 CFR 63.2;
Definition of malfunction). The EPA interprets CAA section 112 as not
requiring emissions that occur during periods of malfunction to be
factored into development of CAA section 112 standards and this reading
has been upheld as reasonable by the Court in U.S. Sugar Corp. v. EPA,
830 F.3d 579, 606-610 (2016). Under CAA section 112, emissions
standards for new sources must be no less stringent than the level
``achieved'' by the best controlled similar source and for existing
sources generally must be no less stringent than the average emission
limitation ``achieved'' by the best performing 12 percent of sources in
the category. There is nothing in CAA section 112 that directs the
Agency to consider malfunctions in determining the level ``achieved''
by the best performing sources when setting emission standards. As the
Court has recognized, the phrase ``average emissions limitation
achieved by the best performing 12 percent of'' sources ``says nothing
about how the performance of the best units is to be calculated.''
Nat'l Ass'n of Clean Water Agencies v. EPA, 734 F.3d 1115, 1141 (D.C.
Cir. 2013). While the EPA accounts for variability in setting emissions
standards, nothing in CAA section 112 requires the Agency to consider
malfunctions as part of that analysis. The EPA is not required to treat
a malfunction in the same manner as the type of variation in
performance that occurs during routine operations of a source. A
malfunction is a failure of the source to perform in a ``normal or
usual manner'' and no statutory language compels the EPA to consider
such events in setting CAA section 112 standards.
    As the Court recognized in U.S. Sugar Corp, accounting for
malfunctions in setting standards would be difficult, if not
impossible, given the myriad different types of malfunctions that can
occur across all sources in the category and given the difficulties
associated with predicting or accounting for the frequency, degree, and
duration of various malfunctions that might occur. Id. at 608 (``the
EPA would have to conceive of a standard that could apply equally to
the wide range of possible boiler malfunctions, ranging from an
explosion to minor mechanical defects. Any possible standard is likely
to be hopelessly generic to govern such a wide array of
circumstances.'') As such, the performance of units that are
malfunctioning is not ``reasonably'' foreseeable. See, e.g. Sierra Club
v. EPA, 167 F.3d 658, 662 (D.C. Cir. 1999) (``The EPA typically has
wide latitude in determining the extent of data-gathering necessary to
solve a problem. We generally defer to an agency's decision to proceed
on the basis of imperfect scientific information, rather than to
`invest the resources to conduct the perfect study.' '') See also,
Weyerhaeuser v. Costle, 590 F.2d 1011, 1058 (D.C. Cir. 1978) (``In the
nature of things, no general limit, individual permit, or even any
upset provision can anticipate all upset situations. After a certain
point, the transgression of regulatory limits caused by `uncontrollable
acts of third parties,' such as strikes, sabotage, operator
intoxication or insanity, and a variety of other eventualities, must be
a matter for the administrative exercise of case-by-case enforcement
discretion, not for specification in advance by regulation.''). In
addition, emissions during a malfunction event can be significantly
higher than emissions at any other time of source operation. For
example, if an air pollution control device with 99-percent removal
goes off-line as a result of a malfunction (as might happen if, for
example, the bags in a baghouse catch fire) and the emission unit is a
steady state type unit that would take days to shut down, the source
would go from 99-percent control to zero control until the control
device was repaired. The source's emissions during the malfunction
would be 100 times higher than during normal operations. As such, the
emissions over a 4-day malfunction period would exceed the annual
emissions of the source during normal

operations. As this example illustrates, accounting for malfunctions
could lead to standards that are not reflective of (and significantly
less stringent than) levels that are achieved by a well-performing non-
malfunctioning source. It is reasonable to interpret CAA section 112 to
avoid such a result. The EPA's approach to malfunctions is consistent
with CAA section 112 and is a reasonable interpretation of the statute.
    Although no statutory language compels the EPA to set standards for
malfunctions, the EPA has the discretion to do so where feasible. For
example, in the Petroleum Refinery Sector RTR, the EPA established a
work practice standard for unique types of malfunction that result in
releases from pressure relief devises or emergency flaring events
because the EPA had information to determine that such work practices
reflected the level of control that applies to the best performers. 80
FR 75178, 75211-14 (December 1, 2015). The EPA will consider whether
circumstances warrant setting standards for a particular type of
malfunction and, if so, whether the EPA has sufficient information to
identify the relevant best performing sources and establish a standard
for such malfunctions. We also encourage commenters to provide any such
information.
    In the event that a source fails to comply with the applicable CAA
section 112(d) standards as a result of a malfunction event, the EPA
would determine an appropriate response based on, among other things,
the good faith efforts of the source to minimize emissions during
malfunction periods, including preventative and corrective actions, as
well as root cause analyses to ascertain and rectify excess emissions.
The EPA would also consider whether the source's failure to comply with
the CAA section 112(d) standard was, in fact, sudden, infrequent, not
reasonably preventable, and was not instead caused, in part, by poor
maintenance or careless operation. 40 CFR 63.2 (definition of
malfunction).
    If the EPA determines in a particular case that an enforcement
action against a source for violation of an emission standard is
warranted, the source can raise any and all defenses in that
enforcement action and the federal district court will determine what,
if any, relief is appropriate. The same is true for citizen enforcement
actions. Similarly, the presiding officer in an administrative
proceeding can consider any defense raised and determine whether
administrative penalties are appropriate.
    In summary, the EPA interpretation of the CAA and, in particular,
CAA section 112 is reasonable and encourages practices that will avoid
malfunctions. Administrative and judicial procedures for addressing
exceedances of the standards fully recognize that violations may occur
despite good faith efforts to comply and can accommodate those
situations. U.S. Sugar Corp. v. EPA, 830 F.3d 579, 606-610 (2016).
a. 40 CFR 63.6105 General Duty
    We are proposing to revise the General Provisions table (Table 7)
entry for 40 CFR 63.6(e)(1)(i) by changing the ``yes'' in column 3 to a
``no.'' Section 63.6(e)(1)(i) describes the general duty to minimize
emissions. Some of the language in that section is no longer necessary
or appropriate in light of the elimination of the SSM exemption. We are
proposing instead to add general duty regulatory text at 40 CFR 63.6105
that reflects the general duty to minimize emissions while eliminating
the reference to periods covered by an SSM exemption. The current
language in 40 CFR 63.6(e)(1)(i) characterizes what the general duty
entails during periods of SSM. With the elimination of the SSM
exemption, there is no need to differentiate between normal operations,
startup and shutdown, and malfunction events in describing the general
duty. Therefore, the language the EPA is proposing for 40 CFR 63.6105
does not include that language from 40 CFR 63.6(e)(1).
    We are also proposing to revise the General Provisions table (Table
7) entry for 40 CFR 63.6(e)(1)(ii) by changing the ``yes'' in column 3
to a ``no.'' Section 63.6(e)(1)(ii) imposes requirements that are not
necessary with the elimination of the SSM exemption or are redundant
with the general duty requirement being added at 40 CFR 63.6105. We are
also proposing to revise the General Provisions table (Table 7) to add
an entry for 40 CFR 63.6(e)(1)(iii) and include a ``yes'' in column 3.
b. SSM Plan
    We are proposing to revise the General Provisions table (Table 7)
entry for 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3) by changing the ``yes'' in column 3 to a
``no.'' Generally, these paragraphs require development of an SSM plan
and specify SSM recordkeeping and reporting requirements related to the
SSM plan. As noted, the EPA is proposing to remove the SSM exemptions.
Therefore, affected units will be subject to an emission standard
during such events. The applicability of a standard during such events
will ensure that sources have ample incentive to plan for and achieve
compliance and, thus, the SSM plan requirements are no longer
necessary.
c. Compliance With Standards
    We are proposing to revise the General Provisions table (Table 7)
entry for 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1) by changing the ``yes'' in column 3 to a
``no.'' The current language of 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1) exempts sources from
non-opacity standards during periods of SSM. As discussed above, the
Court in Sierra Club vacated the exemptions contained in this provision
and held that the CAA requires that some CAA section 112 standards
apply continuously. Consistent with Sierra Club, the EPA is proposing
to revise standards in this rule to apply at all times.
d. 40 CFR 63.6120 Performance Testing
    We are proposing to revise the General Provisions table (Table 7)
entry for 40 CFR 63.7(e)(1) by changing the ``yes'' in column 3 to a
``no.'' Section 63.7(e)(1) describes performance testing requirements.
The EPA is instead proposing to add a performance testing requirement
at 40 CFR 63.6120(c). The performance testing requirements we are
proposing to add differ from the General Provisions performance testing
provisions in several respects. The regulatory text does not include
the language in 40 CFR 63.7(e)(1) that restated the SSM exemption and
language that precluded startup and shutdown periods from being
considered ``representative'' for purposes of performance testing. The
proposed performance testing provisions specify that representative
conditions exclude periods of startup and shutdown. As in 40 CFR
63.7(e)(1), performance tests conducted under this subpart should not
be conducted during malfunctions because conditions during malfunctions
are often not representative of normal operating conditions. The EPA is
proposing to add language that requires the owner or operator to record
the process information that is necessary to document operating
conditions during the test and include in such record an explanation to
support that such conditions represent normal operation. Section
63.7(e) requires that the owner or operator make available to the
Administrator such records ``as may be necessary to determine the
condition of the performance test'' available to the Administrator upon
request, but does not specifically require the information to be
recorded. The regulatory text the EPA is proposing to add to this
provision builds on that requirement

and makes explicit the requirement to record the information.
e. Monitoring
    We are proposing to revise the General Provisions table (Table 7)
entry for 40 CFR 63.8(c)(1)(i) and (iii) by changing the ``yes'' in
column 3 to a ``no.'' The cross-references to the general duty and SSM
plan requirements in those subparagraphs are not necessary in light of
other requirements of 40 CFR 63.8 that require good air pollution
control practices (40 CFR 63.8(c)(1)) and that set out the requirements
of a quality control program for monitoring equipment (40 CFR 63.8(d)).
    We are proposing to revise the General Provisions table (Table 7)
entry for 40 CFR 63.8(d)(3) by changing the ``yes'' in column 3 to a
``no.'' The final sentence in 40 CFR 63.8(d)(3) refers to the General
Provisions' SSM plan requirement which is no longer applicable. The EPA
is proposing to add to the rule at 40 CFR 63.6125(e) text that is
identical to 40 CFR 63.8(d)(3) except that the final sentence is
replaced with the following sentence: ``The program of corrective
action should be included in the plan required under Sec.
63.8(d)(2).''
f. 40 CFR 63.6155 Recordkeeping
    We are proposing to revise the General Provisions table (Table 7)
entry for 40 CFR 63.10(b)(2)(i) by changing the ``yes'' in column 3 to
a ``no.'' Section 63.10(b)(2)(i) describes the recordkeeping
requirements during startup and shutdown. We are instead proposing to
add recordkeeping requirements to 40 CFR 63.6155. When a source is
subject to a different standard during startup, it will be important to
know when such startup periods begin and end in order to determine
compliance with the appropriate standard. Thus, the EPA is proposing to
add language to 40 CFR 63.6155 requiring that sources subject to an
emission standard during startup that differs from the emission
standard that applies at all other times must report the date, time,
and duration of such periods.
    We are proposing to revise the General Provisions table (Table 7)
entry for 40 CFR 63.10(b)(2)(ii) by changing the ``yes'' in column 3 to
a ``no.'' Section 63.10(b)(2)(ii) describes the recordkeeping
requirements during a malfunction. The EPA is proposing to add such
requirements to 40 CFR 63.6155. The regulatory text we are proposing to
add differs from the General Provisions it is replacing in that the
General Provisions requires the creation and retention of a record of
the occurrence and duration of each malfunction of process, air
pollution control, and monitoring equipment. The EPA is proposing that
this requirement apply to any failure to meet an applicable standard
and is requiring that the source record the date, time, and duration of
the failure rather than the ``occurrence.'' The EPA is also proposing
to add to 40 CFR 63.6155 a requirement that sources keep records that
include a list of the affected source or equipment and actions taken to
minimize emissions, an estimate of the quantity of each regulated
pollutant emitted over the standard for which the source failed to meet
the standard, and a description of the method used to estimate the
emissions. Examples of such methods would include product-loss
calculations, mass balance calculations, measurements when available,
or engineering judgment based on known process parameters. The EPA is
proposing to require that sources keep records of this information to
ensure that there is adequate information to allow the EPA to determine
the severity of any failure to meet a standard, and to provide data
that may document how the source met the general duty to minimize
emissions when the source has failed to meet an applicable standard.
    We are proposing to revise the General Provisions table (Table 7)
entry for 40 CFR 63.10(b)(2)(iv) by changing the ``yes'' in column 3 to
a ``no.'' When applicable, the provision requires sources to record
actions taken during SSM events when actions were inconsistent with
their SSM plan. The requirement is no longer appropriate because SSM
plans will no longer be required. The requirement previously applicable
under 40 CFR 63.10(b)(2)(iv)(B) to record actions to minimize emissions
and record corrective actions is now applicable by reference to 40 CFR
63.6155(a)(7)(iii).
    We are proposing to revise the General Provisions table (Table 7)
entry for 40 CFR 63.10(b)(2)(v) by changing the ``yes'' in column 3 to
a ``no.'' When applicable, the provision requires sources to record
actions taken during SSM events to show that actions taken were
consistent with their SSM plan. The requirement is no longer
appropriate because SSM plans will no longer be required.
    We are proposing to revise the General Provisions table (Table 7)
entry for 40 CFR 63.10(c)(15) by changing the ``yes'' in column 3 to a
``no.'' The EPA is proposing that 40 CFR 63.10(c)(15) no longer apply.
When applicable, the provision allows an owner or operator to use the
affected source's SSM plan or records kept to satisfy the recordkeeping
requirements of the SSM plan, specified in 40 CFR 63.6(e), to also
satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR 63.10(c)(10) through (12). The EPA
is proposing to eliminate this requirement because SSM plans would no
longer be required, and, therefore, 40 CFR 63.10(c)(15) no longer
serves any useful purpose for affected units.
g. 40 CFR 63.6150 Reporting
    Section 63.10(d)(5) describes the reporting requirements for
startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions. Currently the General Provisions
table (Table 7) entry for 40 CFR 63.10(d)(5) in 40 CFR part 63, subpart
YYYY, states that 40 CFR 63.10(d)(5) does not apply because reporting
of SSM is not required. To replace the General Provisions reporting
requirement, the EPA is proposing to add reporting requirements to 40
CFR 63.6150. The replacement language differs from the General
Provisions requirement in that it eliminates periodic SSM reports as a
stand-alone report. We are proposing language that requires sources
that fail to meet an applicable standard at any time to report the
information concerning such events in the semiannual compliance report
already required under this rule. We are proposing that the report must
contain the number, date, time, duration, and the cause of such events
(including unknown cause, if applicable), a list of the affected source
or equipment, an estimate of the quantity of each regulated pollutant
emitted over any emission limit, and a description of the method used
to estimate the emissions.
    Examples of such methods would include product-loss calculations,
mass balance calculations, measurements when available, or engineering
judgment based on known process parameters. The EPA is proposing this
requirement to ensure that there is adequate information to determine
compliance, to allow the EPA to determine the severity of the failure
to meet an applicable standard, and to provide data that may document
how the source met the general duty to minimize emissions during a
failure to meet an applicable standard.
    We will no longer require owners or operators to determine whether
actions taken to correct a malfunction are consistent with an SSM plan,
because plans would no longer be required. The proposed amendments,
therefore, eliminate the cross reference to 40 CFR 63.10(d)(5)(i) that
contains the description of the previously required SSM report format
and submittal schedule from this section. These specifications are no
longer necessary because the events will be reported in

otherwise required reports with similar format and submittal
requirements.
2. Electronic Reporting
    Through this proposal, the EPA is proposing that owners and
operators of stationary combustion turbine facilities submit electronic
copies of required performance test results and semiannual compliance
reports through the EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) using the
Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI). A
description of the electronic data submission process is provided in
the memorandum, Electronic Reporting Requirements for New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS) and National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) Rules, available in Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0688. The proposed rule requires that performance test
results collected using test methods that are supported by the EPA's
Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) as listed on the ERT website \22\ at
the time of the test be submitted in the format generated through the
use of the ERT and that other performance test results be submitted in
portable document format (PDF) using the attachment module of the ERT.
The test methods required by 40 CFR part 63, subpart YYYY that are
currently supported by the ERT are EPA Methods 3A and 4 of 40 CFR part
60, appendix A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/electronic-reporting-tool-ert.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For periodic compliance reports the proposed rule requires that
owners and operators use the appropriate spreadsheet template to submit
information to CEDRI. A draft version of the proposed template for
these reports is included in the docket for this rulemaking.\23\ The
EPA specifically requests comment on the content, layout, and overall
design of the template.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See
Draft_Stationary_Combustion_Turbine_Semiannual_and_Annual_Report.xlsm
, available at Docket ID. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0688.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the EPA has identified two broad circumstances in
which electronic reporting extensions may be provided. In both
circumstances, the decision to accept the claim of needing additional
time to report is within the discretion of the Administrator, and
reporting should occur as soon as possible. The EPA is providing these
potential extensions to protect owners and operators from noncompliance
in cases where they cannot successfully submit a report by the
reporting deadline for reasons outside of their control. The situation
where an extension may be warranted due to outages of the EPA's CDX or
CEDRI which precludes an owner or operator from accessing the system
and submitting required reports is addressed in 40 CFR 63.6150(h). The
situation where an extension may be warranted due to a force majeure
event, which is defined as an event that will be or has been caused by
circumstances beyond the control of the affected facility, its
contractors, or any entity controlled by the affected facility that
prevents an owner or operator from complying with the requirement to
submit a report electronically as required by this rule is addressed in
40 CFR 63.6150(i). Examples of such events are acts of nature, acts of
war or terrorism, or equipment failure or safety hazards beyond the
control of the facility.
    The electronic submittal of the reports addressed in this proposed
rulemaking will increase the usefulness of the data contained in those
reports, is in keeping with current trends in data availability and
transparency, will further assist in the protection of public health
and the environment, will improve compliance by facilitating the
ability of regulated facilities to demonstrate compliance with
requirements and by facilitating the ability of delegated state, local,
tribal, and territorial air agencies and the EPA to assess and
determine compliance, and will ultimately reduce burden on regulated
facilities, delegated air agencies, and the EPA. Electronic reporting
also eliminates paper-based, manual processes, thereby saving time and
resources, simplifying data entry, eliminating redundancies, minimizing
data reporting errors, and providing data quickly and accurately to the
affected facilities, air agencies, the EPA, and the public. Moreover,
electronic reporting is consistent with the EPA's plan \24\ to
implement Executive Order 13563 and is in keeping with the EPA's
Agency-wide policy \25\ developed in response to the White House's
Digital Government Strategy.\26\ For more information on the benefits
of electronic reporting, see the memorandum, Electronic Reporting
Requirements for New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) Rules,
available in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0688.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ EPA's Final Plan for Periodic Retrospective Reviews, August
2011. Available at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OA-2011-0156-0154.
    \25\ E-Reporting Policy Statement for EPA Regulations, September
2013. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/documents/epa-ereporting-policy-statement-2013-09-30.pdf.
    \26\ Digital Government: Building a 21st Century Platform to
Better Serve the American People, May 2012. Available at: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/egov/digital-government/digital-government.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Stay of Standards for Certain New Turbines
    In August 2002, the Gas Turbine Association submitted a petition to
delist two subcategories of stationary combustion turbines under CAA
section 112(c)(9)(B). The subcategories were lean premix firing natural
gas with limited oil backup and a low-risk subcategory where facilities
would make site-specific demonstrations regarding risk levels.
Additional information supporting the petition was provided in February
2003. On April 7, 2004, the EPA proposed to delist lean premix gas-
fired turbines as well as three additional subcategories that were
determined to meet the criteria for delisting in CAA section
112(c)(9)(B): Diffusion flame gas-fired, emergency, and turbines
located on the North Slope of Alaska. At the same time, the EPA
proposed to stay the effectiveness of the NESHAP for new lean premix
gas-fired and diffusion flame gas-fired turbines to ``avoid wasteful
and unwarranted expenditures on installation of emission controls which
will not be required if the subcategories are delisted.'' The standards
for new oil-fired turbines were not stayed and have been in effect.
    On August 18, 2004, the EPA finalized the stay of the effectiveness
of the NESHAP for new lean premix gas-fired and diffusion flame gas-
fired turbines, pending the outcome of the proposed delisting. The EPA
stated that it would lift the stay if the subcategories were not
ultimately delisted, and turbines constructed after January 14, 2003,
would then be subject to the final standards. Those turbines would be
given the same time to demonstrate compliance as they would have if
there had been no stay.
    In 2007, the Court held in NRDC v. EPA, 489 F.3d 1364 (D.C. Cir.
2007) that the EPA had no authority to delist subcategories under CAA
section 112(c)(9)(B). According to the court decision, only entire
source categories can be delisted under CAA section 112(c)(9)(B). Based
on the proposed results of the residual risk analysis, we do not at
this time have information to support a conclusion that the entire
Stationary Combustion Turbines source category currently meets the
criteria for delisting in CAA section 112(c)(9)(B). The results of the
inhalation risk assessment show that the maximum individual cancer risk
for this source category is above 1-in-1 million. Consequently, the EPA
is proposing to remove the stay of the standards for new

lean premix and diffusion flame gas-fired turbines.

E. What compliance dates are we proposing?

    The EPA is proposing that affected sources must comply with the
proposed amendments for SSM and electronic reporting no later than 180
days after the effective date of the final rule. (The final action is
not expected to be a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2), so
the effective date of the final rule will be the promulgation date as
specified in CAA section 112(d)(10).) For affected sources, we are
proposing changes that would impact ongoing compliance requirements for
40 CFR part 63, subpart YYYY. As discussed elsewhere in this preamble,
we are proposing to add a requirement that performance test results and
semiannual compliance reports be submitted electronically, and we are
proposing to change the requirements for periods of SSM by removing the
exemption from the requirement to meet the emission standards during
periods of SSM and proposing a work practice standard for startup. Our
experience with similar industries that are required to convert
reporting mechanisms to install necessary hardware and software, become
familiar with the process of submitting performance test results and
compliance reports electronically through the EPA's CEDRI, test these
new electronic submission capabilities, and reliably employ electronic
reporting shows that a time period of a minimum of 90 days, and, more
typically, 180 days is generally necessary to successfully accomplish
these revisions. Our experience with similar industries further shows
that this sort of regulated facility generally requires a time period
of 180 days to read and understand the amended rule requirements; to
evaluate their operations to ensure that they can meet the standards
during periods of startup and shutdown as defined in the rule and make
any necessary adjustments; and to update their operation, maintenance,
and monitoring plans to reflect the revised requirements. The EPA
recognizes the confusion that multiple different compliance dates for
individual requirements would create and the additional burden such an
assortment of dates would impose. From our assessment of the timeframe
needed for compliance with the entirety of the revised requirements,
the EPA considers a period of 180 days to be the most expeditious
compliance period practicable and, thus, is proposing that affected
sources must be in compliance with the revised requirements within 180
days of the regulation's effective date. We solicit comment on this
proposed compliance period, and we specifically request submission of
information from sources in this source category regarding specific
actions that would need to be undertaken to comply with the proposed
amended requirements and the time needed to make the adjustments for
compliance with any of the revised requirements. We note that
information provided may result in changes to the proposed compliance
date. All affected facilities would have to continue to meet the
current requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart YYYY, until the
applicable compliance date of the amended rule.
    As discussed previously, the EPA is proposing to lift the stay of
the effectiveness of the standards for new lean premix and diffusion
flame gas-fired turbines that was promulgated in 2004. Turbines that
are subject to the stay would be required to comply with all applicable
regulatory requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart YYYY, immediately
upon a final action to remove the stay. Required initial performance
tests must be conducted within 180 calendar days after the effective
date of a final action to remove the stay.

V. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts

A. What are the affected sources?

    The EPA has identified 719 turbines at 242 facilities that are
subject to the Stationary Combustion Turbine NESHAP. We are projecting
39 new stationary combustion turbines at 26 facilities will become
subject over the next 3 years. The 39 turbines include 36 natural gas-
fired units, 1 oil-fired unit, and 2 landfill gas or digester gas-fired
units. More information about the number of projected turbines over the
next 3 years can be found in the Projected Number of Turbine Units and
Facilities Subject to the Stationary Combustion Turbine National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air (NESHAP) memorandum in the docket
for this rulemaking.

B. What are the air quality impacts?

    The baseline emissions of HAP for 719 stationary combustion
turbines at 242 facilities subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart YYYY, are
estimated to be 5,331 tpy. The HAP that is emitted in the largest
quantity is formaldehyde. The proposed amendments will require turbines
subject to the Stationary Combustion Turbine NESHAP to operate without
the SSM exemption. We were unable to quantify emission reductions
associated with eliminating the SSM exemption. However, eliminating the
SSM exemption will reduce emissions by requiring facilities to meet the
applicable standard during periods of SSM. We are not proposing any
other revisions to the emission limits, so there are no other air
quality impacts as a result of the proposed amendments.

C. What are the cost impacts?

    Owners and operators of stationary combustion turbines that are
subject to the proposed amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart YYYY,
will incur costs to review the final rule. Nationwide annual costs
associated with reviewing the final rule are estimated to be a total of
$77,437 for the first year after the final rule only, or approximately
$320 per facility. We do not believe that the proposed amendments
revising the SSM provisions and requiring electronic reporting will
impose additional burden and may result in a cost savings.

D. What are the economic impacts?

    Economic impact analyses focus on changes in market prices and
output levels. If changes in market prices and output levels in the
primary markets are significant enough, impacts on other markets may
also be examined. Both the magnitude of costs needed to comply with a
proposed rule and the distribution of these costs among affected
facilities can have a role in determining how the market will change in
response to a proposed rule. The total costs associated with reviewing
the final rule are estimated to be $77,437, or $320 per facility, for
the first year after the final rule. These costs are not expected to
result in a significant market impact, regardless of whether they are
passed on to the purchaser or absorbed by the firms.

E. What are the benefits?

    The EPA is not proposing changes to the emission limits and
estimates that the proposed changes to the SSM requirements and
requirements for electronic reporting are not economically significant.
Because these proposed amendments are not considered economically
significant, as defined by Executive Order 12866, and because no
emission reductions were projected, we did not estimate any benefits
from reducing emissions.

VI. Request for Comments

    We solicit comments on this proposed action. In addition to general
comments on this proposed action, we are also interested in additional
data that may improve the risk assessments and other

analyses. We are specifically interested in receiving any improvements
to the data used in the site-specific emissions profiles used for risk
modeling. Such data should include supporting documentation in
sufficient detail to allow characterization of the quality and
representativeness of the data or information. Section VII of this
preamble provides more information on submitting data.

VII. Submitting Data Corrections

    The site-specific emissions profiles used in the source category
risk and demographic analyses and instructions are available for
download on the RTR website at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html. The data files include detailed information for each HAP
emissions release point for the facilities in the source category.
    If you believe that the data are not representative or are
inaccurate, please identify the data in question, provide your reason
for concern, and provide any ``improved'' data that you have, if
available. When you submit data, we request that you provide
documentation of the basis for the revised values to support your
suggested changes. To submit comments on the data downloaded from the
RTR website, complete the following steps:
    1. Within this downloaded file, enter suggested revisions to the
data fields appropriate for that information.
    2. Fill in the commenter information fields for each suggested
revision (i.e., commenter name, commenter organization, commenter email
address, commenter phone number, and revision comments).
    3. Gather documentation for any suggested emissions revisions
(e.g., performance test reports, material balance calculations).
    4. Send the entire downloaded file with suggested revisions in
Microsoft[supreg] Access format and all accompanying documentation to
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0688 (through the method described in the
ADDRESSES section of this preamble).
    5. If you are providing comments on a single facility or multiple
facilities, you need only submit one file for all facilities. The file
should contain all suggested changes for all sources at that facility
(or facilities). We request that all data revision comments be
submitted in the form of updated Microsoft[supreg] Excel files that are
generated by the Microsoft[supreg] Access file. These files are
provided on the RTR website at https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/atw/rrisk/rtrpg.html.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a significant regulatory action and was,
therefore, not submitted to the OMB for review.

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs

    This action is not expected to be an Executive Order 13771
regulatory action because this action is not significant under
Executive Order 12866.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    The information collection activities in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to the OMB under the PRA. The Information
Collection Request (ICR) document that the EPA prepared has been
assigned EPA ICR number 1967.08. You can find a copy of the ICR in the
docket for this rule, and it is briefly summarized here.
    The information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR
part 63, subpart YYYY. The information requirements are based on
notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the NESHAP
General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), which are mandatory for
all operators subject to national emissions standards. The information
collection activities also include paperwork requirements associated
with initial and annual compliance testing and parameter monitoring.
The proposed amendments to the rule would eliminate the paperwork
requirements associated with the SSM plan and recordkeeping of SSM
events and require electronic submittal of performance test results and
semiannual compliance reports. The proposed amendments to the rule
would also lift the stay on the performance testing and notification,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements for new lean premix gas-fired
turbines and diffusion flame gas-fired turbines. These recordkeeping
and reporting requirements are specifically authorized by CAA section
114 (42 U.S.C. 7414).
    Respondents/affected entities: Owners and operators of stationary
combustion turbines subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart YYYY.
    Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart YYYY).
    Estimated number of respondents: 90 per year.
    Frequency of response: The frequency of responses varies depending
on the burden item. Responses include one-time review of rule
amendments, reports of annual performance tests, and semiannual
compliance reports.
    Total estimated burden: 3,751 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    Total estimated cost: $1,983,088 (per year), includes $1,735,494
annualized capital or operation and maintenance costs.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    Submit your comments on the Agency's need for this information, the
accuracy of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for
minimizing respondent burden to the EPA using the docket identified at
the beginning of this rule. You may also send your ICR-related comments
to OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs via email to
[email protected], Attention: Desk Officer for the EPA. Since
OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60
days after receipt, OMB must receive comments no later than May 13,
2019. The EPA will respond to any ICR-related comments in the final
rule.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. The
small entities subject to the requirements of this action are small
energy companies or governmental jurisdictions. The Agency has
determined that 11 small entities representing approximately 4 percent
of the total number of entities subject to the proposal may experience
an impact of less than 1 percent of revenues.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or
more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes
no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments or the
private sector.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial

direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. None of the stationary combustion turbines that
have been identified as being affected by this proposed action are
owned or operated by tribal governments or located within tribal lands.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is
not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and
because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety
risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to
children. This action's health and risk assessments are contained in
sections III.A and C and sections IV.A and B of this preamble, and
further documented in the risk document.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR
Part 51

    This action involves technical standards. The EPA proposes to use
ANSI/ASME PTC 19-10-1981 Part 10 (2010), ``Flue and Exhaust Gas
Analyses'' manual portion only as an alternative to EPA Method 3B and
incorporate the alternative method by reference. The ANSI/ASME PTC 19-
10-1981 Part 10 (2010) method incorporates both manual and instrumental
methodologies for the determination of O2 content. The
manual method segment of the O2 determination is performed
through the absorption of O2. The method is reasonably
available from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers at http://www.asme.org; by mail at Three Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5990; or
by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>. The EPA proposes to use ASTM D6522-11,
``Standard Test Method for the Determination of Nitrogen Oxides, Carbon
Monoxide, and Oxygen Concentrations in Emissions from Natural Gas-Fired
Reciprocating Engines, Combustion Turbines, Boilers and Process Heaters
Using Portable Analyzers'' as an alternative to EPA Method 3A for
turbines fueled by natural gas and incorporate the alternative method
by reference. The ASTM D6522-11 method is an electrochemical cell based
portable analyzer method which may be used for the determination of
nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and O2 in emission streams
form stationary sources. Also, instead of the current ASTM D6348-12e1
standard (``Determination of Gaseous Compounds by Extractive Direct
Interface Fourier Transform (FTIR) Spectroscopy''), the Stationary
Combustion Turbine NESHAP references ASTM D6348-03 as an alternative to
EPA Method 320. We are proposing to update the NESHAP to reference the
most current version of the method. When using the method, the test
plan preparation and implementation requirements in Annexes A1 through
A8 to ASTM D6348-12e1 are mandatory. The ASTM D6348-12e1 method is an
extractive FTIR Spectroscopy-based field test method and is used to
quantify gas phase concentrations of multiple target compounds in
emission streams from stationary sources. The ASTM standards are
reasonably available from the American Society for Testing and
Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, Post Office Box C700, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959. See http://www.astm.org/.
    The EPA identified an additional seven voluntary consensus
standards (VCS) as being potentially applicable to this proposed rule.
After reviewing the available standards, the EPA determined that the
seven VCS would not be practical due to lack of equivalency,
documentation, validation data, and other important technical and
policy considerations. For further information, see the memorandum
titled Voluntary Consensus Standard Results for National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Stationary Combustion Turbines
Risk and Technology, in the docket for this proposed rule.

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples, as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The documentation for this decision is contained in section IV.A of
this preamble and the technical report, Risk and Technology Review
Analysis of Demographic Factors for Populations Living Near Stationary
Combustion Turbines Source Category Operations.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous
substances, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    Dated: April 2, 2019.
Andrew R. Wheeler,
Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
title 40, chapter I, part 63 of the Code of the Federal Regulations as
follows:

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart A--General Provisions

0
2. Section 63.14 is amended by revising paragraphs (e)(1) and (h)(85),
redesignating paragraphs (h)(94) through (111) as (h)(95) through
(112), and adding new paragraph (h)(94) to read as follows.

Sec.  63.14  Incorporations by reference.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981, Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses [Part
10, Instruments and Apparatus], issued August 31, 1981, IBR approved
for Sec. Sec.  63.309(k), 63.457(k), 63.772(e) and (h), 63.865(b),
63.1282(d) and (g), 63.1625(b), 63.3166(a), 63.3360(e), 63.3545(a),
63.3555(a), 63.4166(a), 63.4362(a), 63.4766(a), 63.4965(a), 63.5160(d),
table 4 to subpart UUUU, table 3 to subpart YYYY, 63.9307(c),
63.9323(a), 63.11148(e), 63.11155(e), 63.11162(f), 63.11163(g),
63.11410(j), 63.11551(a), 63.11646(a), and 63.11945, table 5 to subpart
DDDDD, table 4 to subpart JJJJJ, table 4 to subpart KKKKK, tables 4 and
5 to subpart UUUUU, table 1 to subpart ZZZZZ, and table 4 to subpart
JJJJJJ.
* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (85) ASTM D6348-12e1, Standard Test Method for Determination of

Gaseous Compounds by Extractive Direct Interface Fourier Transform
Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy, Approved February 1, 2012, IBR approved
for Sec.  63.1571(a) and table 3 to subpart YYYY.
* * * * *
    (94) ASTM D6522-11, Standard Test Method for Determination of
Nitrogen Oxides, Carbon Monoxide, and Oxygen Concentrations in
Emissions from Natural Gas-Fired Reciprocating Engines, Combustion
Turbines, Boilers, and Process Heaters Using Portable Analyzers, IBR
approved for table 3 to subpart YYYY.
* * * * *

Subpart YYYY--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Stationary Combustion Turbines

Sec.  63.6095  [Amended]

0
3. Section 63.6095 is amended by removing paragraph (d).
0
4. Section 63.6105 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) and
adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.6105  What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?

    (a) Before [DATE 181 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE
Federal Register], you must be in compliance with the emission
limitations and operating limitations which apply to you at all times
except during startup, shutdown, and malfunctions. After [DATE 180 DAYS
AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], you must be
in compliance with the emission limitations, operating limitations, and
other requirements in this subpart which apply to you at all times.
    (b) Before [DATE 181 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE
Federal Register], if you must comply with emission and operating
limitations, you must operate and maintain your stationary combustion
turbine, oxidation catalyst emission control device or other air
pollution control equipment, and monitoring equipment in a manner
consistent with good air pollution control practices for minimizing
emissions at all times including during startup, shutdown, and
malfunction.
    (c) After [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE
Federal Register], at all times, the owner or operator must operate and
maintain any affected source, including associated air pollution
control equipment and monitoring equipment, in a manner consistent with
safety and good air pollution control practices for minimizing
emissions. The general duty to minimize emissions does not require the
owner or operator to make any further efforts to reduce emissions if
levels required by the applicable standard have been achieved.
Determination of whether a source is operating in compliance with
operation and maintenance requirements will be based on information
available to the Administrator which may include, but is not limited
to, monitoring results, review of operation and maintenance procedures,
review of operation and maintenance records, and inspection of the
source.
0
5. Section 63.6110 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.6110  By what date must I conduct the initial performance
tests or other initial compliance demonstrations?

    (a) You must conduct the initial performance tests or other initial
compliance demonstrations in Table 4 of this subpart that apply to you
within 180 calendar days after the compliance date that is specified
for your stationary combustion turbine in Sec.  63.6095 and according
to the provisions in Sec.  63.7(a)(2). New or reconstructed stationary
combustion turbines that are lean premix gas-fired stationary
combustion turbines or diffusion flame gas-fired stationary combustion
turbines that commenced construction before April 12, 2019 and were
subject to the stay of the standards for gas-fired subcategories in
Sec.  63.6095(d) that was finalized on August 18, 2004, must conduct
the initial performance test within 180 calendar days after the date
the stay in Sec.  63.6095(d) is removed from this subpart.
* * * * *
0
6. Section 63.6120 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to
read as follows:

Sec.  63.6120  What performance tests and other procedures must I use?

* * * * *
    (b) Each performance test must be conducted according to the
requirements in Table 3 of this subpart. Before [DATE 181 DAYS AFTER
PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], each performance
test must be conducted according to the requirements of the General
Provisions at Sec.  63.7(e)(1).
    (c) Performance tests must be conducted at high load, defined as
100 percent plus or minus 10 percent. Before [DATE 181 DAYS AFTER
PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], do not conduct
performance tests or compliance evaluations during periods of startup,
shutdown, or malfunction. After [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF
FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], performance tests shall be
conducted under such conditions based on representative performance of
the affected source for the period being tested. Representative
conditions exclude periods of startup and shutdown. The owner or
operator may not conduct performance tests during periods of
malfunction. The owner or operator must record the process information
that is necessary to document operating conditions during the test and
include in such record an explanation to support that such conditions
represent normal operation. Upon request, the owner or operator shall
make available to the Administrator such records as may be necessary to
determine the conditions of performance tests.
* * * * *
0
7. Section 63.6125 is amended by adding paragraph (e) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.6125  What are my monitor installation, operation, and
maintenance requirements?

* * * * *
    (e) After [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE
Federal Register], if you are required to use a continuous monitoring
system (CMS), you must develop and implement a CMS quality control
program that included written procedures for CMS according to Sec.
63.8(d)(1)-(2). You must keep these written procedures on record for
the life of the affected source or until the affected source is no
longer subject to the provisions of this part, to be made available for
inspection, upon request, by the Administrator. If the performance
evaluation plan is revised, the owner or operator shall keep previous
(i.e., superseded) versions of the performance evaluation plan on
record to be made available for inspection, upon request, by the
Administrator, for a period of 5 years after each revision to the plan.
The program of corrective action should be included in the plan
required under Sec.  63.8(d)(2).
0
8. Section 63.6140 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.6140  How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
emission and operating limitations?

* * * * *
    (c) Before [DATE 181 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE
Federal Register], consistent with Sec. Sec.  63.6(e) and 63.7(e)(1),
deviations that occur during a period of startup, shutdown, and
malfunction are not

violations if you have operated your stationary combustion turbine in
accordance with Sec.  63.6(e)(1)(i).
0
9. Section 63.6150 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory text, paragraph (a)(4)
introductory text, paragraph (c) introductory text, and paragraph (e)
introductory text, and
0
b. Adding paragraphs (a)(5), (f), (g), (h) and (i).
    The revisions and additions read as follows:

Sec.  63.6150   What reports must I submit and when?

    (a) Compliance report. Anyone who owns or operates a stationary
combustion turbine which must meet the emission limitation for
formaldehyde must submit a semiannual compliance report according to
Table 6 of this subpart. The semiannual compliance report must contain
the information described in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this
section. The semiannual compliance report must be submitted by the
dates specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this section,
unless the Administrator has approved a different schedule. After [DATE
180 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], you
must submit all subsequent reports to the EPA following the procedure
specified in paragraph (g) of this section.
* * * * *
    (4) Before [DATE 181 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE
Federal Register], for each deviation from an emission limitation, the
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (a)(4)(i)
through (iii) of this section.
* * * * *
    (5) After [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE
Federal Register], if a source fails to meet an applicable standard,
report such events in the semiannual compliance report. Report the
information specified in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) through (iv) of this
section.
    (i) Report the number of failures to meet an applicable standard.
For each instance, report the start date, start time, duration, and
cause of each failure, and the corrective action taken.
    (ii) For each failure, the report must include a list of the
affected sources or equipment, an estimate of the quantity of each
regulated pollutant emitted over any emission limit, a description of
the method used to estimate the emissions.
    (iii) Information on the number, duration, and cause for monitor
downtime incidents (including unknown cause, if applicable), as
applicable, and the corrective action taken.
    (iv) Report the total operating time of the affected source during
the reporting period.
* * * * *
    (c) If you are operating as a stationary combustion turbine which
fires landfill gas or digester gas equivalent to 10 percent or more of
the gross heat input on an annual basis, or a stationary combustion
turbine where gasified MSW is used to generate 10 percent or more of
the gross heat input on an annual basis, you must submit an annual
report according to Table 6 of this subpart by the date specified
unless the Administrator has approved a different schedule, according
to the information described in paragraphs (d)(1) through (5) of this
section. You must report the data specified in (c)(1) through (3) of
this section. After [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN
THE Federal Register], you must submit all subsequent reports to the
EPA following the procedure specified in paragraph (g) of this section.
* * * * *
    (e) If you are operating a lean premix gas-fired stationary
combustion turbine or a diffusion flame gas-fired stationary combustion
turbine as defined by this subpart, and you use any quantity of
distillate oil to fire any new or existing stationary combustion
turbine which is located at the same major source, you must submit an
annual report according to Table 6 of this subpart by the date
specified unless the Administrator has approved a different schedule,
according to the information described in paragraphs (d)(1) through (5)
of this section. You must report the data specified in (e)(1) through
(3) of this section. After [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL
RULE IN THE Federal Register], you must submit all subsequent reports
to the EPA following the procedure specified in paragraph (g) of this
section.
* * * * *
    (f) Performance test report. After [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION
OF FINAL RULE IN THE Federal Register], within 60 days after the date
of completing each performance test required by this subpart, you must
submit the results of the performance test (as specified in Sec.
63.6145(f)) following the procedures specified in paragraphs (f)(1)
through (3) of this section.
    (1) Data collected using test methods supported by the EPA's
Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) as listed on the EPA's ERT website
(https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/electronic-reporting-tool-ert) at the time of the test. Submit the results of the
performance test to the EPA via the Compliance and Emissions Data
Reporting Interface (CEDRI), which can be accessed through the EPA's
Central Data Exchange (CDX) (https://cdx.epa.gov/). The data must be
submitted in a file format generated through the use of the EPA's ERT.
Alternatively, you may submit an electronic file consistent with the
extensible markup language (XML) schema listed on the EPA's ERT
website.
    (2) Data collected using test methods that are not supported by the
EPA's ERT as listed on the EPA's ERT website at the time of the test.
The results of the performance test must be included as an attachment
in the ERT or an alternate electronic file consistent with the XML
schema listed on the EPA's ERT website. Submit the ERT generated
package or alternative file to the EPA via CEDRI.
    (3) Confidential business information. If you claim some of the
information submitted under paragraph (f)(1) of this section is CBI,
you must submit a complete file, including information claimed to be
CBI, to the EPA. The file must be generated through the use of the
EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic file consistent with the XML
schema listed on the EPA's ERT website. Submit the file on a compact
disc, flash drive, or other commonly used electronic storage medium and
clearly mark the medium as CBI. Mail the electronic medium to U.S. EPA/
OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy
Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same file
with the CBI omitted must be submitted to the EPA via the EPA's CDX as
described in paragraph (f)(1) of this section.
    (g) If you are required to submit reports following the procedure
specified in this paragraph, you must submit reports to the EPA via
CEDRI, which can be accessed through the EPA's (CDX) (https://cdx.epa.gov/). You must use the appropriate electronic report template
on the CEDRI website (https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/compliance-and-emissions-data-reporting-interface-cedri) for
this subpart. The date report templates become available will be listed
on the CEDRI website. The report must be submitted by the deadline
specified in this subpart, regardless of the method in which the report
is submitted. If you claim some of the information required to be
submitted via CEDRI is confidential business

information (CBI), submit a complete report, including information
claimed to be CBI, to the EPA. The report must be generated using the
appropriate form on the CEDRI website. Submit the file on a compact
disc, flash drive, or other commonly used electronic storage medium and
clearly mark the medium as CBI. Mail the electronic medium to U.S. EPA/
OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy
Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same file
with the CBI omitted must be submitted to the EPA via the EPA's CDX as
described earlier in this paragraph.
    (h) If you are required to electronically submit a report through
CEDRI in the EPA's CDX, you may assert a claim of EPA system outage for
failure to timely comply with the reporting requirement. To assert a
claim of EPA system outage, you must meet the requirements outlined in
paragraphs (h)(1) through (7) of this section.
    (1) You must have been or will be precluded from accessing CEDRI
and submitting a required report within the time prescribed due to an
outage of either the EPA's CEDRI or CDX systems.
    (2) The outage must have occurred within the period of time
beginning five business days prior to the date that the submission is
due.
    (3) The outage may be planned or unplanned.
    (4) You must submit notification to the Administrator in writing as
soon as possible following the date you first knew, or through due
diligence should have known, that the event may cause or has caused a
delay in reporting.
    (5) You must provide to the Administrator a written description
identifying:
    (i) The date(s) and time(s) when CDX or CEDRI was accessed and the
system was unavailable;
    (ii) A rationale for attributing the delay in reporting beyond the
regulatory deadline to EPA system outage;
    (iii) Measures taken or to be taken to minimize the delay in
reporting; and
    (iv) The date by which you propose to report, or if you have
already met the reporting requirement at the time of the notification,
the date you reported.
    (6) The decision to accept the claim of EPA system outage and allow
an extension to the reporting deadline is solely within the discretion
of the Administrator.
    (7) In any circumstance, the report must be submitted
electronically as soon as possible after the outage is resolved.
    (i) If you are required to electronically submit a report through
CEDRI in the EPA's CDX, you may assert a claim of force majeure for
failure to timely comply with the reporting requirement. To assert a
claim of force majeure, you must meet the requirements outlined in
paragraphs (i)(1) through (5) of this section.
    (1) You may submit a claim if a force majeure event is about to
occur, occurs, or has occurred or there are lingering effects from such
an event within the period of time beginning five business days prior
to the date the submission is due. For the purposes of this section, a
force majeure event is defined as an event that will be or has been
caused by circumstances beyond the control of the affected facility,
its contractors, or any entity controlled by the affected facility that
prevents you from complying with the requirement to submit a report
electronically within the time period prescribed. Examples of such
events are acts of nature (e.g., hurricanes, earthquakes, or floods),
acts of war or terrorism, or equipment failure or safety hazard beyond
the control of the affected facility (e.g., large scale power outage).
    (2) You must submit notification to the Administrator in writing as
soon as possible following the date you first knew, or through due
diligence should have known, that the event may cause or has caused a
delay in reporting.
    (3) You must provide to the Administrator:
    (i) A written description of the force majeure event;
    (ii) A rationale for attributing the delay in reporting beyond the
regulatory deadline to the force majeure event;
    (iii) Measures taken or to be taken to minimize the delay in
reporting; and
    (iv) The date by which you propose to report, or if you have
already met the reporting requirement at the time of the notification,
the date you reported.
    (4) The decision to accept the claim of force majeure and allow an
extension to the reporting deadline is solely within the discretion of
the Administrator.
    (5) In any circumstance, the reporting must occur as soon as
possible after the force majeure event occurs.
0
10. Section 63.6155 is amended by revising paragraph (a) introductory
text and paragraphs (a)(3) through (5) and adding paragraphs (a)(6),
(a)(7), and (d) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.6155   What records must I keep?

    (a) You must keep the records as described in paragraphs (a)(1)
through (7) of this section.
* * * * *
    (3) Before [DATE 181 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE
Federal Register], records of the occurrence and duration of each
startup, shutdown, or malfunction as required in Sec.  63.10(b)(2)(i).
    (4) Before [DATE 181 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE
Federal Register], records of the occurrence and duration of each
malfunction of the air pollution control equipment, if applicable, as
required in Sec.  63.10(b)(2)(ii).
    (5) Records of all maintenance on the air pollution control
equipment as required in Sec.  63.10(b)(2)(iii).
    (6) After [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE
Federal Register], records of the date, time, and duration of each
startup period, recording the periods when the affected source was
subject to the standard applicable to startup.
    (7) After [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE
Federal Register], keep records as follows.
    (i) In the event that an affected unit fails to meet an applicable
standard, record the number of failures. For each failure record the
date, time, cause, and duration of each failure.
    (ii) For each failure to meet an applicable standard, record and
retain a list of the affected sources or equipment, an estimate of the
quantity of each regulated pollutant emitted over any emission limit
and a description of the method used to estimate the emissions.
    (iii) Record actions taken to minimize emissions in accordance with
Sec.  63.6105(c), and any corrective actions taken to return the
affected unit to its normal or usual manner of operation.
* * * * *
    (d) Any records required to be maintained by this part that are
submitted electronically via the EPA's CEDRI may be maintained in
electronic format. This ability to maintain electronic copies does not
affect the requirement for facilities to make records, data, and
reports available upon request to a delegated air agency or the EPA as
part of an on-site compliance evaluation.
0
11. Section 63.6175 is amended by revising the definition for
``Deviation'' to read as follows:

Sec.  63.6175   What definitions apply to this subpart?

* * * * *
    Deviation means any instance in which an affected source subject to
this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source:
    (1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this
subpart, including but not limited to any emission limitation or
operating limitation;

    (2) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is
included in the operating permit for any affected source required to
obtain such a permit;
    (3) Fails to meet any emission limitation or operating limitation
in this subpart during malfunction, regardless of whether or not such
failure is permitted by this subpart;
    (4) Before [DATE 181 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE
Federal Register], fails to satisfy the general duty to minimize
emissions established by Sec.  63.6(e)(1)(i), or
    (5) After [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN THE
Federal Register], fails to satisfy the general duty to minimize
emissions established by Sec.  63.6105.
* * * * *
0
12. Table 1 to Subpart YYYY of Part 63 is revised to read as follows:

Table 1 to Subpart YYYY of Part 63--Emission Limitations

    As stated in Sec.  63.6100, you must comply with the following
emission limitations.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
   For each new or reconstructed
   stationary combustion turbine         You must meet the following
 described in Sec.   63.6100 which        emission limitations . . .
              is . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. a lean premix gas-fired           limit the concentration of
 stationary combustion turbine as     formaldehyde to 91 ppbvd or less
 defined in this subpart,             at 15 percent O2, except during
2. a lean premix oil-fired            turbine startup. During turbine
 stationary combustion turbine as     startup, you must minimize the
 defined in this subpart,             turbine's time spent at idle or
3. a diffusion flame gas-fired        holding at low load levels and
 stationary combustion turbine as     minimize the turbine's startup
 defined in this subpart, or          time to a period needed for
4. a diffusion flame oil-fired        appropriate and safe loading of
 stationary combustion turbine as     the turbine, not to exceed 1 hour
 defined in this subpart.             for simple cycle stationary
                                      combustion turbines and 3 hours
                                      for combined cycle stationary
                                      combustion turbines, after which
                                      time the formaldehyde emission
                                      limitation of 91 ppbvd or less at
                                      15 percent O2 applies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
13. Table 3 to Subpart YYYY of Part 63 is revised to read as follows:

Table 3 to Subpart YYYY of Part 63--Requirements for Performance Tests
and Initial Compliance Demonstrations

    As stated in Sec.  63.6120, you must comply with the following
requirements for performance tests and initial compliance
demonstrations.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      According to the
       You must . . .              Using . . .            following
                                                     requirements . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. demonstrate formaldehyde   Test Method 320 of    formaldehyde
 emissions meet the emission   40 CFR part 63,       concentration must
 limitations specified in      appendix A; ASTM      be corrected to 15
 Table 1 by a performance      D6348-12e1 \1\        percent O2, dry
 test initially and on an      provided that the     basis. Results of
 annual basis and.             test plan             this test consist
                               preparation and       of the average of
                               implementation        the three 1 hour
                               provisions of         runs. Test must be
                               Annexes A1 through    conducted within 10
                               A8 are followed and   percent of 100
                               the %R as             percent load.
                               determined in Annex
                               A5 is equal or
                               greater than 70%
                               and less than or
                               equal to 130%; \2\
                               or other methods
                               approved by the
                               Administrator.
b. select the sampling port   Method 1 or 1A of 40  if using an air
 location and the number of    CFR part 60,          pollution control
 traverse points and.          appendix A.           device, the
                                                     sampling site must
                                                     be located at the
                                                     outlet of the air
                                                     pollution control
                                                     device.
c. determine the O2           Method 3A or 3B of    measurements to
 concentration at the          40 CFR part 60,       determine O2
 sampling port location and.   appendix A; ANSI/     concentration must
                               ASME PTC 19-10-       be made at the same
                               1981\1\ (Part 10)     time as the
                               manual portion        performance test.
                               only; ASTM D6522-
                               11\1\ if the
                               turbine is fueled
                               by natural gas.
d. determine the moisture     Method 4 of 40 CFR    measurements to
 content at the sampling       part 60, appendix A   determine moisture
 port location for the         or Test Method 320    content must be
 purposes of correcting the    of 40 CFR part 63,    made at the same
 formaldehyde concentration    appendix A, or ASTM   time as the
 to a dry basis.               D6348-12e1 \1\.       performance test.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Incorporated by reference, see Sec.   63.14.
\2\ The %R value for each compound must be reported in the test report,
  and all field measurements must be corrected with the calculated %R
  value for that compound using the following equation:
 Reported Results = ((Measured Concentration in Stack)/(%R)) x 100.

0
14. Table 7 to Subpart YYYY of Part 63 is revised to read as follows:

Table 7 to Subpart YYYY of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions
to Subpart YYYY

    You must comply with the applicable General Provisions
requirements:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Citation                     Subject             Applies to subpart YYYY            Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   63.1..................  General applicability of  Yes..........................  Additional terms defined
                                the General Provisions.                                  in Sec.   63.6175.
Sec.   63.2..................  Definitions.............  Yes..........................  Additional terms defined
                                                                                in Sec.   63.6175.
Sec.   63.3..................  Units and abbreviations.  Yes..........................

Sec.   63.4..................  Prohibited activities...  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.5..................  Construction and          Yes..........................
                                reconstruction.
Sec.   63.6(a)...............  Applicability...........  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.6(b)(1)-(4)........  Compliance dates for new  Yes..........................
                                and reconstructed
                                sources.
Sec.   63.6(b)(5)............  Notification............  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.6(b)(6)............  [Reserved]..............
Sec.   63.6(b)(7)............  Compliance dates for new  Yes..........................
                                and reconstructed area
                                sources that become
                                major.
Sec.   63.6(c)(1)-(2)........  Compliance dates for      Yes..........................
                                existing sources.
Sec.   63.6(c)(3)-(4)........  [Reserved]..............
Sec.   63.6(c)(5)............  Compliance dates for      Yes..........................
                                existing area sources
                                that become major.
Sec.   63.6(d)...............  [Reserved]..............
Sec.   63.6(e)(1)(i).........  General duty to minimize  Yes before [DATE 181 DAYS
                                emissions.                AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL
                                                          RULE IN THE Federal
                                                          Register].
                                                         No after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER
                                                          PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN
                                                          THE Federal Register]. See
                                                          Sec.   63.6105 for general
                                                          duty requirement.
Sec.   63.6(e)(1)(ii)........  Requirement to correct    Yes before [DATE 181 DAYS
                                malfunctions ASAP.        AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL
                                                          RULE IN THE Federal
                                                          Register].
                                                         No after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER
                                                          PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN
                                                          THE Federal Register].
Sec.   63.6(e)(1)(iii).......  Operation and             Yes..........................
                                Maintenance
                                Requirements.
Sec.   63.6(e)(2)............  [Reserved]..............
Sec.   63.6(e)(3)............  SSMP....................  Yes before [DATE 181 DAYS
                                                          AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL
                                                          RULE IN THE Federal
                                                          Register].
                                                         No after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER
                                                          PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN
                                                          THE Federal Register].
Sec.   63.6(f)(1)............  Applicability of          Yes before [DATE 181 DAYS
                                standards except during   AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL
                                startup, shutdown, or     RULE IN THE Federal
                                malfunction (SSM).        Register].
                                                         No after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER
                                                          PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN
                                                          THE Federal Register].
Sec.   63.6(f)(2)............  Methods for determining   Yes..........................
                                compliance.
Sec.   63.6(f)(3)............  Finding of compliance...  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.6(g)(1)-(3)........  Use of alternative        Yes..........................
                                standard.
Sec.   63.6(h)...............  Opacity and visible       No...........................  Subpart YYYY does not
                                emission standards.                                      contain opacity or
                                                                                visible emission
                                                                                standards.
Sec.   63.6(i)...............  Compliance extension      Yes..........................
                                procedures and criteria.
Sec.   63.6(j)...............  Presidential compliance   Yes..........................
                                exemption.
Sec.   63.7(a)(1)-(2)........  Performance test dates..  Yes..........................  Subpart YYYY contains
                                                                                performance test dates
                                                                                at Sec.   63.6110.
Sec.   63.7(a)(3)............  Section 114 authority...  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.7(b)(1)............  Notification of           Yes..........................
                                performance test.
Sec.   63.7(b)(2)............  Notification of           Yes..........................
                                rescheduling.
Sec.   63.7(c)...............  Quality assurance/test    Yes..........................
                                plan.
Sec.   63.7(d)...............  Testing facilities......  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.7(e)(1)............  Conditions for            Yes before [DATE 181 DAYS
                                conducting performance    AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL
                                tests.                    RULE IN THE Federal
                                                          Register].
                                                         No after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER
                                                          PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN
                                                          THE Federal Register].
Sec.   63.7(e)(2)............  Conduct of performance    Yes..........................  Subpart YYYY specifies
                                tests and reduction of                                   test methods at Sec.
                                data.                                                    63.6120.
Sec.   63.7(e)(3)............  Test run duration.......  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.7(e)(4)............  Administrator may         Yes..........................
                                require other testing
                                under section 114 of
                                the CAA.
Sec.   63.7(f)...............  Alternative test method   Yes..........................
                                provisions.
Sec.   63.7(g)...............  Performance test data     Yes..........................
                                analysis,
                                recordkeeping, and
                                reporting.
Sec.   63.7(h)...............  Waiver of tests.........  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.8(a)(1)............  Applicability of          Yes..........................  Subpart YYYY contains
                                monitoring requirements.                                 specific requirements
                                                                                for monitoring at Sec.
                                                                                63.6125.
Sec.   63.8(a)(2)............  Performance               Yes..........................
                                specifications.
Sec.   63.8(a)(3)............  [Reserved]..............
Sec.   63.8(a)(4)............  Monitoring for control    No...........................
                                devices.
Sec.   63.8(b)(1)............  Monitoring..............  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.8(b)(2)-(3)........  Multiple effluents and    Yes..........................
                                multiple monitoring
                                systems.
Sec.   63.8(c)(1)............  Monitoring system         Yes..........................
                                operation and
                                maintenance.
Sec.   63.8(c)(1)(i).........  General duty to minimize  Yes before [DATE 181 DAYS
                                emissions and CMS         AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL
                                operation.                RULE IN THE Federal
                                                          Register].
                                                         No after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER
                                                          PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN
                                                          THE Federal Register].
Sec.   63.8(c)(1)(ii)........  Parts for repair of CMS   Yes..........................
                                readily available.

Sec.   63.8(c)(1)(iii).......  Requirement to develop    Yes before [DATE 181 DAYS
                                SSM Plan for CMS.         AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL
                                                          RULE IN THE Federal
                                                          Register].
                                                         No after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER
                                                          PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN
                                                          THE Federal Register].
Sec.   63.8(c)(2)-(3)........  Monitoring system         Yes..........................
                                installation.
Sec.   63.8(c)(4)............  Continuous monitoring     Yes..........................  Except that subpart YYYY
                                system (CMS)                                             does not require
                                requirements.                                            continuous opacity
                                                                                monitoring systems
                                                                                (COMS).
Sec.   63.8(c)(5)............  COMS minimum procedures.  No...........................
Sec.   63.8(c)(6)-(8)........  CMS requirements........  Yes..........................  Except that subpart YYYY
                                                                                does not require COMS.
Sec.   63.8(d)(1)-(2)........  CMS quality control.....  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.8(d)(3)............  Written procedures for    Yes before [DATE 181 DAYS
                                CMS.                      AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL
                                                          RULE IN THE Federal
                                                          Register].
                                                         No after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER
                                                          PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN
                                                          THE Federal Register].
Sec.   63.8(e)...............  CMS performance           Yes..........................  Except for Sec.
                                evaluation.                                              63.8(e)(5)(ii), which
                                                                                applies to COMS.
Sec.   63.8(f)(1)-(5)........  Alternative monitoring    Yes..........................
                                method.
Sec.   63.8(f)(6)............  Alternative to relative   Yes..........................
                                accuracy test.
Sec.   63.8(g)...............  Data reduction..........  Yes..........................  Except that provisions
                                                                                for COMS are not
                                                                                applicable. Averaging
                                                                                periods for
                                                                                demonstrating
                                                                                compliance are
                                                                                specified at Sec.  Sec.
                                                                                63.6135 and 63.6140.
Sec.   63.9(a)...............  Applicability and State   Yes..........................
                                delegation of
                                notification
                                requirements.
Sec.   63.9(b)(1)-(5)........  Initial notifications...  Yes..........................  Except that Sec.
                                                                                63.9(b)(3) is reserved.
Sec.   63.9(c)...............  Request for compliance    Yes..........................
                                extension.
Sec.   63.9(d)...............  Notification of special   Yes..........................
                                compliance requirements
                                for new sources.
Sec.   63.9(e)...............  Notification of           Yes..........................
                                performance test.
Sec.   63.9(f)...............  Notification of visible   No...........................  Subpart YYYY does not
                                emissions/opacity test.                                  contain opacity or VE
                                                                                standards.
Sec.   63.9(g)(1)............  Notification of           Yes..........................
                                performance evaluation.
Sec.   63.9(g)(2)............  Notification of use of    No...........................  Subpart YYYY does not
                                COMS data.                                               contain opacity or VE
                                                                                standards.
Sec.   63.9(g)(3)............  Notification that         Yes..........................
                                criterion for
                                alternative to relative
                                accuracy test audit
                                (RATA) is exceeded.
Sec.   63.9(h)...............  Notification of           Yes..........................  Except that
                                compliance status.                                       notifications for
                                                                                sources not conducting
                                                                                performance tests are
                                                                                due 30 days after
                                                                                completion of
                                                                                performance
                                                                                evaluations. Sec.
                                                                                63.9(h)(4) is reserved.
Sec.   63.9(i)...............  Adjustment of submittal   Yes..........................
                                deadlines.
Sec.   63.9(j)...............  Change in previous        Yes..........................
                                information.
Sec.   63.10(a)..............  Administrative            Yes..........................
                                provisions for
                                recordkeeping and
                                reporting.
Sec.   63.10(b)(1)...........  Record retention........  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(i)........  Recordkeeping of          Yes before [DATE 181 DAYS
                                occurrence and duration   AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL
                                of startups and           RULE IN THE Federal
                                shutdowns.                Register].
                                                         No after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER
                                                          PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN
                                                          THE Federal Register].
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(ii).......  Recordkeeping of          Yes before [DATE 181 DAYS
                                failures to meet a        AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL
                                standard.                 RULE IN THE Federal
                                                          Register].
                                                         No after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER
                                                          PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN
                                                          THE Federal Register]. See
                                                          Sec.   63.6155 for
                                                          recordkeeping of (1) date,
                                                          time and duration; (2)
                                                          listing of affected source
                                                          or equipment, and an
                                                          estimate of the quantity of
                                                          each regulated pollutant
                                                          emitted over the standard;
                                                          and (3) actions to minimize
                                                          emissions and correct the
                                                          failure.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(iii)......  Maintenance records.....  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(iv)-(v)...  Records related to        Yes before [DATE 181 DAYS
                                actions during SSM.       AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL
                                                          RULE IN THE Federal
                                                          Register].
                                                         No after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER
                                                          PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN
                                                          THE Federal Register].
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(vi)-(xi)..  CMS records.............  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(xii)......  Record when under waiver  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(xiii).....  Records when using        Yes..........................
                                alternative to RATA.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(xiv)......  Records of supporting     Yes..........................
                                documentation.
Sec.   63.10(b)(3)...........  Records of applicability  Yes..........................
                                determination.
Sec.   63.10(c)(1)-(14)......  Additional records for    Yes..........................  Except that Sec.
                                sources using CMS.                                       63.10(c)(2)-(4) and (9)
                                                                                are reserved.

Sec.   63.10(c)(15)..........  Use of SSM Plan.........  Yes before [DATE 181 DAYS
                                                          AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL
                                                          RULE IN THE Federal
                                                          Register].
                                                         No after [DATE 180 DAYS AFTER
                                                          PUBLICATION OF FINAL RULE IN
                                                          THE Federal Register].
Sec.   63.10(d)(1)...........  General reporting         Yes..........................
                                requirements.
Sec.   63.10(d)(2)...........  Report of performance     Yes..........................
                                test results.
Sec.   63.10(d)(3)...........  Reporting opacity or VE   No...........................  Subpart YYYY does not
                                observations.                                            contain opacity or VE
                                                                                standards.
Sec.   63.10(d)(4)...........  Progress reports........  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.10(d)(5)...........  Startup, shutdown, and    No. After [DATE 180 DAYS
                                malfunction reports.      AFTER PUBLICATION OF FINAL
                                                          RULE IN THE Federal
                                                          Register], see 63.6150(a)
                                                          for malfunction reporting
                                                          requirements.
Sec.   63.10(e)(1) and (2)(i)  Additional CMS reports..  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.10(e)(2)(ii).......  COMS-related report.....  No...........................  Subpart YYYY does not
                                                                                require COMS.
Sec.   63.10(e)(3)...........  Excess emissions and      Yes..........................
                                parameter exceedances
                                reports.
Sec.   63.10(e)(4)...........  Reporting COMS data.....  No...........................  Subpart YYYY does not
                                                                                require COMS.
Sec.   63.10(f)..............  Waiver for recordkeeping  Yes..........................
                                and reporting.
Sec.   63.11.................  Flares..................  No...........................
Sec.   63.12.................  State authority and       Yes..........................
                                delegations.
Sec.   63.13.................  Addresses...............  Yes..........................
Sec.   63.14.................  Incorporation by          Yes..........................
                                reference.
Sec.   63.15.................  Availability of           Yes..........................
                                information.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2019-07024 Filed 4-11-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P