[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 218 (Monday, November 14, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 69209-69237]
[FR Doc No: 05-22108]

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

Part II

Environmental Protection Agency

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

40 CFR Part 63

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Organic
Liquids Distribution (Non-Gasoline); Proposed Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 218 / Monday, November 14, 2005 /
Proposed Rules

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[OAR-2003-0138, FRL-7993-7]
RIN 2060-AM77

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Organic
Liquids Distribution (Non-Gasoline)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; amendments.

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

SUMMARY: On February 3, 2004 (69 FR 5038), the EPA issued national
emission standards for hazardous air pollutants for organic liquids
distribution (non-gasoline) (OLD NESHAP) under section 112 of the Clean
Air Act (CAA). In this action, EPA is proposing to amend portions of
the OLD NESHAP in response to petitions for judicial review and for
administrative reconsideration of the promulgated rule. The proposed
amendments are being made to clarify the applicability and control
requirements for storage tanks and transfer racks, and amend the
recordkeeping and reporting requirements for affected sources for which
there are no control requirements. The proposed amendments do not
reflect the full set of possible amendments EPA intends to propose in
response to all of the issues raised in the petitions for review and
reconsideration. The Agency is separately developing a proposed
response to some of those issues.

DATES: Comments. Submit comments on or before December 29, 2005.
    Public Hearing. If a public hearing is requested by November 25,
2005, the EPA will hold a public hearing by November 29, 2005. To
request a public hearing, contact Ms. Martha Smith, EPA, Waste and
Chemical Processes Group (C439-03), Emission Standards Division, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711, telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile number (919)
541-0246, electronic mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No.
OAR-2003-0138, by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Agency Web site: http://www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET,
EPA's electronic public docket and comment systems, is EPA's preferred
method for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>
     Mail: (in duplicate, if possible) to Air and Radiation
Docket, Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: (in duplicate, if possible) to: Air and
Radiation Docket, Attention Docket ID Number OAR-2003-0138, EPA, 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B-102, Washington, DC 20460. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
    We request that a separate copy also be sent to the contact person
listed below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0138.
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the
public docket without change and may be made available online at http://www.epa.gov/edocket, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e-
mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the Federal regulations.gov Web sites are
``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit EDOCKET on-line or see the Federal Register of May 31,
2002 (67 FR 38102). For additional instructions on submitting comments,
go to the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in either the
EDOCKET index at http://www.epa.gov/edocket or in the legacy docket, A-
98-13. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard copy at the Air
and Radiation Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution
Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. A
reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket materials. The
telephone number for the Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at 10
a.m. at the EPA facility complex in Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina, or at an alternate site nearby.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Martha Smith, EPA, Waste and
Chemical Processes Group (C439-03), Emission Standards Division, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711, telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile number (919)
541-3207, electronic mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated Entities. Categories and entities
potentially regulated by this action include:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     NAICS *
                     Category                          code     SIC *  code     Examples of regulated entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.........................................       325211         2821  Operations at major sources that
                                                        325192         2865   transfer organic liquids into or
                                                        325188         2869   out of the plant site, including:
                                                         32411         2911   liquid storage terminals, crude
                                                         49311         4226   oil pipeline stations, petroleum
                                                         49319         4612   refineries, chemical manufacturing
                                                         48611         5169   facilities, and other
                                                         42269         5171   manufacturing facilities with
                                                         42271                collocated OLD operations.
Federal Government...............................  ...........  ...........  Federal agency facilities that
                                                                              operate any of the types of
                                                                              entities listed under the
                                                                              ``industry'' category in this
                                                                              table.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Considered to be the primary industrial codes for the plant sites with OLD operations.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this
action. To determine whether your facility is regulated by this action,
you should examine the applicability criteria 40 CFR part 63, subpart
EEEE. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the individual described in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    Submitting Comments Containing CBI. Do not submit this information
to EPA through EDOCKET, regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the
part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside
of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify electronically within
the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In
addition to one complete version of the comment that includes
information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain
the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
    Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and
page number).
     Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
     Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
    Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of this action will also be available through the
WWW. Following signature, a copy of this action will be posted on EPA's
Technology Transfer Network (TTN) policy and guidance page for newly
proposed or promulgated rules: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN at
EPA's Web site provides information and technology exchange in various
areas of air pollution control.
    Public Hearing. Persons interested in presenting oral testimony or
inquiring as to whether a hearing is to be held should contact Ms.
Martha Smith, Waste and Chemical Processes Group, Emission Standards
Division, (C439-04), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone number
(919) 541-2421, at least 2 days in advance of the potential date of the
public hearing. Persons interested in attending the public hearing must
also call Ms. Smith to verify the time, date, and location of the
hearing. The public hearing will provide interested parties the
opportunity to present data, views, or arguments concerning the
proposed emissions standards.
    Outline. The following outline is provided to aid in reading this
preamble to the proposed rule amendments.

I. Background
II. Proposed Amendments to the Organic Liquids Distribution NESHAP
    A. How are definitions being revised?
    B. How are control options being revised?
    C. How Are My Notification, Recordkeeping, and Reporting
Requirements Being Revised?
    D. How are compliance requirements being changed?
    E. How is the affected source being changed?
    F. Miscellaneous Edits
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

I. Background

    On February 3, 2004 (69 FR 5063), the Federal Register published
EPA's National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Organic
Liquids Distribution (Non-Gasoline) (40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE).
Subpart EEEE sets emission limits and work practice standards for
storage tanks, transfer racks, equipment leak components in organic
liquid service, transport vehicles, and containers. These standards
identify several control options for storage tanks and transfer racks
that meet certain criteria. Because storage tanks and transfer racks in
OLD operation may also be covered by other existing NESHAP, subpart
EEEE addresses these overlap situations. Finally, subpart EEEE also
contains notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.
    Since publication of the OLD NESHAP, EPA has received several
petitions for administrative reconsideration of the OLD NESHAP, and
several petitions for judicial review have been filed in the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the DC Circuit. Petitions for reconsideration were
submitted to EPA

by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, the General Electric
Company, and the Prince William Sound Regional Citizen's Advisory
Council (RCAC). Petitions for judicial review were filed by the
American Chemical Council, the Coke Oven Environmental Task Force, the
General Electric Company, and Mr. Stan Stephens. On April 5, 2004, the
court consolidated the petitions for review under Stan Stephens v.
USEPA, No. 04-1112 (DC Cir.). On April 30, 2004, the court granted the
motion of Alyeska Pipeline Service Company to intervene in the case and
granted the parties' joint motion to hold the case in abeyance pending
EPA's response to the petitions for reconsideration.
    In responding to the petitions, EPA plans to publish two separate
rulemakings. Today's proposed amendments are the first of these two
actions. The proposed amendments in this notice are those that the
Agency can make without substantial analysis of data and can be made
more quickly to ensure correct implementation of the final rule. The
remaining items, which are associated with the incorporation of
wastewater into the OLD NESHAP, will be addressed in the second
rulemaking. Today's proposed amendments, therefore, are not to be
considered EPA's response to all of the issues raised in the petitions.

II. Proposed Amendments to the Organic Liquids Distribution NESHAP

    We are proposing a number of changes to the OLD NESHAP. For storage
tanks, the proposed changes include, but are not limited to, control
options for those storing high vapor pressure liquids and overlap with
other storage tank rules. For transfer racks, the proposed changes
include, but are not limited to, defining total actual annual facility-
level organic liquid loading volume and how to calculate its value,
revising the definition of transfer rack, and compliance dates and
control options as the result of changes in facility-level loading
volumes. Numerous changes are being proposed with regard to
notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements including, but
not limited to: (1) Requirements for emission sources that are not
required to be controlled under the OLD NESHAP, including startup,
shutdown, and malfunction plans; (2) operating scenarios; (3) initial
notification of compliance status (NOCS); and (4) Department of
Transportation (DOT) certification records for transport vehicles.
Other proposed changes include, but are not limited to, adding vapor
balancing as a control option for containers, clarifying that cargo
tank work practice standards only apply to tanks equipped with vapor
collection equipment, allowing an alternative ASTM International method
to Method 18 (40 CFR part 60, Appendix A), four new definitions and
cross-referencing of definitions to other regulations, and removing the
``1-hour'' requirement for offsite records. In addition, today's
proposed amendments would correct typographical errors, including
incorrect cross-references.

A. How Are Definitions Being Revised?

    1. Total Actual Annual Facility-Level Organic Liquid Loading
Volume. One of the criteria for determining whether a transfer rack is
to be controlled or not is the annual loading volume of organic liquids
at the facility. Absent from the OLD NESHAP are a definition of ``total
actual annual facility-level organic liquid loading volume'' and
guidance on how to calculate this value. Therefore, we are proposing to
add a definition to the final rule and include in the definition a
detailed explanation of how to calculate this value for existing
facilities and for new facilities.
    In proposing this definition, we note two important items. First,
the loading volume considers both transfers made between facilities
(for transport out of the facility) and transfers made within a
facility (for transport within the facility). This clarifies the intent
to consider both types of transfers and corrects an error in items 7
through 10 in Table 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE, when the phrase
``out of the facility'' is used. Second, we are proposing to calculate
this value as an average over 3 years of annual loading volumes rather
than a single annual value. Allowing a facility to average its loading
volume over 3 years is reasonable because this would smooth out
fluctuations in loading volumes from year to year that might arise due
to temporary situations, thereby eliminating different control
requirement outcomes caused by temporary changes below or above the
throughput cut-off level that would occur with an annual time period.
The proposed 3-year average should also allow facilities sufficient
lead time in tracking their loading volume to assess the need for
controlling transfer racks should the loading volume exceed the
criterion's trigger value.
    We are proposing the methodology to be used to calculate this value
as an average using 3 years of actual loading volume data. The value
would be recalculated once per year. For example, a facility would
collect loading volume data for years 1, 2, and 3. At the end of year
3, the three annual values would be averaged to calculate the total
actual annual facility-level organic liquid loading volume. This value
would represent the loading volume used in determining whether the
transfer racks at the facility would need to be controlled. At the end
of year 4, the facility would calculate the annual average using the
loading volume data for years 2, 3, and 4. This pattern would repeat
itself each year.
    For existing affected sources, we are proposing that this
calculation be made on a calendar year basis, starting January 1, 2004.
If an existing affected source does not have actual loading volume data
for the time period from January 1, 2004, through February 2, 2004,
(the time period before the effective date of the OLD NESHAP), the
owner or operator would calculate loading volume for that period based
on the average loading volume from February 3, 2004, through December
31, 2004.
    For new affected sources, we are proposing the option of making
this calculation beginning on the actual startup date of the facility
or on the first day of the calendar month following the month in which
actual startup occurs. For example, if actual startup is March 13,
2005, the facility has the option of either using March 13 to March 12
as its annual basis or April 1 to March 31 as its annual basis. We are
also proposing that once owners or operators select the beginning date
to start their calculations, no changes can be made thereafter.
    New affected sources are required to be in compliance at startup.
In order for a new affected source to be in compliance, the owner or
operator must make a determination as to which transfer racks need to
be controlled. However, new affected sources will not have actual
loading volume data at their startup to make this determination.
Therefore, we are proposing that new facilities make projections as to
the facility-level loading volume for the first 3 years of operation.
Based on this forecast, the owner or operator would determine the total
actual annual facility-level organic liquid loading volume and use the
result to determine which transfer racks need to be controlled at
startup.
    At the end of the first year following the date selected to begin
the calculation, the owner or operator would calculate the 3-year
average using the first year's actual loading volume plus a new
forecast of the loading volume for the next 2 years. At the end of the
second year, the owner or

operator would calculate its 3-year average using the first 2 years'
actual loading volume data plus a new forecast of loading for the next
year. At the end of the third year, and for all subsequent years,
following startup, the owner or operator would have actual loading
volume data for 3 years and would no longer need to forecast loading
volumes. The owner or operator would use the actual loading volume data
for the first 3 years to make this calculation, and then use the
``rolling'' 3 years of data for future calculations, as would owners
and operators of existing affected sources.
    2. Transfer Rack. In the OLD NESHAP, the definition of transfer
rack includes the concept of loading of organic liquids into transport
vehicles. Unfortunately, there were two shortcomings with the
definition.
    First, the definition is inconsistent with how the term is used
when describing the affected sources. As stated in the OLD NESHAP, 40
CFR part 63, subpart EEEE applies to (emphasis added): ``transfer racks
at which organic liquids are loaded into or unloaded out of transport
vehicles and/or containers'' (see 40 CFR 63.2338(b)(2)) and ``all
transport vehicles while they are loading or unloading organic liquids
at transfer racks'' (see 40 CFR 63.2338(b)(4)). However, in the
definition section of the OLD NESHAP, transfer rack is defined in part
(emphasis added) as ``a single system used to load organic liquids into
transport vehicles.'' The definition of transfer rack, by limiting
itself to only the loading of liquids, creates an inconsistency with
the use of the term when defining the affected source. In the affected
source, transfer racks can be loading or unloading organic liquids
(emphasis added).
    The intent of the rule is that, for purposes of defining the
affected source, both loading and unloading racks are to be included.
For purposes of control requirements, however, the OLD NESHAP apply
only to racks when they are loading organic liquids into transport
vehicles or, for new sources only, containers.
    To accomplish this intent, we are proposing to modify the
definition of ``transfer rack'' to also refer to unloading. Because of
this proposed change to the definition of transfer rack, we are also
proposing numerous language changes to ensure that the rule language is
specific that control is required for transfer racks when they are
loading organic liquids into cargo tanks or when they are filling
containers.
    For new sources, transfer racks may also load containers, which the
definition failed to mention. Therefore, we are proposing to add
containers to the definition of transfer rack.
    3. Cross Reference to Other Rules. The OLD NESHAP use several terms
that are defined in other subparts, but not directly in the OLD NESHAP.
We are proposing to revise the introductory paragraph at 40 CFR 63.2406
to cross-reference the other 40 CFR part 63 subparts that are
referenced in the OLD NESHAP. This is being done by citing the specific
definition sections of the applicable subparts in the same manner we
cited the definitions found in 40 CFR 63.2 of the General Provisions.
This change would not make the OLD NESHAP any more or less stringent,
but simply clarifies the intent to use those definitions in the other
subparts as appropriate and necessary to implement the OLD NESHAP.
    We are proposing to add four new definitions--bottoms receivers,
surge control vessels, low-throughput transfer racks, and high-
throughput transfer racks--to the OLD NESHAP. These terms are added
because their definitions in the cross-referenced rules do not apply to
the OLD NESHAP and, therefore, needed to be added.
    We are proposing to add a sentence to the introductory paragraph of
40 CFR 63.2406 to clarify a potential conflict in priority between the
OLD NESHAP (subpart EEEE) and 40 CFR part 63, subpart PP. The
introductory language in the OLD NESHAP and in subpart PP both claim
that the terms as defined within each subpart shall have precedent over
any other definition for those same terms in another subpart. We are
proposing to amend the language in the OLD NESHAP to specifically
override the language in subpart PP such that the terms ``container''
and ``safety device'' shall have the meaning given them in the OLD
NESHAP notwithstanding the introductory language in 40 CFR 63.921.
    We do not believe any other changes to the definition section of
the OLD rule are necessary. When complying with the OLD NESHAP, an
owner or operator may be required to comply with another subpart (e.g.,
with 40 CFR part 63, subpart UU, for equipment leak components). If a
term needs to be defined in order to comply with subpart UU and that
term is not defined in the OLD NESHAP, then the owner or operator would
use the definition found in subpart UU. In summary, when complying with
the OLD NESHAP, if a term is used and it is not defined in the OLD
NESHAP, then that term has the meaning assigned it in the 40 CFR part
63 subpart that is being complied with.
    4. Startup and Shutdown. In 40 CFR 63.2406, we are proposing to
clarify the definitions of ``startup'' and ``shutdown'' by adding the
phrase ``(other than as part of normal operation for a batch-type
operation), including equipment'' after ``or portion thereof.''
    The proposed wording for ``shutdown'' would now read: ``Shutdown
means the cessation of operation of an OLD affected source, or portion
thereof (other than as part of normal operation of a batch-type
operation), including equipment required or used to comply with this
subpart, or the emptying and degassing of a storage tank. Shutdown as
defined here includes, but is not limited to, events that result from
periodic maintenance, replacement of equipment, or repair.''
    The proposed wording for ``startup'' would now read: ``Startup
means the setting in operation of an OLD affected source, or portion
thereof (other than as part of normal operation of a batch-type
operation), for any purpose. Startup also includes the placing in
operation of any individual piece of equipment required or used to
comply with this subpart including, but not limited to, control devices
and monitors.''
    The normal operation of transfer racks is such that at times a
transfer rack is transferring liquids and at other times it is not
transferring liquids. We received questions about whether instances in
which transfer racks begin or cease transferring liquids as part of
normal ``batch'' type operations would constitute ``startup'' or
``shutdown'' episodes. We never intended such instances to be
interpreted in this way. Therefore, to avoid misunderstandings, we are
proposing to revise the definitions of startup and shutdown to make it
clear that the commencement or cessation of actual transfer of liquids
through a transfer rack as part of batch-type operations does not
constitute a ``startup'' or a ``shutdown'' of the transfer rack within
the meaning of the OLD NESHAP. As a result of this proposed change,
emission sources (i.e., transfer racks) that are subject to the OLD
NESHAP, but for which control is not required, would not be required to
minimize emissions during such periods as would be required under the
General Provisions (i.e., 40 CFR 63.11(e)(1)) and would not be required
to be addressed in a facility's startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan
(i.e., 40 CFR 63.11(e)(3)). Likewise, emission sources subject to the
OLD NESHAP for which control is required would remain subject to the
control requirements during routine commencement or

cessation of operations that are part of normal batch-type operations.
    These proposed changes would also make the OLD NESHAP consistent
with other recent EPA standards that recognize cessation of operations
that is part of the normal characteristics of batch operations and
batch-type operations is not considered ``startup'' or ``shutdown'' for
purposes of startup, shutdown, and malfunction plans. Rather than
revising the definitions of ``startup'' and ``shutdown'' to achieve
this purpose, an alternative may be to simply amend Table 12 to 40 CFR
part 63, subpart EEEE, to clarify that the duty to minimize emissions
during periods of startup, shutdown and malfunction, in 40 CFR
63.11(e)(1) of the General Provisions, does not apply to emissions
sources that are part of the OLD affected source but are not subject to
emissions control requirements. EPA requests comment on this
alternative approach.
    5. Vapor Balancing System. We are proposing revisions to this
definition to include reference to containers. We are proposing to
extend the option of vapor balancing systems to containers. We are also
proposing to clarify that vapors need to be ``directly conveyed'' to a
``chemical manufacturing process unit,'' and are, thus, proposing to
replace ``compresses the vapors for feeding into a chemical process
manufacturing unit'' with ``compresses the vapor for direct conveyance
to a chemical manufacturing unit.''
    6. Vapor Collection System. We are proposing to add reference to
the conveyance of vapors displaced during the loading of containers to
this definition. The OLD NESHAP inadvertently do not contain this
reference, even though the use of control devices to control emissions
from the filling of containers is a control option.

B. How Are Control Options Being Revised?

    1. Storage Tanks with High Vapor Pressure Liquids. Between proposal
and promulgation, we added the equivalent control option of routing
emissions to a fuel gas system or back to a process, per 40 CFR part
63, subpart SS, for storage tanks storing liquids with vapor pressures
less than 11.1 psia. The OLD NESHAP did not extend this option to
storage tanks storing liquids with vapor pressures greater than 11.1
psia. This was not an intentional exclusion. Most, but not all, tanks
storing liquids with high vapor pressure are pressurized. Pressurized
tanks do not have emissions. However, non-pressurized tanks storing
liquids with high vapor pressures have the same types of emissions
(working and/or breathing losses) as those tanks storing liquids with
lower vapor pressures. In these instances, the controls that are
applicable to the tanks storing the liquids with vapor pressures less
than 11.1 psia are applicable to tanks storing liquids with vapor
pressures greater than 11.1 psia. Therefore, we are proposing
revisions, which appear in Tables 2 and Table 4 to 40 CFR part 63,
subpart EEEE, to allow these storage tanks the same equivalent option
as those storing lower vapor pressure liquids.
    2. Overlap of Storage Tank Rules. The Agency is proposing to revise
the manner in which the OLD NESHAP address the overlap of the OLD
NESHAP with 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb (Standards of Performance for
Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Vessels (Including Petroleum Liquid
Storage Vessels) for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or
Modification Commenced After July 23, 1984) and with 40 CFR part 61,
subpart Y (National Emission Standard for Benzene Emissions from
Benzene Storage Vessels). In the OLD NESHAP, 40 CFR 63.2396(a), storage
tanks that are subject to the OLD NESHAP requirements (which reference
40 CFR part 63, subpart WW) and either of these other two rules are
required to comply with the requirements of the OLD NESHAP when the
tank is in OLD operation.
    Another recent rule (i.e., the Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP, or
MON) promulgated by the Agency handles this overlap in a different
fashion. In the MON, we allow facilities with storage tanks subject to
both the MON and either of the other two rules noted above to be
considered in compliance with the MON when they are in compliance with
either of the other two rules.
    In assessing whether this approach was appropriate for the OLD
NESHAP, we reviewed the OLD data used to establish the MACT floor and
compared the requirements of the OLD NESHAP with 40 CFR part 60,
subpart Kb, and 40 CFR part 61, subpart Y. Based on that review, 40 CFR
part 60, subpart Kb, is equal to or more stringent than the MACT floor
established for storage tanks. Therefore, allowing a facility to comply
with 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb, or, for that matter, with 40 CFR part
61, subpart Y, would not be less stringent than the MACT floor for the
OLD NESHAP and provides the same level of control as that found in 40
CFR part 63, subpart WW. We, therefore, are proposing to revise the
wording in 40 CFR 63.2396(a) to allow facilities to comply with 40 CFR
part 60, subpart Kb, or 40 CFR part 61, subpart Y, for these storage
tanks. However, we are not proposing to revise the 5-year recordkeeping
requirement for OLD storage tanks. This is a longer timeframe than
found in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb, or in 40 CFR part 61, subpart Y,
which have a 2-year timeframe for keeping records. Finally, we are not
proposing to revise the OLD monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements for OLD storage tanks that are controlled using closed
vent systems (which is consistent with the MON). In sum, we have
determined that the MACT floor is being maintained, and there is no
loss in stringency as the result of the proposed changes.
    3. Transfer Racks. While we believe our intent is clear in 40 CFR
63.2346(b) as to which transfer racks are to be controlled, the
language is not accurate. The organic hazardous air pollutant (HAP)
criterion is applied to the individual rack, but the ``facility-level
organic liquid loading volume'' criterion is not. The loading volume
criterion is based on the volume for all transfer racks and not for the
individual transfer rack. Therefore, we are proposing to revise the
introductory text as follows:

    ``For each transfer rack that is part of the collection of
transfer racks that meets the total actual annual facility-level
organic liquid loading volume criterion for control in Table 2 to
this subpart, items 7 through 10, you must comply with paragraph
(b)(1), (2), or (3) of this section for each arm in the transfer
rack loading an organic liquid whose organic HAP content meets the
organic HAP criterion for control in Table 2 to this subpart, items
7 through 10.''

    4. Changes in OLD Loading Volume. Over time, the OLD loading volume
at a facility may increase or decrease. These changes may be large
enough that the 3-year rolling average creates a situation where a
facility that is controlling its transfer racks no longer meets the
criteria for control, or where a facility that is not controlling its
transfer racks now meets the criteria for control. The OLD NESHAP does
not explicitly indicate the control requirements when a facility
encounters such situations. We are, therefore, proposing language to
specifically indicate the control requirements and timing when such
changes occur.
    We are proposing that if a facility is controlling its transfer
racks, but the loading volume decreases at a later date to such a level
that the criteria for control are no longer being met, compliance with
the control requirements specified in 40 CFR 63.2386(b)(1), (2), or (3)
is no longer required until such time that the total

actual facility-wide organic loading volume increases to a level
requiring control.
    We are also proposing that if a facility is not controlling its
transfer racks, but the loading volume increases at a later date to
such a level that the criteria for control is now met, compliance with
the control requirements specified in 40 CFR 63.2386(b)(1), (2), or (3)
is required immediately, except as may be provided for existing sources
only.
    5. Transfer Racks and Table 2 Emission Limits. The OLD NESHAP
require a transfer rack to comply with each of the three emission
limitations identified in item 7 in Table 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart
EEEE. These emission limitations are: (1) Reduce emissions by 98
percent reduction or to 20 ppmv; (2) vent emissions through a closed
vent system to any combination of control devices in compliance with 40
CFR part 63, subpart SS; and (3) meet one of two work practice
standards specified in Table 4 to subpart EEEE. Requiring a facility to
comply with all three emission limitations was not our intent and
further is not technically feasible. To correct this, we are proposing
to combine the first two emission limitations into a single emission
limitation (which we incorrectly split into two limitations between
proposal and promulgation and which would now parallel the correct
construct of item 6 in Table 2 to subpart EEEE) and clarify that a
facility is to comply with either 98 percent reduction or 20 ppmv
emission limitation or one of the two work practice standards.
    6. Transfer Racks and Routing Emissions to a Process. The OLD
NESHAP allow a facility the option to comply with 40 CFR part 63,
subpart SS, which allows a facility to route emissions to fuel gas
systems or back to a process (emphasis added). The OLD NESHAP
inadvertently use the phrase ``the process,'' which has the potential
effect of unnecessarily limiting a facility's option for routing vent
gases. Therefore, we are proposing to use the phrase ``a process'' in
conjunction with this compliance option.
    7. Vapor balancing and containers. The OLD NESHAP do not allow
vapor balancing as a control option for the filling of containers.
However, vapor balancing can be an effective control option for the
filling of containers. Therefore, we are proposing vapor balancing,
under certain conditions, as a control option for the filling of
containers, identifying applicability for existing sources and new
sources and revising the definitions of ``vapor balancing systems'' and
``vapor collection system.''
    8. Vapor balancing and routing of displaced vapors. The control
option of vapor balancing for transfer racks is stated inconsistently
in the OLD NESHAP in 40 CFR 63.2346(b)(3) and in Table 7 to 40 CFR part
63, subpart EEEE. We are proposing to resolve this inconsistency by
revising 40 CFR 63.2346(b)(3) to include routing of vapors to a process
unit.
    The OLD NESHAP direct that the routing of the displaced vapors is
to be made to the ``appropriate storage tank.'' We are proposing to
revise this phrase to now read ``to the storage tank from which the
liquid being loaded originated.'' We believe this change makes the rule
clearer.
    9. Cargo Tank Work Practice Standards. The cargo tank work
practices in the OLD NESHAP (see 40 CFR 63.2346(d) and items 4 and 5 in
Table 4 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE) create a technological
inconsistency--requiring vapor tightness on transport vehicles being
loaded at transfer racks that were not being controlled. We are
proposing to correct this error by requiring vapor tightness only on
transport vehicles being loaded at transfer racks that are being
controlled. The proposed amendment would affect both cargo tanks with
and cargo tanks without vapor collection equipment.

C. How Are My Notification, Recordkeeping, and Reporting Requirements
Being Revised?

    1. Emission sources not subject to control. We are proposing to
overhaul the OLD NESHAP notification, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements for emission sources not subject to control. The proposed
amendments are found mostly in a proposed new section, 40 CFR 63.2343,
with some additional changes needed in other parts of the rule. The OLD
NESHAP currently identifies requirements for these sources in 40 CFR
63.2346(h) and 63.2386(c)(9). Under today's proposed amendments, 40 CFR
63.2346(h) would be deleted and ``reserved,'' because it is no longer
needed. With regard to 40 CFR 63.2386(c)(9), the proposed amendments
would revise (as described below) and redesignate the paragraph (as
proposed 40 CFR 63.2386(c)(10)(i)).
    In today's proposed rulemaking, we are proposing to exempt all
emission sources in the affected source not requiring control under the
OLD NESHAP from notification, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements, except as otherwise specified in the proposed new 40 CFR
63.2343. The proposed exceptions would apply to storage tanks and
transfer racks.
    Storage tanks and transfer rack that would never be required to be
controlled. For storage tanks and transfer racks that would never be
required to be controlled under the OLD NESHAP as they currently apply,
we are proposing that owners and operators submit an Initial
Notification identifying such emission sources; and keep documentation
verifying the ``no control'' status be kept up-to-date by the owner or
operator. By the phrase ``up-to-date,'' we mean that such emission
sources at a facility are identified in the documentation regardless of
when the documentation was last compiled. Further, this documentation
needs to be up-to-date only as it pertains to emission sources that are
still physically present at a facility.
    The proposed amendments would also have the effect of eliminating
the requirement for listing these sources in the NOCS, first compliance
report, and subsequent compliance reports. Once the Initial
Notification has been submitted, we believe it is unnecessary to
continue to identify such emission sources in NOCS, first compliance
report, and subsequent compliance reports as long as owners and
operators keep documentation that such emission sources would never
require control under the OLD NESHAP.
    Storage tanks and transfer racks that could be required to be
controlled, but for which control is not currently required. For
storage tanks and transfer racks that could be required to be
controlled, but for which control is not currently required, we are
proposing changes to notification and reporting and to documentation.
    We believe that it is important for an owner or operator to
identify those storage tanks and transfer racks for which control could
be required if and when the HAP content or throughput changes, even if
control is not required at the time either the NOCS of the first
compliance report is filed. Therefore, we are proposing owners and
operators submit a list of all transfer racks (except those at which
only unloading of organic liquids occurs) and of tanks greater than or
equal to 18.9 cubic meters (5,000 gallons) that are part of the
affected source but are not subject to any of the emission limitations,
operating limits, or work practice standards of 40 CFR part 63, subpart
EEEE (see proposed 40 CFR 63.2386(c)(10)(i)).
    Owners and operators would be required to submit this list with
either the NOCS or the first Compliance report, whichever is submitted
first.

After the NOCS or a Compliance report has been submitted, changes to a
storage tank or transfer rack may have been made that affect its
compliance status (e.g., an uncontrolled storage tank becomes subject
to control). The types of changes that we are proposing to be reported
are:
     Any storage tank or transfer rack that became subject to
control since the filing of the last Compliance report (see proposed 40
CFR 63.2386(d)(3)). The intent here is to cover any storage tank or
transfer rack that existed at the facility when the last Compliance
report was filed, but has undergone a change that now subjects the
storage tank or transfer rack to control; and any storage tank or
transfer rack that was constructed at the facility since the last
Compliance report was filed, that is being used (e.g., contains
liquid), that is in OLD service and that meets the OLD criteria for
control.
     Any storage tank greater than or equal to 18.9 cubic
meters (5,000 gallons) and any transfer rack that is part of the
affected source, but which are not subject to any of the emission
limitations, operating limits, or work practice standards of the OLD
NESHAP, that became part of the affected source since the filing of the
NOCS or the last Compliance report (see proposed 40 CFR 63.2386(d)(4)).
The intent here is to cover any storage tank or transfer rack that was
constructed at the facility since the NOCS or the last Compliance
report was filed, that is part of the affected source (i.e., is in OLD
service), but does not meet any of the criteria for control under the
OLD rule; and any storage tank or transfer rack that existed at the
facility prior to the filing of the NOCS or last Compliance report that
was not in OLD service that is now in OLD service (i.e., is now part of
the affected source), but does not meet any of the criteria for control
under the OLD NESHAP.
    We are proposing that such changes be reported in either the NOCS
or the first Compliance report (depending on which was submitted first
(see proposed 40 CFR 63.2382(d)(2)(viii) and 63.2386(c)(10(ii)) and in
subsequent Compliance reports whenever such changes occur after the
filing of the last Compliance report (see proposed 40 CFR 63.2386(d)(3)
and (4)).
    Proposed 40 CFR 63.2343 specifies the documentation that would be
required for these emission sources. We are also proposing to modify 40
CFR 63.2390, What records must I keep?, to clarify the applicability of
proposed 40 CFR 63.2343 and 40 CFR 63.2390 to all emission sources
subject to the OLD NESHAP.
    For storage tanks that could be subject to control, but are not
required to be controlled, we are proposing that documentation be kept
that demonstrates the status of the tank, including a record of the
annual average true vapor pressure of the organic liquid being stored
in each such tank.
    For transfer racks that could be subject to control, but are not
required to be controlled, we are proposing that documentation be kept
that demonstrates the status of the transfer rack.
    General Provisions. For all emission sources for which control is
not required, we are proposing to amend the applicability of the
General Provisions in two ways. First, we are proposing to modify the
applicability of 40 CFR 63.6(e)(3) by not requiring startup, shutdown,
and malfunction (SSM) plans for these emission sources because SSM
plans apply to control devices used to comply with regulations, and
these emission sources are not required to be controlled.
    Second, in the proposed new 40 CFR 63.2343 for emission sources not
required to be controlled, we specifically identify those changes that
require a facility to submit information and are proposing to modify
the applicability of 40 CFR 63.9(j) such that it would not apply to
these emission sources.
    2. Transport Vehicles and DOT Certifications. In the OLD NESHAP, we
require owners or operators to keep documentation on the DOT
certifications for transport vehicles loaded at their facilities. Other
NESHAP allow an alternative to this requirement, which we believe can
also be applied to transport vehicles loading organic liquids. This
proposed alternative would allow owners and operators to simply record
in a number of acceptable methods the verification of DOT certification
without actually keeping such documentation (see proposed 40 CFR
63.2390(c)(3)).
    3. Initial Notification of Compliance Status. The OLD NESHAP allow
facilities with multiple control devices to submit a single NOCS and up
to 240 days after the compliance date to submit it. To make this
provision explicitly clear, we are proposing to revise the
applicability of the General Provisions at 40 CFR 63.7(g) and
63.9(h)(1)-(6) in Table 12 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE, to allow
facilities to submit a single initial NOCS with test reports either
within 240 days after the compliance date or within 60 days after the
completion of the last compliance test demonstrating compliance,
whichever occurs first.
    4. Offsite Records. The OLD NESHAP (see 40 CFR 63.2394(a)) allow
facilities to store on-site records ``in electric form at a separate
location from the site provided they can be access and printed at the
site within 1 hour after a request by the applicable title V permitting
authority.'' EPA included the ``1-hour'' requirement at promulgation,
but now believes that it is unnecessarily restrictive. Therefore, we
are proposing to revise 40 CFR 63.2394(a) by removing the ``1-hour''
requirement and stating explicitly that records kept off-site are to be
available for ``expeditious review and inspection.'' We are also
proposing to eliminate the provision allowing on-site records to be
stored off-site in electronic format because ``expeditious retrieval''
of records stored off-site does not meet the General Provision's
requirements that records be stored ``on-site'' for the first 2 years.
    5. Operating Scenarios. The OLD NESHAP require facilities to
identify operating scenarios in the NOCS report and then to update
changes to operating scenarios in the semiannual compliance reports. We
are proposing to delete ``operating scenarios'' from the OLD NESHAP
because the term is not applicable to the OLD source category.

D. How Are Compliance Requirements Being Changed?

    1. Changes in OLD Loading Volume--Compliance Dates. We are
proposing language to clarify when transfer racks must be in compliance
when the total actual annual facility-level organic liquid loading
volume decreases such that control is no longer required, or when it
increases such that control is required (see 40 CFR 63.2342(a)(3) and
(b)(3)). For both new and existing sources, we are proposing that a
source whose loading volume increases to a level such that control of
transfer racks is required, be in compliance with the transfer rack
requirements immediately. We are proposing to define ``immediately'' as
the first day of the period following the end of the 3-year period
triggering the control criteria.
    For existing sources, however, we are proposing that owners or
operators of existing sources be allowed to request a compliance
extension of up to 1 year if the additional time is necessary for the
installation of controls. This proposed request for a compliance
extension is similar to that provided for under 40 CFR
63.100(l)(4)(ii)(B) of the Hazardous Organic NESHAP. We are also
proposing to limit the use of this compliance extension provision to
once for each facility (see 40 CFR 63.2342(b)(3)(ii)(I)). That is, once
an owner or operator has requested an

extension of compliance for its facility, the owner or operator cannot
request such an extension at a later date if changes in loading volume
again create a situation in which control of transfer racks is once
again required.
    2. ASTM D7420-99. In the preamble to the OLD NESHAP, we indicated
that we had included ASTM D7420-99, Standard Test Method for
Determination of Gaseous Organic Compounds by Direct Interface Gas
Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS), as an alternative to Method
18. However, we neglected to add the method to the final rule.
Therefore, we are proposing language, in 40 CFR 63.2354(b)(3), adding
ASTM D7420-99 as an alternative to Method 18 to determine compliance
with the organic HAP or TOC emission limit.
    3. Reformulation. One of the petitioners requested clarification as
to the periodic reporting requirements for a facility that reformulates
materials prior to the compliance date, and for a facility that
reformulates materials after the compliance date. The reformulation the
petitioner is concerned about is where a material that meets the
definition of an organic liquid as defined in 40 CFR 63.2402 is
reformulated in such a manner that the material no longer meets the
definition of an organic liquid.
    The OLD NESHAP apply to emission sources when they are in OLD
service. If a facility reformulates a material in such a manner that
the material no longer is an organic liquid, as defined in 40 CFR
63.2406, the emission source is not in OLD service and, therefore, is
neither subject to the OLD NESHAP nor its reporting requirements. If
all of the material at a facility were reformulated such that there is
no organic liquid at the facility, the entire facility would have no
emission sources in organic liquid service and would not be required to
meet the periodic compliance reporting requirements. If the facility
were to later reformulate the material such that it once again met the
definition of organic liquid, then the emission source would be in OLD
service and subject to all applicable requirements of the OLD NESHAP,
including periodic reporting requirements.
    The Agency does not believe that it is necessary to modify the OLD
NESHAP to address the specific situations posed by the petitioner. In
addition, we do not believe this issue needs to be treated differently
if the reformulation occurs prior to or after the compliance date of
the final rule.

E. How Is the Affected Source Being Changed?

    1. Containers. In 40 CFR 63.2338(b)(2) of the OLD NESHAP, we
identify ``transfer racks'' as a component of the affected source and
identify in that paragraph both ``transport vehicles'' and
``containers'' into which or out of which the liquids are loaded. We
then identify, in 40 CFR 63.2338(b)(4), ``transport vehicles'' as a
separate component of the affected source. However, we neglected to
also identify ``containers'' as a separate component of the affected
source. To correct this oversight, we are proposing to add a new
paragraph (b)(5) to 40 CFR 63.2338 to identify containers as a separate
component of the affected source.
    2. Transport Vehicles. In 40 CFR 63.2338(b)(4) of the OLD NESHAP,
it is unclear as to whether the affected source includes transport
vehicles while they are loading or unloading organic liquids at any
transfer rack or only at transfer racks subject to the OLD NESHAP. We
are proposing to revise 40 CFR 63.2338(b)(4) to state that only those
transport vehicles loading or unloading at transfer racks subject to
the OLD NESHAP are to be included in the affected source.
    3. Excluded Equipment. As stated in 40 CFR 63.2338(b), the affected
source is composed of storage tanks, transfer racks, equipment leak
components, transport vehicles, and containers. The OLD NESHAP, in 40
CFR 63.2338(c), exclude from the affected source three of these five
types of equipment--storage tanks, transfer racks, and equipment leak
components--under certain conditions (e.g., subject to another 40 CFR
part 63 NESHAP, used in special operations, used to conduct maintenance
activities). We know of no reason that transport vehicles and
containers when used in the same circumstances as the three cited types
of equipment should not also be included in these exclusions.
Therefore, we are proposing to revise 40 CFR 63.2338(c) accordingly.
    4. Equipment Leak Components. The OLD NESHAP (see 40 CFR
63.2338(c)(2)) is unclear as to which equipment leak components are to
be excluded from the affected source definition. For example, are
equipment leak components associated with a pipeline originating
offsite that goes directly to a tank subject to the Hazardous Organic
NESHAP (HON) part of the affected source? Or, as another example, are
equipment leak components associated with a pipeline from a transfer
rack subject to the OLD NESHAP that goes to a tank subject to the HON
part of the affected source?
    To clarify the determination of which equipment leak components are
included in the definition of the affected source and which are
excluded, we are proposing to revise 40 CFR 63.2338(b)(3) to clearly
state that equipment leak components are part of the affected source if
they are associated with pipelines that transfer organic liquids
directly to and from storage tanks and/or transfer racks, both of which
are subject to the OLD NESHAP. Equipment leak components associated
with pipelines that connect two storage tanks, two transfer racks, or a
storage tank and a transfer rack are subject to the OLD NESHAP only if
both storage tanks, both transfer racks, or both the storage tank and
transfer rack are subject to the OLD NESHAP. These three scenarios
comprise the situations in which equipment leak components associated
with pipelines are part of the OLD affected sources.
    Lastly, because the proposed revisions to 40 CFR 63.2338(b)(3)
include all those equipment leak components that we intend to include,
we do not believe there is any need to have an equipment leak component
exclusion. Therefore, we are proposing to delete 40 CFR 63.2338(c)(2)
from the OLD NESHAP.
    5. Coke by-product Plants. One of the petitioners requested
clarification as to the applicability of the OLD NESHAP to coke by-
product plants. On January 30, 2001 (66 FR 8220), EPA deleted coke by-
product plants from the list of major and area sources of HAP required
by CAA section 112(c)(1). Consequently, 40 CFR part 63 MACT standards
promulgated under CAA section 112(d), such as the OLD NESHAP, would not
apply to the deleted coke by-product plant source category. Moreover,
as EPA explained in 2001, coke by-product plants remain subject to the
pre-existing NESHAP for benzene emissions from coke by-product recovery
plants at 40 CFR part 61, subpart L. See 66 FR at 8222. EPA is not
proposing any changes to the OLD NESHAP in order to clarify this issue,
as it is unnecessary to do so. The result follows from EPA's previous
action in 2001 deleting the coke by-product plant source category.

F. Miscellaneous Edits

    There are numerous edits being proposed to address typographical
errors and oversights in the OLD NESHAP. These edits make clearer our
intent, correct punctuation, or change cross-references because of the
other changes being proposed in today's rulemaking; they do not affect
the stringency of the final rule or its

enforceability. These edits may be found in the EDOCKET (see ADDRESSES
section).

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 5173, October 4, 1993), the EPA
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and,
therefore, subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and
the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order defines
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in
standards that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect, in a material way, the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
    (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlement, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
    (4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, OMB has notified
EPA that it considers this a ``non-significant regulatory action''
within the meaning of the Executive Order and is therefore not subject
to OMB review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden.
The final rule required owners and operators to list sources not
subject to control in the first and subsequent compliance reports and
to keep appropriate documentation. The final rule applied these
requirements across-the-board for all emission sources not requiring
control and, in general, was not specific as to what recordkeeping is
required. Under the proposed amendments, we are clarifying how these
provisions would apply to those emission sources for which control
would never be required and to those emission sources for which control
could be required, but is not currently required. In addition, we are
identifying the specific circumstances under which listing in
subsequent Compliance reports would be required for sources for which
control is not required rather than requiring all previously identified
sources to be re-listed. Further, we are narrowing the applicability of
certain sections of the General Provisions for sources for which
control is not required because the proposed amendments make such
application of those sections in the General Provisions unnecessary.
Thus, in sum, the proposed amendments are not adding new information
collection burden. However, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
has previously approved the information collection requirements
contained in the existing regulations at 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq. and has assigned OMB control number 2060 0539, EPA ICR number
1963. A copy of the OMB approved Information Collection Request (ICR)
may be obtained from Susan Auby, Collection Strategies Division; U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (2822T); 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460 or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements;
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information;
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    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 EPA's
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's proposed
amendments on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small
business as defined by the Small Business Administration's (SBA)
regulations at 13 CFR 121.20; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction
that is a government of a city, county, town, school district or
special district with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small
organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed
amendments on small entities, I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. In determining whether a rule has a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern
is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities, because
the primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analysis is to
identify and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any
significant economic impact of the rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C.
603 and 604. Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive
economic effect on all of the small entities subject to the rule.
    Today's proposed amendments will not impose any new requirements on
small entities, and will reduce some of the burden established under
the promulgated rule. We have therefore concluded that today's proposed
amendments will relieve regulatory burden by, for example, exempting
all emission sources in the affected source not requiring control under
the OLD NESHAP from notification, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements, except as otherwise specified for all affected small
entities; excluding from the affected source three types of equipment--
storage tanks, transfer racks, and equipment leak components--under
certain conditions that are used in special operations and to conduct
maintenance activities; and proposing that owners or operators of
existing sources be allowed to request a compliance extension of up to
1 year if the additional time is necessary for the installation of
controls. We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the
proposed rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues related
to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, the
EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-
benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal
mandates'' that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100
million or more in any 1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for
which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally
requires the EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of
regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective
or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the
rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are
inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows the EPA
to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost-
effective, or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator
publishes with the final rule an explanation of why that alternative
was not adopted. Before the EPA establishes any regulatory requirements
that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including
tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the
UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must provide for
notifying potential affected small governments, enabling officials of
affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the
development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
    EPA has determined that the proposed amendments do not contain a
Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more
for State, local, and tribal governments, in aggregate, or the private
sector in any 1 year, nor do the proposed amendments significantly or
uniquely impact small governments, because they contain no requirements
that apply to such governments or impose obligations upon them. Thus,
the requirements of the UMRA do not apply to the proposed amendments.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have
federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include
regulations that 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.''
    Today's proposed amendments do not have federalism implications.
The proposed amendments correct typographical errors, clarify
provisions, or eliminate unnecessary recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for emission sources for which there are no control
requirements. These changes do not modify existing or create new
responsibilities among EPA Regional Offices, States, or local
enforcement agencies. The proposed amendments will not have new
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, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does
not apply to the proposed amendments.

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

    Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies
that have tribal implications.'' The proposed amendments do not have
tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. They would
not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to these proposed
amendments.

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

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has
the potential to influence the regulation. Today's proposed amendments
are not subject to Executive Order 13045 because they do not establish
an environmental standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.

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

    The proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined
in Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Further,
we have concluded that this rule is not likely to have any adverse
energy effects.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note)
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide
Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use
available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. In the preamble
to the OLD NESHAP, we indicated that we had revised the rule to include
three voluntary consensus methods, including ASTM D7420-99, Standard
Test Method for Determination of Gaseous Organic Compounds by Direct
Interface Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS), as an
alternative to Method 18. While we did

include two of the three voluntary consensus methods, we neglected to
add ASTM D7420-99 to the final rule. Therefore, we are proposing
language adding ASTM D7420-99 as an alternative to Method 18 to
determine compliance with the organic HAP or TOC emission limit under
certain circumstances.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: October 31, 2005.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part
63 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as
follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

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

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

    2. Section 63.14 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(29) to read
as follows:

Sec.  63.14  Incorporation by reference.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (29) ASTM D6420-99, Standard Test Method for Determination of
Gaseous Organic Compounds by Direct Interface Gas Chromatography-Mass
Spectrometry, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.  63.2354, 63.5799, and
63.5850.
* * * * *

Subpart EEEE--[Amended]

    3. Section 63.2338 is amended by:
    a. Revising paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4);
    b. By adding a new paragraph (b)(5);
    c. Revising paragraph (c)(1);
    d. Removing paragraph (c)(2) and redesignating paragraphs (c)(3)
and (c)(4) as (c)(2) and (c)(3), respectively; and
    e. Revising newly designated paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3) to read
as follows:

Sec.  63.2338  What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) All equipment leak components in organic liquids service that
are associated with:
    (i) Storage tanks storing organic liquids;
    (ii) Transfer racks loading or unloading organic liquids;
    (iii) Pipelines that transfer organic liquids directly between two
storage tanks that are subject to this subpart;
    (iv) Pipelines that transfer organic liquids directly between a
storage tank subject to this subpart and a transfer rack subject to
this subpart; and
    (v) Pipelines that transfer organic liquids directly between two
transfer racks that are subject to this subpart.
    (4) All transport vehicles while they are loading or unloading
organic liquids at transfer racks subject to this subpart.
    (5) All containers while they are loading or unloading organic
liquids at transfer racks subject to this subpart.
    (c) * * *
    (1) Storage tanks, transfer racks, transport vehicles, containers,
and equipment leak components that are part of an affected source under
another 40 CFR part 63 national emission standards for hazardous air
pollutants (NESHAP).
    (2) Non-permanent storage tanks, transfer racks, transport
vehicles, containers, and equipment leak components when used in
special situation distribution loading and unloading operations (such
as maintenance or upset liquids management).
    (3) Storage tanks, transfer racks, transport vehicles, containers,
and equipment leak components when used to conduct maintenance
activities, such as stormwater management, liquid removal from tanks
for inspections and maintenance, or changeovers to a different liquid
stored in a storage tank.
* * * * *
    4. Section 63.2342 is amended by:
    a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory text;
    b. Adding paragraph (a)(3);
    c. Revising paragraph (b)(1);
    d. Adding paragraph (b)(3); and
    e. Revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.2342  When do I have to comply with this subpart?

    (a) If you have a new or reconstructed affected source, you must
comply with this subpart according to the schedule identified in
paragraph (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this section, as applicable.
* * * * *
    (3) If, after startup of a new affected source, the total actual
annual facility-level organic liquid loading volume at that source
exceeds the criteria for control in Table 2 to this subpart, items 9
and 10, the owner or operator must comply with the transfer rack
requirements specified in Sec.  63.2346(b) immediately; that is, be in
compliance the first day of the period following the end of the 3-year
period triggering the control criteria.
    (b)(1) If you have an existing affected source, you must comply
with the emission limitations, operating limits, and work practice
standards for existing affected sources no later than February 5, 2007,
except as provided in paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) of this section.
* * * * *
    (3)(i) If an addition or change other than reconstruction as
defined in Sec.  63.2 is made to an existing affected facility that
causes the total actual annual facility-level organic liquid loading
volume to exceed the criteria for control in Table 2 to this subpart,
items 7 and 8, the owner or operator must comply with the transfer rack
requirements specified in Sec.  63.2346(b) immediately; that is, be in
compliance the first day of the period following the end of the 3-year
period triggering the control criteria.
    (ii) If the owner or operator believes that compliance with the
transfer rack emission limits cannot be achieved immediately, as
specified in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section, the owner or operator
may submit a request for a compliance extension, as specified in
paragraphs (b)(3)(ii)(A) through (I) of this section. Subject to
paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B) of this section, until an extension of
compliance has been granted by the Administrator (or a State with an
approved permit program) under this paragraph (b)(3)(ii), the owner or
operator of the transfer rack subject to the requirements of this
section shall comply with all applicable requirements of this subpart.
Advice on requesting an extension of compliance may be obtained from
the Administrator (or the State with an approved permit program).
    (A) Submittal. The owner or operator shall submit a request for a
compliance extension to the Administrator (or a State, when the State
has an approved 40 CFR part 70 permit program and the source is
required to obtain a 40 CFR part 70 permit under that program, or a
State, when the State has been delegated the authority to implement and
enforce the emission standard for that source) seeking an extension
allowing the source up to 1 additional year to comply with the transfer
rack standard, if such additional period is necessary for the
installation of controls. The owner or operator of the affected source
who has requested an extension of compliance under this paragraph
(b)(3)(ii)(A) and who is otherwise required to obtain a title V permit
shall apply for such permit, or apply to have the source's

title V permit revised to incorporate the conditions of the extension
of compliance. The conditions of an extension of compliance granted
under this paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(A) will be incorporated into the
affected source's title V permit according to the provisions of 40 CFR
part 70 or Federal title V regulations in this chapter (42 U.S.C.
7661), whichever are applicable.
    (B) When to submit. (1) Any request submitted under paragraph
(b)(3)(ii)(A) of this section must be submitted in writing to the
appropriate authority no later than 120 days prior to the affected
source's compliance date (as specified in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this
section), except as provided for in paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B)(2) of this
section. Nonfrivolous requests submitted under this paragraph
(b)(3)(ii)(B)(1) will stay the applicability of the rule as to the
emission points in question until such time as the request is granted
or denied. A denial will be effective as of the date of denial.
    (2) An owner or operator may submit a compliance extension request
after the date specified in paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B)(1) of this section
provided the need for the compliance extension arose after that date,
and before the otherwise applicable compliance date and the need arose
due to circumstances beyond reasonable control of the owner or
operator. This request must include, in addition to the information
required in paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C) of this section, a statement of the
reasons additional time is needed and the date when the owner or
operator first learned of the problems. Nonfrivolous requests submitted
under this paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B)(2) will stay the applicability of
the rule as to the emission points in question until such time as the
request is granted or denied. A denial will be effective as of the
original compliance date.
    (C) Information required. The request for a compliance extension
under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(A) of this section shall include the
following information:
    (1) The name and address of the owner or operator and the address
of the existing source if it differs from the address of the owner or
operator;
    (2) The name, address, and telephone number of a contact person for
further information;
    (3) An identification of the organic liquid distribution operation
and of the specific equipment for which additional compliance time is
required;
    (4) A description of the controls to be installed to comply with
the standard;
    (5) Justification for the length of time being requested; and
    (6) A compliance schedule, including the date by which each step
toward compliance will be reached. At a minimum, the list of dates
shall include:
    (i) The date by which on-site construction, installation of
emission control equipment, or a process change is planned to be
initiated;
    (ii) The date by which on-site construction, installation of
emission control equipment, or a process change is to be completed; and
    (iii) The date by which final compliance is to be achieved.
    (D) Approval of request for extension of compliance. Based on the
information provided in any request made under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C)
of this section, or other information, the Administrator (or the State
with an approved permit program) may grant an extension of compliance
with the transfer rack emission standard, as specified in paragraph
(b)(3)(ii) of this section. The extension will be in writing and will--
    (1) Identify each affected source covered by the extension;
    (2) Specify the termination date of the extension;
    (3) Specify the dates by which steps toward compliance are to be
taken, if appropriate;
    (4) Specify other applicable requirements to which the compliance
extension applies (e.g., performance tests);
    (5) Specify the contents of the progress reports to be submitted
and the dates by which such reports are to be submitted, if required
pursuant to paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(E) of this section.
    (6) Under paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section, specify any
additional conditions that the Administrator (or the State) deems
necessary to assure installation of the necessary controls and
protection of the health of persons during the extension period.
    (E) Progress reports. The owner or operator of an existing source
that has been granted an extension of compliance under paragraph
(b)(3)(ii)(D) of this section may be required to submit to the
Administrator (or the State with an approved permit program) progress
reports indicating whether the steps toward compliance outlined in the
compliance schedule have been reached.
    (F) Notification of approval or intention to deny. (1) The
Administrator (or the State with an approved permit program) will
notify the owner or operator in writing of approval or intention to
deny approval of a request for an extension of compliance within 30
calendar days after receipt of sufficient information to evaluate a
request submitted under paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section. The
Administrator (or the State) will notify the owner or operator in
writing of the status of his/her application; that is, whether the
application contains sufficient information to make a determination,
within 30 calendar days after receipt of the original application and
within 30 calendar days after receipt of any supplementary information
that is submitted. The 30-day approval or denial period will begin
after the owner or operator has been notified in writing that his/her
application is complete. Failure by the Administrator to act within 30
calendar days to approve or disapprove a request submitted under
paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section does not constitute automatic
approval of the request.
    (2) When notifying the owner or operator that his/her application
is not complete, the Administrator will specify the information needed
to complete the application and provide notice of opportunity for the
applicant to present, in writing, within 30 calendar days after he/she
is notified of the incomplete application, additional information or
arguments to the Administrator to enable further action on the
application.
    (3) Before denying any request for an extension of compliance, the
Administrator (or the State with an approved permit program) will
notify the owner or operator in writing of the Administrator's (or the
State's) intention to issue the denial, together with:
    (i) Notice of the information and findings on which the intended
denial is based; and
    (ii) Notice of opportunity for the owner or operator to present in
writing, within 15 calendar days after he/she is notified of the
intended denial, additional information or arguments to the
Administrator (or the State) before further action on the request.
    (4) The Administrator's final determination to deny any request for
an extension will be in writing and will set forth the specific grounds
on which the denial is based. The final determination will be made
within 30 calendar days after presentation of additional information or
argument (if the application is complete), or within 30 calendar days
after the final date specified for the presentation if no presentation
is made.
    (G) Termination of extension of compliance. The Administrator (or
the State with an approved permit program) may terminate an extension
of compliance at an earlier date than specified if any specification
under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(D)(3) or (4) of this section is not met.
Upon a determination to terminate, the

Administrator will notify, in writing, the owner or operator of the
Administrator's determination to terminate, together with:
    (1) Notice of the reason for termination; and
    (2) Notice of opportunity for the owner or operator to present in
writing, within 15 calendar days after he/she is notified of the
determination to terminate, additional information or arguments to the
Administrator before further action on the termination.
    (3) A final determination to terminate an extension of compliance
will be in writing and will set forth the specific grounds on which the
termination is based. The final determination will be made within 30
calendar days after presentation of additional information or
arguments, or within 30 calendar days after the final date specified
for the presentation if no presentation is made.
    (H) The granting of an extension under this section shall not
abrogate the Administrator's authority under section 114 of the Clean
Air Act.
    (I) Limitation on use of compliance extension. The owner or
operator may request an extension of compliance under the provisions
specified in paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section only once for each
facility.
* * * * *
    (d) You must meet the notification requirements in Sec. Sec.
63.2343 and 63.2382(a), as applicable, according to the schedules in
Sec.  63.2382(a) and (b)(1) through (3) and in subpart A of this part.
Some of these notifications must be submitted before the compliance
dates for the emission limitations, operating limits, and work practice
standards in this subpart.
    5. Section 63.2343 is added to subpart EEEE to read as follows:

Sec.  63.2343  What are my requirements for emission sources not
requiring control?

    This section establishes the notification, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements for emission sources identified in Sec.  63.2338
that do not require control under this subpart (i.e., under paragraphs
(a) through (e) of Sec.  63.2346). Such emission sources are not
subject to any other notification, recordkeeping, or reporting sections
in this subpart, including Sec.  63.2350(c), except as indicated in
paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section.
    (a) For each storage tank subject to this subpart having a capacity
of less than 18.9 cubic meters (5,000 gallons) and for each transfer
rack subject to this subpart that only unloads organic liquids (i.e.,
no organic liquids are loaded at any of the transfer racks), you must
keep documentation that verifies that each storage tank and transfer
rack identified in paragraph (a) of this section is not required to be
controlled. The documentation must be kept up-to-date (i.e., all such
emission sources at a facility are identified in the documentation
regardless of when the documentation was last compiled) and must be in
a form suitable and readily available for expeditious inspection and
review according to Sec.  63.10(b)(1), including records stored in
electronic form in a separate location.
    (b) For each storage tank subject to this subpart having a capacity
of 18.9 cubic meters (5,000 gallons) or more that is not subject to
control based on the criteria specified in Table 2 to this subpart,
items 1 through 6, you must comply with the requirements specified in
paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section.
    (1)(i) You must submit the information in Sec.  63.2386(c)(1),
(c)(2), (c)(3), and (c)(10)(i) in either the Notification of Compliance
Status, according to the schedule specified in Table 12 to this
subpart, or in your first Compliance report, according to the schedule
specified in Sec.  63.2386(b), whichever occurs first.
    (ii)(A) If you submit your first Compliance report before your
NOCS, the NOCS must contain the information specified in Sec.
63.2386(d)(3) and (4) if any of the changes identified in paragraph (d)
of this section have occurred since the filing of the first Compliance
report. If none of the changes identified in paragraph (d) of this
section have occurred since the filing of the first compliance report,
you do not need to report the information specified in Sec.
63.2386(c)(10)(i) when you submit your NOCS.
    (B) If you submit your NOCS before your first compliance report,
your first Compliance report must contain the information specified in
Sec.  63.2386(d)(3) and (4) if any of the changes specified in
paragraph (d) of this section have occurred since the filing of the
NOCS.
    (iii) If you are already submitting a NOCS or a first Compliance
report under Sec.  63.2386(c), you do not need to submit a separate
NOCS or first Compliance report for each storage tank that meets the
conditions identified in paragraph (b) of this section (i.e., a single
NOCS or first Compliance report should be submitted).
    (2)(i) You must submit a subsequent Compliance report according to
the schedule in Sec.  63.2386(b) whenever any of the events in
paragraph (d) of this section occur, as applicable.
    (ii) Your subsequent Compliance reports must contain the
information in Sec.  63.2386(c)(1), (2), (3) and, as applicable, in
Sec.  63.2386(d)(3) and (4). If you are already submitting a subsequent
Compliance report under Sec.  63.2386(d), you do not need to submit a
separate subsequent Compliance report for each storage tank that meets
the conditions identified in paragraph (b) of this section (i.e., a
single subsequent Compliance report should be submitted).
    (3) For each storage tank that meets the conditions identified in
paragraph (b) of this section, you must keep documentation, including a
record of the annual average true vapor pressure of the total Table 1
organic HAP in the stored organic liquid, that verifies the storage
tank is not required to be controlled under this subpart. The
documentation must be kept up-to-date and must be in a form suitable
and readily available for expeditious inspection and review according
to Sec.  63.10(b)(1), including records stored in electronic form in a
separate location.
    (c) For each transfer rack subject to this subpart that loads
organic liquids but is not subject to control based on the criteria
specified in Table 2 to this subpart, items 7 through 10, you must
comply with the requirements specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3)
of this section.
    (1)(i) You must submit the information in Sec.  63.2386(c)(1),
(c)(2), (c)(3), and (c)(10)(i) in either the Notification of Compliance
Status, according to the schedule specified in Table 12 to this
subpart, or a first Compliance report, according to the schedule
specified in Sec.  63.2386(b), whichever occurs first.
    (ii)(A) If you submit your first Compliance report before your
NOCS, the NOCS must contain the information specified in Sec.
63.2386(d)(3) and (4) if any of the changes identified in paragraph (d)
of this section have occurred since the filing of the first Compliance
report. If none of the changes identified in paragraph (d) of this
section have occurred since the filing of the first compliance report,
you do not need to report the information specified in Sec.
63.2386(c)(10)(i) when you submit your NOCS.
    (B) If you submit your NOCS before your first compliance report,
your first Compliance report must contain the information specified in
Sec.  63.2386(d)(3) and (4) if any of the changes specified in
paragraph (d) of this section have occurred since the filing of the
NOCS.
    (iii) If you are already submitting a NOCS or a first Compliance
report under Sec.  63.2386(c), you do not need to submit a separate
NOCS or first Compliance report for each transfer rack that meets the
conditions identified in

paragraph (b) of this section (i.e., a single NOCS or first Compliance
report should be submitted).
    (2)(i) You must submit a subsequent Compliance report according to
the schedule in Sec.  63.2386(b) whenever any of the events in
paragraph (d) of this section occur, as applicable.
    (ii) Your subsequent Compliance reports must contain the
information in Sec.  63.2386(c)(1), (2), (3) and, as applicable, in
Sec.  63.2386(d)(3) and (4). If you are already submitting a subsequent
Compliance report under Sec.  63.2386(d), you do not need to submit a
separate subsequent Compliance report for each transfer rack that meets
the conditions identified in paragraph (c) of this section (i.e., a
single subsequent Compliance report should be submitted).
    (3) For each transfer rack that meets the conditions identified in
paragraph (c) of this section, you must keep documentation, including
the records specified in Sec.  63.2390(d), that verifies the transfer
rack is not required to be controlled under this subpart. The
documentation must be kept up-to-date and must be in a form suitable
and readily available for expeditious inspection and review according
to Sec.  63.10(b)(1), including records stored in electronic form in a
separate location.
    (d) If one or more of the events identified in paragraphs (d)(1)
through (4) of this section occur since the filing of the NOCS or the
last Compliance report, you must submit a subsequent Compliance report
as specified in paragraphs (b)(3) and (c)(3) of this section.
    (1) Any storage tank or transfer rack became subject to control
under this subpart EEE; or
    (2) Any storage tank equal to or greater than 18.9 cubic meters
(5,000 gallons) became part of the affected source but is not subject
to any of the emission limitations, operating limits, or work practice
standards of this subpart; or
    (3) Any transfer rack (except those racks at which only unloading
of organic liquids occurs) became part of the affected source; or
    (4) Any of the information required in Sec.  63.2386(c)(1), (2), or
(3) has changed.
    6. Section 63.2346 is amended by:
    a. Revising paragraph (a)(2);
    b. Revising paragraph (b) introductory text;
    c. Revising paragraph (b)(2);
    d. Revising paragraph (b)(3);
    e. Revising paragraph (d) introductory text;
    f. Revising paragraph (e); and
    g. Removing and reserving paragraph (h) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.2346  What emission limitations, operating limits, and work
practice standards must I meet?

    (a) * * *
    (2) Route emissions to fuel gas systems or back into a process as
specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS.
* * * * *
    (b) Transfer racks. For each transfer rack that is part of the
collection of transfer racks that meets the total actual annual
facility-level organic liquid loading volume criterion for control in
Table 2 to this subpart, items 7 through 10, you must comply with
paragraph (b)(1), (2), or (3) of this section for each arm in the
transfer rack loading an organic liquid whose organic HAP content meets
the organic HAP criterion for control in Table 2 to this subpart, items
7 through 10. For existing affected sources, you must comply with
paragraph (b)(1), (b)(2), or (b)(3)(i) of this section during the
loading of organic liquids into transport vehicles. For new affected
sources, you must comply with paragraph (b)(1), (b)(2), or (b)(3)(i)
and (ii) of this section during the loading of organic liquids into
transport vehicles and containers. If the total actual annual facility-
level organic liquid loading volume at any affected source is equal to
or greater than the loading volume criteria for control in Table 2 to
this subpart, but at a later date is less than the loading volume
criteria for control, compliance with paragraph (b)(1), (2), or (3) of
this section is no longer required. For new sources and reconstructed
sources, as defined in Sec.  63.2338(d) and (e), if at a later date,
the total actual annual facility-level organic liquid loading volume
again becomes equal to or greater than the loading volume criteria for
control in Table 2 to this subpart, the owner or operator must comply
with paragraph (b)(1), (b)(2), or (b)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section
immediately, as specified in Sec.  63.2342(a)(3). For existing sources,
as defined in Sec.  63.2338(f), if at a later date, the total actual
annual facility-level organic liquid loading volume again becomes equal
to or greater than the loading volume criteria for control in Table 2
to this subpart, the owner or operator must comply with paragraph
(b)(1), (b)(2), or (b)(3)(i) of this section immediately, as specified
in Sec.  63.2342(b)(3)(i), unless an alternative compliance schedule
has been approved under Sec.  63.2342(b)(3)(ii) and subject to the use
limitation specified in Sec.  63.2342(b)(3)(ii)(I).
* * * * *
    (2) Route emissions to fuel gas systems or back into a process as
specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS.
    (3)(i) Use a vapor balancing system that routes organic HAP vapors
displaced from the loading of organic liquids into transport vehicles
to the storage tank from which the liquid being loaded originated or to
a process unit.
    (ii) Use a vapor balancing system that routes the organic HAP
vapors displaced from the loading of organic liquids into containers
directly (e.g., no intervening tank or containment area such as a room)
to the storage tank from which the liquid being loaded originated or to
a process unit.
* * * * *
    (d) Transport vehicles. For each transport vehicle equipped with
vapor collection equipment that is loaded at a transfer rack that is
subject to control based on the criteria specified in Table 2 to this
subpart, items 7 through 10, you must comply with paragraph (d)(1) of
this section. For each transport vehicle without vapor collection
equipment that is loaded at a transfer rack that is subject to control
based on the criteria specified in Table 2 to this subpart, items 7
through 10, you must comply with paragraph (d)(2) of this section.
* * * * *
    (e) Operating limits. For each high throughput transfer rack, you
must meet each operating limit in Table 3 to this subpart for each
control device used to comply with the provisions of this subpart
whenever emissions from the loading of organic liquids are routed to
the control device. For each storage tank and low throughput transfer
rack, you must comply with the requirements for monitored parameters as
specified in subpart SS of this part for storage vessels and, during
the loading of organic liquids, for low throughput transfer racks,
respectively. Alternatively, you may comply with the operating limits
in Table 3 to this subpart.
* * * * *
    (h) [Reserved]
* * * * *
    7. Section 63.2350 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.2350  What are my general requirements for complying with this
subpart?

* * * * *
    (c) Except for emission sources not required to be controlled as
specified in Sec.  63.2343, you must develop and implement a written
startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) plan according to the
provisions in Sec.  63.6(e)(3).
    8. Section 63.2354 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(3) to read
as follows:

Sec.  63.2354  What performance tests, design evaluations, and
performance evaluations must I conduct?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) In addition to EPA Method 25 or 25A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix
A, to determine compliance with the organic HAP or TOC emission limit,
you may use EPA Method 18 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, as specified
in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section. As an alternative to EPA Method
18, you may use ASTM D6420-99, Standard Test Method for Determination
of Gaseous Organic Compounds by Direct Interface Gas Chromatography-
Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) (incorporated by reference, see Sec.  63.14),
under the conditions specified in paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section.
    (i)(A) If you use EPA Method 18 to measure compliance with the
percentage efficiency limit, you must first determine which organic HAP
are present in the inlet gas stream (i.e., uncontrolled emissions)
using knowledge of the organic liquids or the screening procedure
described in EPA Method 18. In conducting the performance test, you
must analyze samples collected as specified in EPA Method 18,
simultaneously at the inlet and outlet of the control device. Quantify
the emissions for the same organic HAP identified as present in the
inlet gas stream for both the inlet and outlet gas streams of the
control device.
    (B) If you use EPA Method 18 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, to
measure compliance with the emission concentration limit, you must
first determine which organic HAP are present in the inlet gas stream
using knowledge of the organic liquids or the screening procedure
described in EPA Method 18. In conducting the performance test, analyze
samples collected as specified in EPA Method 18 at the outlet of the
control device. Quantify the control device outlet emission
concentration for the same organic HAP identified as present in the
inlet or uncontrolled gas stream.
    (ii) You may use ASTM D6420-99 as an alternative to EPA Method 18
if the target concentration is between 150 ppbv and 100 ppmv and either
of the conditions specified in paragraph (b)(2)(ii)(A) or (B) of this
section exists. For target compounds not listed in Section 1.1 of ASTM
D6420-99 and not amenable to detection by mass spectrometry, you may
not use ASTM D6420-99.
    (A) The target compounds are those listed in Section 1.1 of ASTM
D6420-99; or
    (B) For target compounds not listed in Section 1.1 of ASTM D6420-
99, but potentially detected by mass spectrometry, the additional
system continuing calibration check after each run, as detailed in ASTM
D6420-99, Section 10.5.3, must be followed, met, documented, and
submitted with the data report, even if there is no moisture condenser
used or the compound is not considered water-soluble.
* * * * *
    9. Section 63.2362 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read
as follows:

Sec.  63.2362  When must I conduct subsequent performance tests?

* * * * *
    (b)(1) For each transport vehicle that you own that is equipped
with vapor collection equipment and that is loaded with organic liquids
at a transfer rack that is subject to control based on the criteria
specified in Table 2 to this subpart, items 7 through 10, you must
perform the vapor tightness testing required in Table 5 to this
subpart, item 2, on that transport vehicle at least once per year.
* * * * *
    10. Section 63.2382 is amended by revising paragraphs (d)(2)(iv),
(v), (vi), (vii), and (viii) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.2382  What notifications must I submit and when and what
information should be submitted?

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (iv) Descriptions of worst-case operating and/or testing conditions
for the control device(s).
    (v) Identification of emission sources subject to overlapping
requirements described in Sec.  63.2396 and the authority under which
you will comply.
    (vi) The applicable information specified in Sec.  63.1039(a)(1)
through (3) for all pumps and valves subject to the work practice
standards for equipment leak components in Table 4 to this subpart,
item 4.
    (vii) If you are complying with the vapor balancing work practice
standard for transfer racks according to Table 4 to this subpart, item
3.a, include a statement to that effect and a statement that the
pressure vent settings on the affected storage tanks are greater than
or equal to 2.5 pounds per square inch gauge (psig).
    (viii) The information specified in Sec.  63.2386(c)(10)(i), unless
the information has already been submitted with the first Compliance
report. If the information specified in Sec.  63.2386(c)(10)(i) has
already been submitted with the first Compliance report, the
information specified in Sec.  63.2386(d)(3) and (4), as applicable,
shall be submitted instead.
    11. Section 63.2386 is amended by:
    a. Revising paragraph (b)(3);
    b. Revising paragraph (c)(4);
    c. Redesignating paragraph (c)(10) as (c)(9) and paragraph (c)(9)
as (c)(10);
    e. Revising newly designated paragraphs (c)(9) and (c)(10);
    f. Revising paragraph (d) introductory text;
    g. Removing paragraph (d)(3); and
    h. Adding new paragraphs (d)(3) and (d)(4) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.2386  What reports must I submit and when and what information
is to be submitted in each?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) For each affected source that is subject to permitting
regulations pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, if the
permitting authority has established dates for submitting semiannual
reports pursuant to 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR
71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), you may submit the first and subsequent Compliance
reports according to the dates the permitting authority has established
instead of according to the dates in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this
section.
    (c) * * *
    (4) Any changes to the information listed in Sec.  63.2382(d)(2)
that have occurred since the submittal of the Notification of
Compliance Status.
* * * * *
    (9) A listing of all transport vehicles into which organic liquids
were loaded at transfer racks that are subject to control based on the
criteria specified in Table 2 to this subpart, items 7 through 10,
during the previous 6 months for which vapor tightness documentation as
required in Sec.  63.2390(c) was not on file at the facility.
    (10)(i) A listing of all transfer racks (except those racks at
which only unloading of organic liquids occurs) and of tanks greater
than or equal to 18.9 cubic meters (5,000 gallons) that are part of the
affected source but are not subject to any of the emission limitations,
operating limits, or work practice standards of this subpart.
    (ii) If the information specified in paragraph (c)(10)(i) of this
section has already been submitted with the NOCS, the information
specified in paragraphs (d)(3) and (4) of this section, as applicable,
shall be submitted instead.
    (d) Subsequent Compliance reports. Subsequent Compliance reports
must contain the information in paragraphs (c)(1) through (9) of this
section and, where applicable, the information in

paragraphs (d)(1) through (4) of this section.
* * * * *
    (3)(i) A listing of any storage tank that became subject to
controls based on the criteria for control specified in Table 2 to this
subpart, items 1 through 6, since the filing of the last Compliance
report.
    (ii) A listing of any transfer rack that became subject to controls
based on the criteria for control specified in Table 2 to this subpart,
items 7 through 10, since the filing of the last Compliance report.
    (4)(i) A listing of tanks greater than or equal to 18.9 cubic
meters (5,000 gallons) that became part of the affected source but are
not subject to any of the emission limitations, operating limits, or
work practice standards of this subpart, since the last Compliance
report.
    (ii) A listing of all transfer racks (except those racks at which
only the unloading of organic liquids occurs) that became part of the
affected source but are not subject to any of the emission limitations,
operating limits, or work practice standards of this subpart, since the
last Compliance report.
* * * * *
    12. Section 63.2390 is amended by:
    a. Revising paragraphs (a) and (b);
    b. Revising paragraph (c) introductory text;
    c. Redesignating paragraph (c)(3) as (d);
    d. Adding a new paragraph (c)(3); and
    e. Revising newly designated paragraph (d) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.2390  What records must I keep?

    (a) For each emission source identified in Sec.  63.2338 that does
not require control under this subpart, you must keep all records
identified in Sec.  63.2343.
    (b) For each emission source identified in Sec.  63.2338 that does
require control under this subpart:
    (1) You must keep all records identified in subpart SS of this part
and in Table 12 to this subpart that are applicable, including records
related to notifications and reports, SSM, performance tests, CMS, and
performance evaluation plans; and
    (2) You must keep the records required to show continuous
compliance, as required in subpart SS of this part and in Tables 8
through 10 to this subpart, with each emission limitation, operating
limit, and work practice standard that applies to you.
    (c) For each transport vehicle into which organic liquids are
loaded at a transfer rack that is subject to control based on the
criteria specified in Table 2 to this subpart, items 7 through 10, you
must keep the applicable records in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this
section or alternatively the verification records in paragraph (c)(3)
of this section.
* * * * *
    (3) In lieu of keeping the records specified in paragraph (c)(1) or
(2) of this section, as applicable, the owner or operator shall record
that the verification of DOT tank certification or Method 27 of
appendix A to 40 CFR part 60 testing, required in Table 5 to this
subpart, item 2, has been performed. Various methods for the record of
verification can be used, such as: a check-off on a log sheet, a list
of DOT serial numbers or Method 27 data, or a position description for
gate security showing that the security guard will not allow any trucks
on site that do not have the appropriate documentation.
    (d) You must keep records of the total actual annual facility-level
organic liquid loading volume as defined in Sec.  63.2406 through
transfer racks to document the applicability, or lack thereof, of the
emission limitations in Table 2 to this subpart, items 7 through 10.
    13. Section 63.2394 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as
follows:

Sec.  63.2394  In what form and how long must I keep my records?

    (a) Your records must be in a form suitable and readily available
for expeditious inspection and review according to Sec.  63.10(b)(1),
including records stored in electronic form at a separate location.
* * * * *
    14. Section 63.2396 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b)
to read as follows:

Sec.  63.2396  What compliance options do I have if part of my plant is
subject to both this subpart and another subpart?

    (a) Compliance with other regulations for storage tanks.--(1) After
the compliance dates specified in Sec.  63.2342, you are in compliance
with the provisions of this subpart for any storage tank that is
assigned to the OLD affected source and that is both controlled with a
floating roof and is in compliance with the provisions of either 40 CFR
part 60, subpart Kb, or 40 CFR part 61, subpart Y, except that records
shall be kept for 5 years rather than 2 years for storage tanks that
are assigned to the OLD affected source.
    (2) After the compliance dates specified in Sec.  63.2342, you are
in compliance with the provisions of this subpart for any storage tank
with a fixed roof that is assigned to the OLD affected source and that
is both controlled with a closed vent system and control device and is
in compliance with either 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb, or 40 CFR part
61, subpart Y, except that you must comply with the monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in this subpart.
    (3) As an alternative to paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section,
if a storage tank assigned to the OLD affected source is subject to
control under 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb, or 40 CFR part 61, subpart Y,
you may elect to comply only with the requirements of this subpart for
storage tanks meeting the applicability criteria for control in Table 2
to this subpart.
    (b) Compliance with other regulations for transfer racks. After the
compliance dates specified in Sec.  63.2342, if you have a transfer
rack that is subject to 40 CFR part 61, subpart BB, and that transfer
rack is in OLD operation, you must meet all of the requirements of this
subpart for that transfer rack when the transfer rack is in OLD
operation during the loading of organic liquids.
* * * * *
    15. Section 63.2402 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(2),
(b)(3), and (b)(4) to read as follows:

Sec.  63.2402  Who implements and enforces this subpart?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) Approval of major changes to test methods under Sec.
63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f) and as defined in Sec.  63.90.
    (3) Approval of major changes to monitoring under Sec.  63.8(f) and
as defined in Sec.  63.90.
    (4) Approval of major changes to recordkeeping and reporting under
Sec.  63.10(f) and as defined in Sec.  63.90.
    16. Section 63.2406 is amended by:
    a. Revising the introductory text;
    b. Revising the definitions of ``Shutdown,'' ``Startup,''
``Transfer rack,'' ``Vapor balancing system,'' and ``Vapor collection
system,'' and paragraph (3) of the definition for ``Storage tank;'' and
    c. Adding in alphabetical order definitions for ``Bottoms
receivers,'' ``High throughput transfer rack,'' ``Low throughput
transfer rack,'' ``Surge control vessel,'' and ``Total actual annual
facility-level organic liquid loading volume'' to read as follows:

Sec.  63.2406  What definitions apply to this subpart?

    Terms used in this subpart are defined in the CAA, in Sec.  63.2,
40 CFR part 63, subparts H, PP, SS, TT, UU, and WW, and in this
section. If the same term is defined in another subpart and in this
section, it will have the meaning given in this section for purposes of
this

subpart. Notwithstanding the introductory language in Sec.  63.921, the
terms ``container'' and ``safety device'' shall have the meaning found
in this subpart and not in Sec.  63.921.
* * * * *
    Bottoms receiver means a tank that collects distillation bottoms
before the stream is sent for storage or for further processing
downstream.
* * * * *
    High throughput transfer rack means those transfer racks that
transfer into transport vehicles (for existing affected sources) or
into transport vehicles and containers (for new affected sources) a
total of 11.8 million liters per year or greater of organic liquids.
* * * * *
    Low throughput transfer rack means those transfer racks that
transfer into transport vehicles (for existing affected sources) or
into transport vehicles and containers (for new affected sources) less
than 11.8 million liters per year of organic liquids.
* * * * *
    Shutdown means the cessation of operation of an OLD affected
source, or portion thereof (other than as part of normal operation of a
batch-type operation), including equipment required or used to comply
with this subpart, or the emptying and degassing of a storage tank.
Shutdown as defined here includes, but is not limited to, events that
result from periodic maintenance, replacement of equipment, or repair.
    Startup means the setting in operation of an OLD affected source,
or portion thereof (other than as part of normal operation of a batch-
type operation), for any purpose. Startup also includes the placing in
operation of any individual piece of equipment required or used to
comply with this subpart including, but not limited to, control devices
and monitors.
    Storage tank * * *
    (3) Bottoms receivers;
* * * * *
    Surge control vessel means feed drums, recycle drums, and
intermediate vessels. Surge control vessels are used within chemical
manufacturing processes when in-process storage, mixing, or management
of flow rates or volumes is needed to assist in production of a
product.
* * * * *
    Total actual annual facility-level organic liquid loading volume
means the total facility-level actual volume of organic liquid loaded
for transport within or out of the facility through transfer racks that
are part of the affected source into transport vehicles (for existing
affected sources) or into transport vehicles and containers (for new
affected sources) based on a 3-year rolling average, calculated
annually.
    (1) For existing affected sources, each 3-year rolling average is
based on actual facility-level loading volume during each calendar year
(January 1 through December 31) in the 3-year period. For calendar year
2004 only (the first year of the initial 3-year rolling average), if an
owner or operator of an affected source does not have actual loading
volume data for the time period from January 1, 2004, through February
2, 2004 (the time period prior to the effective date of the OLD
NESHAP), the owner or operator shall compute a facility-level loading
volume for this time period as follows: At the end of the 2004 calendar
year, the owner or operator shall calculate a daily average facility-
level loading volume (based on the actual loading volume for February
3, 2004, through December 31, 2004) and use that daily average to
estimate the facility-level loading volume for the period of time from
January 1, 2004, through February 2, 2004. The owner or operator shall
then sum the estimated facility-level loading volume from January 1,
2004, through February 2, 2004, and the actual facility-level loading
volume from February 3, 2004, through December 31, 2004, to calculate
the annual facility-level loading volume for calendar year 2004.
    (2)(i) For new affected sources, the 3-year rolling average is
calculated as an average of three 12-month periods. An owner or
operator must select as the beginning calculation date with which to
start the calculations as either the initial startup date of the new
affected source or the first day of the calendar month following the
month in which startup occurs. Once selected, the date with which the
calculations begin cannot be changed.
    (ii) The initial 3-year rolling average is based on the projected
maximum facility-level annual loading volume for each of the 3 years
following the selected beginning calculation date. The second 3-year
rolling average is based on actual facility-level loading volume for
the first year of operation plus a new projected maximum facility-level
annual loading volume for second and third years following the selected
beginning calculation date. The third 3-year rolling average is based
on actual facility-level loading volume for the first 2 years of
operation plus a new projected maximum annual facility-level loading
volume for the third year following the beginning calculation date.
Subsequent 3-year rolling averages are based on actual facility-level
loading volume for each year in the 3-year rolling average.
    Transfer rack means a single system used to load organic liquids
into, or unload organic liquids out of, transport vehicles or
containers. It includes all loading and unloading arms, pumps, meters,
shutoff valves, relief valves, and other piping and equipment necessary
for the transfer operation. Transfer equipment and operations that are
physically separate (i.e., do not share common piping, valves, and
other equipment) are considered to be separate transfer racks.
* * * * *
    Vapor balancing system means a piping system that collects organic
HAP vapors displaced from transport vehicles or containers during
loading and routes the collected vapors to the storage tank from which
the liquid being loaded originated or compresses the vapors for direct
conveyance to a chemical manufacturing process unit. For containers,
the piping system must route the displaced vapors directly to the
appropriate storage tank or process unit in order to qualify as a vapor
balancing system.
    Vapor collection system means any equipment located at the source
(i.e., at the OLD operation) that is not open to the atmosphere; that
is composed of piping, connections, and, if necessary, flow-inducing
devices; and that is used for:
    (1) Containing and conveying vapors displaced during the loading of
transport vehicles to a control device;
    (2) Containing and directly conveying vapors displaced during the
loading of containers; or
    (3) Vapor balancing. This does not include any of the vapor
collection equipment that is installed on the transport vehicle.
* * * * *
    17. Table 2 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63 is amended by revising
entries 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 to read as follows:

          Table 2 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.--Emission Limits
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 If you own or operate . . .      And if . . .       Then you must . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. A storage tank at an       a. The stored         i. Reduce emissions
 existing affected source      organic liquid is     of total organic
 with a capacity >=18.9        not crude oil and     HAP (or, upon
 cubic meters (5,000           if the annual         approval, TOC) by
 gallons) and <189.3 cubic     average true vapor    at least 95 weight-
 meters (50,000 gallons).      pressure of the       percent or, as an
                               total Table 1         option, to an
                               organic HAP in the    exhaust
                               stored organic        concentration less
                               liquid is >=27.6      than or equal to 20
                               kilopascals (4.0      ppmv, on a dry
                               psia) and <76.6       basis corrected to
                               kilopascals (11.1     3% oxygen for
                               psia).                combustion devices
                                                     using supplemental
                                                     combustion air, by
                                                     venting emissions
                                                     through a closed
                                                     vent system to any
                                                     combination of
                                                     control devices
                                                     meeting the
                                                     applicable
                                                     requirements of 40
                                                     CFR part 63,
                                                     subpart SS; OR
                                                    ii. Comply with the
                                                     work practice
                                                     standards specified
                                                     in Table 4 to this