[Federal Register: December 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 239)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 74886-74895]
[DOCID:fr13de06-25]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 69

[Docket No. EPA-R02-OAR-2005-VI-0001, FRL-8254-6]

Clean Air Act Section 325 Exemption for Virgin Islands Water and
Power Authority

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed Grant of Petition under section 325 of the Clean Air
Act.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is proposing to grant,
with conditions, a Petition, from the Governor of the Virgin Islands,
submitted under section 325 of the Clean Air Act (CAA). The Petition
requests that EPA exempt the Virgin Islands Water and Power Authority
(VIWAPA) from its obligation to comply with the continuous emission
monitoring system (CEMS) conditions contained in Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) permits issued pursuant to section 165
of the CAA to VIWAPA for nine PSD permitted units

located on St. Thomas and St. Croix at two of its facilities.
    This approval will exempt VIWAPA from its obligation to comply for
a period of five (5) years with the PSD permit CEMS conditions at seven
of its eight PSD permitted combustion turbines and at its two PSD
permitted Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) units. These PSD permit
CEMS conditions address monitoring of Nitrogen Oxides (NOX),
Carbon Monoxide (CO) and opacity emissions. Additionally, VIWAPA sought
to extend the Petitioner's request to include waiver of PSD permit CEMS
conditions for a new unit, Unit 23. While this approval will not exempt
VIWAPA from the CEMS obligations for Unit 23, it does provide VIWAPA
additional time to comply with the CEMS permit conditions.
    This approval may be revoked or modified if significant changes in
circumstances occur at either one or both of the two VIWAPA facilities.
Failure to comply with the conditions included in this approval at
Section VII (Conditions of Approval), hereinafter called
``Conditions,'' could result in the approval of the exemption being
revoked by the Administrator as well as civil and/or criminal
enforcement action under the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 12, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R02-
OAR-2005-VI-0001, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line

instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Kenneth Eng, Chief, Air Compliance Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 21st
Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866.
     Hand Delivery: Kenneth Eng, Chief, Air Compliance Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway, 21st
Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional
Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R02-OAR-
2005-VI-0001. 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.regulations.gov, 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
http:.www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web

site is an ``anonymous access'' system, 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 http://www.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 the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
.

    Copies of the Governor's Petition, additional submittals relied
upon in evaluating this Petition, and the Technical Support Document
explaining the Environmental Protection Agency's rationale are
available on line at http://www.regulations.gov in docket EPA-R02-OAR-

2005-VI-0001 and at the following address for inspection during normal
business hours: Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, Air
Compliance Branch, 290 Broadway, 21st Floor, New York, New York 10007-
1866, Attn: Gaetano LaVigna,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gaetano LaVigna, Air Compliance
Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 Broadway,
21st Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866,<PHONE_NUMBER> or at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following table of contents describes
the format for the Supplementary Information section:

I. What Action is the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Taking
Today?
II. What are the Regulatory Requirements for Authorizing an
Exemption under the Clean Air Act?
III. What are the Bases for the Petitioner's Request and what is
EPA's Analysis of the Petition?
IV. What are Grounds for Revocation of the Exemption?
V. What is EPA's Conclusion?
VI. What is the Effective Date of the Approval of Petition and
Timing of the Requirements?
VII. What are the Conditions of Approval?
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Review

I. What Action is the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Taking
Today?

    EPA is proposing a five (5) year approval, with Conditions, of the
Governor of the Virgin Islands' March 7, 2002 Clean Air Act (CAA)
section 325 Petition (``Petition''). On behalf of the Virgin Islands
Water and Power Authority (VIWAPA or ``the Authority''), the Governor
of the Virgin Islands requested that the Authority be exempted from
continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) conditions, which are
contained in Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permits
issued to VIWAPA pursuant to section 165 of the CAA. If finally
approved, this exemption will become effective for a period of five (5)
years from the date of final publication.
    For the effective period of the exemption, VIWAPA will not be
required to comply with the CEMS conditions in its PSD permits for
seven of its PSD permitted combustion turbines and its two PSD
permitted Heat Recovery Steam Generating (HRSG) units. EPA is not
granting the Petition with respect to the newly permitted eighth
combustion turbine, Unit 23. However, the exemption provides VIWAPA
additional time to comply with the CEMS conditions in its PSD permit
for Unit 23, as delineated in the Conditions provided in Section VII.
The PSD permit CEMS conditions relate to monitoring of NOX,
CO and opacity emissions. All of the units subject to this proposed
approval are located at VIWAPA's two facilities in St. Thomas and St.
Croix. Failure to comply with the Conditions could result in the
exemption being revoked by the Administrator as well as civil and/or
criminal enforcement action under the CAA.
    The Petitioner's request, supporting documents submitted and
presentations given by VIWAPA are summarized in this notice and
detailed in a Technical Support Document available from EPA at the
addresses listed above.

II. What are the Regulatory Requirements for Authorizing an Exemption
Under the CAA?

    Section 325(a) of the CAA authorizes the Administrator of EPA, upon
a Governor's petition, to exempt any person or source or class of
persons or sources in the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, or
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands from CAA requirements
other than section 112 or any requirements of section 110 or part D of
subchapter I of the CAA necessary to attain or maintain a national
primary ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). EPA may grant a petition
for exemption if the Administrator finds that compliance with such a
requirement is not feasible or is unreasonable due to unique
geographical, meteorological, or economic factors of such territory, or
other local factors that the Administrator deems significant. The CAA
further provides that any such petition shall be considered in
accordance with section 7607(d) of the Act and any exemption granted
shall be considered final action by the Administrator for the purposes
of section 7607(b) of the CAA.
    Further, EPA is required to notify the Committees on Energy and
Commerce and on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives and
the Committees on Environment and Public Works and on Energy and
Natural Resources of the Senate upon receipt of a petition under
section 325(a) of the CAA and upon approval or rejection of a petition
under section 325(a). EPA notified the appropriate committees and will
also notify them upon final action on this Petition.

III. What are the Bases for the Petitioner's Request and What Is EPA's
Analysis of the Petition?

    The Governor in his Petition and VIWAPA in support of the Petition
seek a CAA section 325 exemption from its PSD permit CEMS conditions
because, they argue, compliance with these conditions is not feasible
or reasonable due to unique geographical, meteorological, economic and
other local factors in the Virgin Islands. The Petition and VIWAPA
provide a number of arguments in support of an approval of an
exemption. EPA analyzed each basis for the Petitioner's and VIWAPA's
request as follows:

A. Attainment and Maintenance of National Ambient Air Quality Standards

    Pursuant to section 325 of the Act, the Administrator is not
authorized to exempt a source from requirements under CAA section 110
or part D of subchapter I of the Act necessary to attain or maintain a
national primary ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). Therefore,
whether the requested exemptions will result in nonattainment of a
NAAQS is a threshold requirement for consideration of this, and any
other, CAA section 325 petition. This threshold requirement was
addressed in the Petition and in subsequent information provided by
VIWAPA.
    Because EPA had obtained modeling data from another facility
suggesting that the Island of St. Croix may be close to exceeding the
NAAQS for NOX, EPA requested and reviewed new NOX
modeling data submitted by VIWAPA. EPA sought to determine whether the
Air Quality Control Regions of both St. Croix and St. Thomas as well as
the Class I area of St. John would still be in attainment if EPA were
to approve the Petition for exemption. One of VIWAPA's PSD permits
requires that the nitrogen content of the fuel oil be no greater than
150 ppm. VIWAPA's exclusive fuel oil supplier indicated that it can no
longer supply VIWAPA fuel oil with a nitrogen content specified in the
PSD permit. VIWAPA's supplier will only guarantee fuel oil with a
nitrogen content of no more than 1,000 ppm. Therefore, VIWAPA submitted
air modeling of the potential emissions from combustion of fuel with a
nitrogen content of up to 1,000 ppm. The modeling demonstrates that
properly controlled use of fuel oil with a nitrogen content of 1,000
ppm at VIWAPA's two facilities will not cause an exceedance of the
NAAQS. The modeling demonstrates that VIWAPA has met this threshold
requirement for consideration of the Petition.

B. Statutory and Regulatory Authority for Requiring CEMS

    The Petitioner contends that there is no statutory or regulatory
requirement that mandates the use of CEMS. However, the units in
question are subject to PSD. In PSD permits, like the ones issued to
VIWAPA, EPA routinely requires the use of CEMS to directly and
continuously measure emissions as a means of determining compliance
with PSD Best Available Control Technology (BACT) limits. In the VIWAPA
permits, EPA established BACT limits for NOX and CO and set
limits for opacity and required CEMS to ensure compliance with these
limits. EPA's 1990 Draft New Source Review Workshop Manual indicates
that continuous and quantitative measurements be obtained where
feasible; if not, surrogate parameters must be expressed in the permit.
EPA has consistently applied this policy in its issuance of PSD
permits.
    In reviewing VIWAPA's PSD applications for its PSD affected units,
EPA determined that VIWAPA had not demonstrated that continuous,
quantitative measurements are infeasible, therefore all of VIWAPA's PSD
permits include CEMS requirements to ensure that VIWAPA continually
meets the BACT limits established in its PSD permits.

C. Unique Geographical Location as it Relates to Difficulties in
Obtaining and Retaining CEMS Operators and Contractors

    The Petitioner and VIWAPA indicate that because VIWAPA is located
approximately 1,100 miles from the mainland of the United States, the
Authority has had significant difficulties hiring full-time qualified
technical and engineering personnel to maintain and service CEMS at the
VIWAPA facilities. In addition they indicate that when necessary, the
Authority had been unable to timely obtain contractor assistance due to
difficulties in contractors obtaining flights. Furthermore, the
Petitioner and VIWAPA assert that there are no locally available
vendors that can provide hardware and/or software service. In addition,
the Petitioner and VIWAPA indicated that off-Island contractors are not
always available for the extra two (2) days needed to travel to and
from the Virgin Islands.
    EPA investigated the Petitioner's and VIWAPA's assertions, and has
determined that while some of VIWAPA's difficulties are attributable to
its location, its difficulties with contractors are more likely
attributable to other issues discussed in later sections. In addition,
even sources on the mainland are located in areas which are difficult
to get to within a day. Thus, while EPA recognizes that the travel
distance presents some support for the exemption, it would not, on its
own, be a sufficient basis for approval of the exemption.

D. VIWAPA's Financial Condition as it Relates to Difficulties in
Obtaining and Retaining CEMS Operators and Contractors

    Documents provided by VIWAPA show that it often cannot pay its
contractors on a timely basis. The Virgin Islands Government frequently
delays payments to VIWAPA which, in turn, delays payments to its
contractors. This leads to difficulties in retaining contractors,
resulting in poorly maintained equipment. EPA recognizes

that VIWAPA's financial circumstances create difficulties in obtaining
and retaining CEMS expertise. EPA has determined that these
difficulties warrant a five (5) year approval of the Petition, with the
Conditions specified in Section VII.

E. Summary of Difficulties in Obtaining and Retaining Expertise To
Manage and Maintain Old CEMS

    VIWAPA identified numerous difficulties in obtaining and retaining
qualified technical and engineering personnel and contractors to
maintain and service its CEMS and related data acquisition software.
VIWAPA's CEMS vendor indicated to EPA that it is no longer providing
hardware and software services for VIWAPA's old CEMS because its staff
is no longer trained in supporting systems that are as old as the ones
in place at VIWAPA. VIWAPA has told EPA that it does not have trained
in-house personnel to manage and maintain these systems, and has
indicated that there are no local vendors available to provide such
hardware and software service, and there exists no alternatives for
VIWAPA to keep these old CEMS-related equipment operating. Based upon
VIWAPA's representations as well as our discussions with VIWAPA's CEM's
vendor, EPA agrees that VIWAPA is likely to experience continued
difficulties in obtaining and retaining expertise to manage and
maintain the current antiquated CEMS.

F. Other Relevant Financial Considerations

    The Petitioner stated that VIWAPA's ``scarce resources should not
be wasted on unnecessary and unreliable monitoring.'' EPA does not
agree that such monitoring is unnecessary and unreliable. Monitoring is
a necessary tool for determining compliance with the PSD permit
emission limits. VIWAPA also contends that the CEMS replacement alone
will cost between $900,000 and $1,600,000. EPA hired a financial
analyst to review VIWAPA's financial statements, annual budgets and
other documents submitted in support of the Petition's position on
financial considerations. The analyst determined that the cost of
installation, operation and maintenance of the PSD-required CEMS is
financially feasible. EPA also researched the costs of replacement and
determined them unlikely to be as high as VIWAPA stated.

G. Current Condition of PSD Permit-Required CEMS and Supporting
Software

    The Petitioner and VIWAPA stated that the monitors and data
acquisition system (DAS), which are installed on all but the newly
permitted and constructed Unit 23, have reached the end of their useful
lives. The NOX, CO and old opacity CEMS have been unable to
meet the minimum monitor availability requirements and the monitors
themselves have not been functioning properly, in part, because of
excessive stack flexing and vibration resulting in improper alignment,
etc. EPA's position is that CEMS replacement is expected during the
life of a combustion turbine, as is servicing and repair of CEMS in
order to comply with PSD permit CEMS conditions. EPA has decided that
during the period of the exemption, VIWAPA shall make necessary
improvements to its gas turbines and their associated stacks, to
address the problems that adversely impacted on the operation of the
CEMS at the PSD-permitted units. Addressing the problems and improving
the alternative monitoring system (AMS) will facilitate better
operation and maintenance of new generation CEMS that will be installed
in the future.

H. Attempts To Replace PSD Permit-Required CEMS

    Prior to the Governor's submission of the Petition, VIWAPA sent out
an RFP for purchase, installation and support of new CEMS. Vendors
responding to the RFP indicated that they could not fully accept the
terms specified in the RFP. Upon reviewing the RFP, EPA found that the
RFP required not only that a vendor install, operate and maintain the
CEMS in compliance with the PSD permits, but also that the vendor bear
the liability of any civil penalties resulting from noncompliance with
the PSD permits. EPA determined that this was an unreasonable
requirement to place in the RFP and that it created a barrier to
engaging a CEMS replacement contractor. The Agency also has determined
that commercially available CEMS are far more reliable and easier to
operate than the monitors and data acquisition systems that VIWAPA
currently operates; therefore, VIWAPA should be able to operate these
systems with relatively fewer difficulties. EPA concluded that a
permanent exemption from the CEMS conditions is not warranted based on
VIWAPA's prior contracting experience with vendors. However, as stated
in section III(G), above, a five (5) year exemption will provide
sufficient time for VIWAPA to improve its facilities and, in
particular, its turbines, so that they can effectively use new monitors
and data acquisition systems.

I. Proposed Alternative Monitoring

    The Petitioner and VIWAPA propose using an alternative monitoring
system (AMS) in lieu of compliance with the PSD permit-required CEMS.
EPA determined that using the AMS system instead of CEMS for monitoring
NOX emissions is acceptable for a five (5) year period
provided VIWAPA monitors its compliance by conducting visible emission
readings, performing stack testing and using the portable analyzers.
The AMS would compare the actual water and/or steam injection rates
with the injection rates established through the permit-required stack
testing as well as the stack testing conditions in this proposed
exemption. The AMS includes an alarm system to alert operating
personnel trained to respond whenever operating levels approach or
exceed permit limits. This exemption conditions the use of the proposed
AMS on specific improvements to include recording the hours of
operation, turbine operation load, compliance parameters, and minimum
data availability requirements. The exemption also includes additional
conditions on reporting and recordkeeping to alleviate any ambiguity as
to required submissions and the schedule for such submissions.
    The Agency is proposing additional periodic monitoring conditions,
including the use of portable analyzers to measure CO, O2
and NOX emissions from the stacks. In addition, the Agency
also has determined that the exemption will require annual stack tests,
as discussed in the Governor's petition. During stack testing, VIWAPA
shall establish additional parameters that correlate with compliance
and VIWAPA shall add these parameters to its automated AMS. Properly
operated, an improved AMS should provide necessary compliance
information during the five (5) year period of the exemption and
provide a foundation for determining compliance with the PSD limits
after the exemption terminates. VIWAPA may choose to terminate the AMS
upon implementing CEMS in compliance with Section 165 PSD permit
requirements, this may occur prior to but not later than the end of the
five (5) year period of the exemption.

J. Fuel Supply Changes

    As stated earlier, VIWAPA indicated that its fuel supplier is
currently able to guarantee fuel oil with no greater than 1,000 ppm
nitrogen, rather than fuel oil

with 150 ppm nitrogen-in-fuel content used to establish the BACT limits
in all of VIWAPA's PSD permits other than Unit 23. While EPA has
reviewed and analyzed modeling and other information that VIWAPA
provided in support of the Governor's Petition regarding VIWAPA's use
of fuel oil with greater than 150 ppm nitrogen content, the Agency is
not approving such a fuel change in this exemption. Action on the
section 325 Petition is not the appropriate forum for EPA approval of
PSD permit modification requests. VIWAPA has recently submitted an
application to revise its PSD permits to reflect the higher nitrogen
fuel that is presently being combusted. The Agency is currently
evaluating this application.

K. Status of Recently Installed Opacity CEMS

    VIWAPA argues that, due to geographic and financial difficulties,
it is currently unable to obtain appropriate contractor support for a
CEMS data acquisition system necessary to collect CEMS data including
data relating to opacity monitoring. EPA includes visible emission (VE)
reading requirements in this exemption in lieu of operating the Opacity
CEMS. The Agency determined that for the duration of the approval,
VIWAPA should be exempted from its obligation to comply with PSD
conditions relating to opacity CEMS in part because the Agency
recognized that it would take time to improve the physical condition of
the older existing gas turbines and their associated stacks (e.g.,
reduce excessive stack vibration, stack flexing, and maintain proper
alignment, etc.), which adversely affects the performance of the
opacity monitors. The temporary exemption allows VIWAPA time to improve
the condition of the older existing turbines so that they will not
contribute to poor performance of new opacity CEMS.

L. VIWAPA's Request for Consideration of Exemption From Obligation To
Comply With Unit 23 PSD Permit CEMS Conditions

    Although the Governor submitted the Petition prior to the
construction of Unit 23, VIWAPA claims that the request for an
exemption from CEMS requirements was non-specific and applies to all of
its PSD permitted units. Representatives of the Governor's office and
VIWAPA have repeatedly asserted in subsequent meetings and
correspondence with EPA that the Petition also applies to Unit 23.
Accordingly, EPA reviewed information provided by VIWAPA relating to
the possibility of exempting the Authority from compliance with CEMS
conditions in Unit 23's PSD permit.
    The Agency is not convinced that an exemption of Unit 23 CEMS is
justified. Current generation CEMS and DAS are much easier to operate
and maintain than those currently in place at VIWAPA's other units.
Since Unit 23 is new, it does not suffer from the various operational
problems of the older turbines and its condition will not have a
negative impact on the operation of CEMS. Moreover, EPA has determined
that by operating CEMS at Unit 23, VIWAPA will gain the knowledge and
experience that will assist it in phasing in CEMS installation and
operation at all its units. However, although EPA is not exempting Unit
23 from the CEMS requirements, the exemption provides VIWAPA additional
time to fully comply with the CEMS installation and operation
requirements in its PSD permit for Unit 23. The Conditions pertaining
to Unit 23 are delineated in section VII, entitled ``Conditions of
Approval.''

IV. What are Grounds for Revocation of the Exemption?

    This approval may be revoked or modified in whole or in part, by
the Administrator, if significant changes in circumstances at the
facility occur, if significant violations of the exemption occur, or if
significant changes in the factual circumstances upon which the
approval is based occur. These changes include, but are not limited to,
changes in commitments and modeling information made in the Petition or
in support of the Petition, changes at the facility or in the status of
the Air Quality Control Region, changes in financial status, and
changes in ownership (including privatization--in whole or in part)
that could have an impact upon the facilities' finances or ability to
hire and retain technical and engineering personnel.
    Significant violations also include, but are not be limited to,
failures to meet any and all conditions of this exemption, such as
stack testing, periodic monitoring, improvement of the AMS and water
injection system, and failures to adhere to established compliance
parameters. The exemption requires VIWAPA to bring any such changes to
the attention of the Agency for review as soon as practicable.
    In addition to revocation and/or modification, failure to comply
with the Conditions could result in civil and/or criminal enforcement
action under the CAA.

V. What is EPA's Conclusion?

    Based on EPA's review of the Petition, information and
presentations provided in support of this Petition, EPA has determined
that VIWAPA's unique geographical location and financial circumstances
have caused it difficulties in operating existing CEMS at its older
turbines and difficulties in obtaining and retaining contractors and
staff with expertise to operate and maintain the CEMS. EPA is,
therefore, proposing to approve, with Conditions specified in Section
VII, the Governor's Petition for exemption for a period of five (5)
years. The approval will exempt VIWAPA from its obligation to comply
with the PSD permit CEMS conditions at seven of its eight PSD permitted
combustion turbines and at its two PSD permitted HRSG units. These PSD
permit CEMS conditions address monitoring of NOX, CO and
opacity emissions. During the five (5) year period of the exemption,
VIWAPA is required, in accordance with good air pollution control
practice, to make improvements to its facilities, including but not
limited to the turbines, necessary to ensure proper operation of new
generation CEMS upon termination of this exemption. Additionally, the
Administrator is providing, in this notice, a set period of time for
VIWAPA to comply with its PSD permit CEMS requirements for Unit 23, as
delineated in the Conditions. During the period of this exemption, it
is EPA's expectation that VIWAPA's staff will gain the necessary
experience to properly operate and maintain such equipment at Unit 23,
and then apply this knowledge to the operation of CEMS at the rest of
their units upon termination, if not earlier, of this exemption.
    In summary, the Conditions require: (a) Improvements to VIWAPA's
AMS and water injection system; (b) initial and periodic (annual) stack
tests, (c) ongoing portable analyzer monitoring, (d) visible emissions
readings, (e) record keeping and reporting, and (f) planning for and
installation of new CEMS.
    One of the reasons for EPA's inclusion of Conditions to the
exemption relating to stack testing and portable analyzer monitoring in
conjunction with AMS and water injection system improvement is to
ensure the creation and maintenance of operating parameters which
accurately correlate with VIWAPA's operating conditions at the time of
opacity, NOX and CO limit compliance demonstrations made
during compliance tests conducted in accordance with the New Source
Performance Standards, PSD and this exemption.

VI. What is the Effective Date of the Approval of Petition and Timing
of the Requirements?

    The effective date of the approval is the date of final publication
of the EPA exemption in the Federal Register. The exemption will be in
effect for a period of five (5) years from such date. Under the
proposed exemption, VIWAPA will be allowed to discontinue operation of
its CEMS at all of the PSD affected units, except for Unit 23, which is
being provided a limited time to achieve permanent, consistent
compliance with its PSD permit CEMS conditions, as delineated in
section VII, below.
    Once VIWAPA complies with conditions 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11
and 23, operation of CEMS at PSD permitted units other than Unit 23 can
be discontinued. VIWAPA shall submit Monthly Status Reports delineating
its progress in complying with these Conditions. Once VIWAPA has
complied with the above conditions, VIWAPA shall submit Quarterly
Reports as directed in the Conditions.

VII. What are the Conditions of Approval?

Conditions of Approval

    All of the units affected by this exemption, with the exception of
Unit 23, are subject to conditions 1-32, and conditions 36 and 37
below. The Unit 23 conditions are separately specified. Condition 38
applies to all units. The Conditions are to be in effect for a period
of no more than five (5) years from the effective date of the approval.
    VIWAPA shall conduct initial stack testing, prior to the
discontinuation of the CEMS operation, to establish the water and fuel
injection rates as well as to establish additional compliance
monitoring parameters and their associated compliance values. VIWAPA
shall monitor all of these parameters using its alternate monitoring
system. Any necessary changes to accommodate monitoring of these
parameters shall be in place prior to discontinuation of the CEMS
operation. In addition, a number of Conditions require other methods of
monitoring in lieu of the CEMS operation. These monitoring measures
shall be available and in place prior to discontinuation of the CEMS
operation. For example, the exemption requires VIWAPA to purchase
portable analyzers as well as to submit for EPA approval a sampling
protocol for use of the portable analyzers. In addition, the exemption
requires VIWAPA to have certified visible emissions readers available
on staff to conduct required visible emissions readings. Furthermore,
the exemption requires VIWAPA to complete a third-party audit of the
water injection system to identify any problems associated with the
operation of the system and to correct these problems. Proper operation
of the water injection system is critical because it is the only form
of control of NOX emissions from the affected units.
    Once VIWAPA has complied with conditions 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10,
11, and 23, the operation of the CEMS at PSD permitted units other than
Unit 23 can be discontinued. VIWAPA shall submit Monthly Status Reports
delineating its progress in complying with these specific conditions
until the specific conditions have been adequately addressed.
Thereafter, VIWAPA shall submit Quarterly Reports on ongoing compliance
with these conditions.

Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) Stack Damper

    1. VIWAPA shall demonstrate that, prior to required stack testing,
during simple cycle operation, no air flow goes to the HRSG. Provisions
for making this demonstration shall be included in the stack test
protocol submitted for performance testing. This is necessary to show
that all emissions are correctly recorded by the CEMS when the monitors
are reinstalled. In addition, VIWAPA has agreed and the exemption
requires the elimination of the capability of firing fuel in the HRSG
unit for turbines 15 and 18. VIWAPA shall eliminate the capability of
firing fuel in the HRSG unit for turbines 15 and 18. Within one hundred
twenty (120) days of the approval of the exemption, VIWAPA shall
provide to EPA a certification signed by a corporate representative
indicating that the capability to fire fuel in the HRSG for turbines 15
and 18 has been eliminated.

Stack Testing

    2. VIWAPA shall plan, conduct, and report upon stack emission tests
to be conducted at each PSD permitted gas turbine. VIWAPA shall conduct
stack tests initially within thirty (30) days of EPA protocol approval.
VIWAPA shall complete no later than one hundred eighty (180) days from
publication of the final approval of the Petition, and shall repeat
stack testing every twelve (12) months thereafter. VIWAPA shall provide
EPA at least two (2) weeks notice prior to the date proposed for
conducting stack tests.
    3. VIWAPA shall submit stack testing protocols covering all testing
scenarios and all parameters to be tested and measured (including load,
fuel bound nitrogen, and all AMS parameters, including but not limited
to water/steam and fuel rates) to EPA for review, revision and approval
at least sixty (60) days before each stack test. VIWAPA may, at its
option, submit a separate protocol for each test or combined protocols
covering more than one unit. If combined protocols are submitted,
VIWAPA shall submit for each unit, separate sections, figures, and/or
tables clearly indicating the specific unit, load, fuel, AMS, stack and
sampling configurations and all other unit-specific information. VIWAPA
shall conduct stack tests for each PSD permitted gas turbine during at
least the four loads required by NSPS Subpart GG, or more, as specified
in VIWAPA's current PSD permit. VIWAPA shall include in the stack
testing protocols, provisions for verifying that all flow from units
connected to the HRSG passes through the turbine stack in simple cycle
mode.
    4. VIWAPA shall conduct stack tests to determine compliance with
PSD NOX, and CO emissions limits, and opacity limits as well
as to establish and then assure maintenance of AMS compliance
parameters, which shall be utilized to ensure Federal enforceability.
VIWAPA's Title V permits also require these tests as well as stack
tests for VOC, PM and PM10.
    5. VIWAPA shall determine the nitrogen content of fuel combusted
during stack testing using any of the following ASTM Test Methods:
D2597-94 (reapproved 1994), D6366-99, D4629-02, or D5762-02.
    6. VIWAPA shall recalibrate the water injection system before each
stack test. VIWAPA shall establish new compliance parameter values
including but not limited to water-to-fuel ratios after each stack
test. Periods in which compliance parameters are exceeded shall be
considered violations of the NOX limit.

Periodic Monitoring

    7. VIWAPA shall purchase two (2) Portable Flue Gas Emission
Analyzers, one each for its St. Thomas and St. Croix facilities. In
addition to these analyzers, VIWAPA shall purchase all appropriate
calibration and operational equipment and supplies, and thereafter
shall maintain a sufficient inventory of such on each island. VIWAPA
shall calibrate and operate the instruments in accordance with the
manufacturer's instructions. VIWAPA shall monitor every week for
NOX, CO, O2 and SO2 emissions from the
stack of each PSD affected gas turbine ``available to operate''
(excluding units that are ``down for service'') and that operate a
minimum of five (5) hours per week. VIWAPA shall sample the nitrogen
content of the fuel combusted at the

time of portable analyzer monitoring. VIWAPA shall submit a sampling
protocol which includes a monitoring period it believes acceptable for
determining compliance. This protocol is subject to EPA review,
revision and approval. Should any concentrations measured by the
portable analyzer be in excess of the emission limits in the applicable
permit, VIWAPA shall make any adjustments necessary to the affected
unit to return it to compliance with the emission limit. Within two (2)
days of making any necessary adjustments, VIWAPA shall re-monitor the
affected unit, in accordance with the protocol, to demonstrate
compliance with the emission limit. VIWAPA shall continue this process
until VIWAPA achieves compliance with each PSD-permit emission limit.
    After VIWAPA demonstrates continual compliance with the emission
standards using the portable analyzer for a period of six (6) months,
VIWAPA shall reduce the initial frequency of monitoring to biweekly
(once every two (2) weeks). VIWAPA shall further reduce the subsequent
frequency of monitoring to monthly after a demonstration of continual
compliance of the emission standards using the portable analyzer for a
period of six (6) months. VIWAPA shall not reduce the frequency of the
periodic monitoring using the portable analyzer any further than once
every month. VIWAPA shall revert back to the prior frequency of
periodic monitoring if two (2) consecutive measurements with the
portable analyzer indicate noncompliance with the emission limit.
    During periods that the PSD affected gas turbines operate less than
five (5) hours per week, the exemption allows VIWAPA to forgo the
required portable analyzer monitoring for that weekly period. Where
VIWAPA has not operated a unit for a two-week period and such unit
begins operation greater than five (5) hours per week, VIWAPA shall
conduct the monitoring with the portable analyzer within two (2) days
of the day in which the unit had been operated for more than five (5)
hours that week. If VIWAPA does not operate a unit or operates a unit
for less than five (5) hours per week, VIWAPA shall monitor such a unit
at a lower frequency of no less than once every two (2) months. A unit
shall be considered to be operating when fuel is being combusted
regardless of the capacity at which it is burning the fuel.
    VIWAPA shall submit copies of all data relating to the periodic
sampling and shall be submitted with VIWAPA's quarterly reports. During
periods when stack tests are performed, VIWAPA shall use the portable
flue gas emission analyzer for correlation purposes to verify accuracy.
VIWAPA shall submit for EPA approval its selection of the portable flue
gas analyzer it proposes to use for the periodic sampling. (Examples of
such portable devices include but are not limited to Lancom III by Land
Instrument, Enerac 3000 by Energy Efficiency Systems and PEM 9002 by
Teledyne Analytical Instruments.) This list of examples is not an EPA
pre-endorsement of any of these devices.
    All exceedances of the NOX emission limits measured by
the portable analyzer for the sampling period determined through the
EPA approved sampling protocol shall be considered violations of the
emissions standards.

Improving the Alternative Monitoring System (AMS)

    8. VIWAPA shall monitor the water injection rates and the
established compliance parameters.
    9. VIWAPA shall ensure that the AMS be completely automated and
that mechanisms or safeguards are implemented to ensure that the raw
data cannot be altered.
    10. VIWAPA shall design a data logging system to function and
continue to function at all times, including but not limited to
instances when the water injection system is switched from automatic
operation to manual operation, when water injection pumps are switched,
when the water injection system trips and when sensors malfunction.
    11. VIWAPA shall ensure that the AMS record the specific hours of
operation and operating load of each turbine.
    12. VIWAPA shall keep a log that indicates any instances in which a
compliance parameter is exceeded, the reasons for the exceedance, and
the corrective action(s) taken (Compliance Parameter Log).
    13. VIWAPA shall keep logs of all parameters manually which include
the reasons for system failure and corrective measures when the AMS
system is unable to log data.
    14. VIWAPA shall test alarms weekly to ensure proper operation.
    15. VIWAPA shall ensure that the AMS monitoring system maintains a
data availability of 95% per quarter over all of the hours of the
quarter. VIWAPA shall ensure that the AMS monitoring system, in
conjunction with the manual logging during any period where the AMS is
not in operation, maintain a data availability of 98% per quarter over
all the hours of the quarter.

Water Injection System

    16. Within sixty (60) days of the approval, VIWAPA shall complete a
third-party system-wide evaluation of the water injection system of
each PSD permitted turbine. VIWAPA shall perform the evaluation to
identify and to determine the causes of any system failure, to
determine the integrity of the water injection system, to determine why
operators continually switch water injection pumps and why some pump
switches result in excess emissions being measured at the CEMS and not
the AMS.
    17. Within sixty (60) days of completion of the third-party system-
wide evaluation, VIWAPA shall implement a capital improvement program
to replace all damaged and/or deteriorated equipment relating to the
water injection systems for all PSD permitted turbines and to correct
any equipment, hardware, software, or operational deficiencies revealed
during the audits.
    18. Within sixty (60) days of completion of the third-party system-
wide evaluation, VIWAPA shall ensure that water flow monitors shall be
located as close as possible to the turbine injection points to
minimize false readings caused by leaks downstream, clogged filters, or
unforeseen problems.
    19. Within sixty (60) days of the approval, VIWAPA shall install,
operate and maintain a feed water pretreatment system to remove
minerals that lead to scaling and clogging of the water injection
nozzles.
    20. Within one hundred twenty (120) days of the approval, VIWAPA
shall develop and implement a preventative operation and maintenance
plan (including standard operation procedures) to ensure the proper and
continual operation of the water injection system. Such a plan shall
include, but is not limited to schedules for periodic pump maintenance,
replacing filters, identifying and repairing leaks (temporary and
permanent), and schedules and procedures for calibrations of water and
fuel monitors. VIWAPA shall ensure that good air pollution control
practices are utilized at all times during the operation of the water
injection system.
    21. Within one hundred twenty (120) days of the approval, VIWAPA
shall implement a spare parts inventory program at each facility. The
spare parts inventory program shall contain an inventory of various
replacement parts for routine maintenance. VIWAPA shall maintain lists/
logs of the average frequency at which hardware

components are required to be replaced and the dates of replacement of
such components. VIWAPA shall assess the minimum quantity of each
replacement component that may be maintained based upon evaluation, at
the very least, of the lead and the delivery time for procurement and
the frequency at which each a component is required to be replaced in
the equipment. VIWAPA shall design the spare parts inventory to ensure
minimum water injection system downtime in the event of a water
injection system failure.
    22. VIWAPA shall ensure that at least one technical person or
engineer be available on site at its St. Thomas and St. Croix
facilities at all times who is trained and experienced in operating and
maintaining the water injection system.

Visible Emission Readings

    23. VIWAPA shall have a minimum of three (3) EPA Method 9 certified
visible emission readers on its staff at its St. Thomas facility and
three (3) visible emission readers on its staff at its St. Croix
facility. VIWAPA shall ensure that two (2) certified visible emission
readers be on-site to conduct two (2) consecutive six-minute Method 9
visible emissions readings in accordance with EPA recognized
interpretations of Method 9 for each operating turbine, once during
each day of operation. If these observations demonstrate an exceedance
of the opacity limits, VIWAPA shall continue to conduct visible
emissions observations until the visible emissions readings document
that opacity is below the applicable limits.
    VIWAPA shall be required to increase the frequency of visible
emissions readings to once per eight (8) hour operating shift, during
daylight operation, for a period of thirty (30) operating days on a
unit where there is a total of thirty (30) minutes or more of visible
emissions readings indicating noncompliance with the PSD limit within a
twenty four (24) hour period. During this thirty (30) operating day
period, if there are a total of eighteen (18) minutes or more of
visible emissions readings indicating noncompliance with the PSD limit
within a twenty four (24) hour period, the thirty (30) operating day
period shall be restarted from that day. Readings taken between each
shift must be separated by a minimum of two (2) hours.
    Any periods of exceedance shall be considered violations of the
opacity limitations in the PSD permit. VIWAPA shall document any
periods where it does not conduct the required visible emissions
readings, explaining the reason(s) that it did not perform these
readings. Any visible emissions readings, conducted by EPA and/or
VIDPNR that indicate noncompliance with the PSD limits for the
durations specified above, shall also result in VIWAPA's increasing or
extending the frequency of required visible emissions readings.

Improving the Physical Condition of the Turbines and Associated Stacks

    24. VIWAPA shall take all steps necessary to improve the physical
condition of the gas turbines and associated stacks in order to
eliminate excessive vibration, stack flexing, improper alignment and
any other such problem that adversely affects proper operation of the
CEMS. Within sixty (60) days of this approval, VIWAPA shall provide EPA
with a plan, including a schedule for repairs and improvements, to
ensure that VIWAPA will be able to install and properly operate new
CEMS upon termination of the five (5) year exemption. VIWAPA shall
implement the submitted plan and schedule after review and approval by
EPA.

Reporting and Recordkeeping

    25. VIWAPA shall keep on site records of activities conducted
pursuant to this exemption shall be kept on site for seven (7) years
and shall make these records available to EPA upon request.
    26. VIWAPA shall report to EPA any significant or anticipated
changes in circumstances as prescribed above at the facility as soon as
practicable but no later than 15 days after knowledge of such change.
Significant changes in circumstances include, but are not limited to,
changes at the facility or in the NAAQS attainment area, changes which
could impact upon the maintenance of the NAAQS, changes in financial
status, and changes in ownership (including privatization--in whole or
in part), which could have an impact upon the facilities' finances or
ability to hire and retain technical and engineering personnel.
    27. Within sixty (60) days of the completion of stack testing,
VIWAPA shall submit stack test reports to EPA covering all tests on all
units at its St. Thomas and St. Croix facilities. VIWAPA may, at its
option, submit a report for each unit or a single consolidated report,
as long as all information for all units is clearly identified and
submitted on time. For each test on each unit, the test report(s) shall
include:
     Certified true copies of all raw data collected from each
part of each test for each parameter measured or observed during and
associated with each test, including, for example, all raw data from
the emission tests (both field and laboratory), fuel bound nitrogen
measurements, all AMS parameter measurements, load measurements, all
quality control and/or quality assurance measurements associated with
all of the proceeding, etc.
     Summary sheets, showing, for each test, the values
determined for each measured pollutant along with the applicable
compliance limit,
     Results of all calculations including example calculations
for each step,
     All compliance parameters proposed for each operating
condition or set of conditions, along with tabulated and/or graphical
evidence confirming that those parameter settings would ensure
compliance with the emission limitations.
    28. Within sixty (60) days of completion of the third-party system-
wide evaluation of the water injection systems, VIWAPA shall submit a
report that includes a timetable to correct all problems identified as
well as the preventative and operations maintenance plan to EPA for
review, revision and approval.
    29. Within one hundred twenty (120) days of the approval, VIWAPA
shall submit documentation to demonstrate that data logging for the AMS
is completely automated and that raw data cannot be altered.
    30. VIWAPA shall submit Quarterly reports to EPA covering the
activities performed in accordance with the monitoring requirements for
each calendar quarter and shall postmark these reports by the thirtieth
(30th) day following the end of each calendar quarter. VIWAPA shall
submit such a report for the first quarter, even if it does not include
a full three month period.
    31. VIWAPA shall include in Quarterly reports the following
information about activities which occurred during the reporting
period, for each unit: The AMS, periodic monitoring, visible emissions
observations, fuel-bound nitrogen and sulfur content monitoring, and
improvements to the physical condition of the gas turbines and
associated stacks in accordance with paragraph 24.
     Alternative Monitoring System:
    --Copies of the AMS Compliance Parameter Log documenting each
measured exceedance of the emission standard, indicating, at least the
start and stop times for each exceedance, the hourly average water to
fuel ratio during the exceedance period, the established water to fuel
compliance ratio for the

period, an explanation of the possible causes of the exceedance, with
the number of hours attributed to each cause, the total operating hours
for the unit during the quarter, and the corrective action taken.
    --Copies of the Incident Log, and the Manual Log for each unit,
indicating each time that the AMS became inoperable or performed
improperly or was out of service for any reason, including the start
and stop time of the outage, the reason determined for the outage, and
the corrective action taken.
    --Summary Reports for all water-to-fuel exceedances and AMS
downtimes for the unit during the quarter, including the total number
of exceedance hours and downtime hours, the total number of operating
hours in the quarter, and the percent of total operating hours for
which there were exceedances or downtimes. A listing of the minimum
information required in the summary sheet in the recommended format is
attached as Attachment 1.
     Periodic monitoring, visible emissions observations and
fuel bound nitrogen and sulfur content monitoring:
    --Copies of all data for each monitoring type (periodic, etc.)
    --Supplemental information related to exceedances and missed
samples or data for each monitoring type, including a listing of each
exceedance or missed sample, documentation of the date, time, duration,
cause, and corrective action for each.
    --Summary sheet for each testing and/or monitoring activity. A
listing of the minimum information required in the summary sheet in the
recommended format is attached as Attachment 2.
     EPA reserves the right, following review of any Quarterly
Report, to require changes in subsequent reporting to facilitate
facility response and EPA reviews.
    32. In order for EPA to ensure the acceptability of the format of
the Quarterly Summary Reports and accompanying detailed excess emission
reports, VIWAPA shall submit copies of draft reports to EPA review and
approval within one hundred twenty (120) days of the approval of the
Petition to: Air and Water QA Team, Monitoring and Assessment Branch,
US EPA Region 2, 2890 Woodbridge Ave. Edison, New Jersey 08837.

Unit 23

    33. VIWAPA shall install and performance test the CEMS required by
the PSD permit for Unit 23 in accordance with its PSD permit
conditions, within one hundred eighty (180) days of the effective date
of the approval. Failure to do so, within one hundred eighty (180) days
of the effective date of this approval, will subject VIWAPA to
penalties for non-compliance with its PSD permit.
    34. VIWAPA shall be allowed a period, of up to one hundred eighty
(180) days after all of the CEMS are performance tested but no greater
than one (1) year of the effective date of the approval, to address any
training, operation and maintenance issues as they relate to meeting
the PSD permit CEMS performance conditions. During this period of time,
VIWAPA shall not be penalized for failing to comply with the PSD
performance conditions. After this period, VIWAPA shall be subject to
penalties for any violations of its PSD permit CEMS conditions.
    35. VIWAPA shall submit all reports relating to the CEMS for Unit
23 in accordance with the requirements of its PSD permit.

Future Installation of New CEMS

    36. Within one hundred twenty (120) days of the approval, VIWAPA
shall submit a detailed plan for securing funding to purchase and
install new CEMS at the PSD permitted units. Such a plan shall include
a feasibility option for installation of time-share CEMS which could
result in a significant reduction in the number of CEMS required and
significantly reduce future CEMS purchase, installation and maintenance
costs.
    37. VIWAPA shall implement the submitted plan to ensure funding,
purchase, installation and operation of CEMS at all of the PSD
permitted units by no later than the termination date of this
exemption.

Enforcement

    38. In accordance with the CAA, penalties for violations or
multiple violations of operating, emission, monitoring, and
recordkeeping requirements may be assessed for periods such as when the
AMS system does not automatically log or logs improperly, when the
integrity of the data is not ensured, when the water to fuel injection
rates are below the established minimum water-to-fuel ratio as
monitored by the AMS; when the permitted turbines are operating without
water injection; when records are not maintained; and/or when required
changes to reporting are not made.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Review

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the
terms of Executive Order (EO) 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and
is therefore not subject to review under the EO. It involves a
temporary exemption from existing regulatory requirements for two
sources, requested by a Petition filed by the Governor of the Virgin
Islands on behalf of the regulated sources.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., OMB must
approve all ``collections of information'' by EPA. The Act defines
``collection of information'' as a requirement for ``answers to * * *
identical reporting or record keeping requirements imposed on ten or
more persons * * * '' 44 U.S.C. 3502(3)(A). Because the proposed
exemption only applies to one company, the Paperwork Reduction Act does
not apply.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct 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 rule 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
121.201; (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 impact of today's proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant
impact on a substantial number of small entities. The exemption applies
to only two source and only postpones compliance with PSD permit
conditions for a five (5) year period. 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

    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must prepare a budgetary impact
statement to accompany any proposed or final rule that includes a
Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs to State, local, or
tribal governments in the aggregate; or to the private sector, of $100
million or more. Under section 205, EPA must select the most cost-
effective and least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives
of the rule and is consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203
requires EPA to establish a plan for informing and advising any small
governments that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    EPA has determined that the approval action proposed does not
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the
aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action proposes to
approve a waiver under Federal law, and imposes no new requirements.
Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal
governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces
Executive Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 (Enhancing the
Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132 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.'' This proposed rule does not have federalism implications.
    It will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132, because it merely
propose approval of a waiver from a Federal standard, and does not
alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the CAA. Thus, the requirements of
Section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.

F. Executive Order 13175, Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (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.'' This proposed rule does not
have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175.
    Today's proposed rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve
or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this rule.

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

    Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (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.
    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does
not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or
safety risks.

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

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

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.
    This proposed rulemaking involves technical standards. EPA proposes
the use of the following ASTM Test Methods: D2597-994, D6366-99, D4629-
02 or D5762-02 for measuring the nitrogen content of fuel. They are
available from ASTM International and will help insure compliance with
the conditions of this action. EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of
the proposed rulemaking and, specifically, invites the public to
identify potentially-applicable voluntary consensus standards and to
explain why such standards should be used in this regulation.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 69

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

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

    Dated: December 7, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E6-21198 Filed 12-12-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AIR, PESTICIDES & TOXICS MANAGEMENT DIVISION 61 Forsyth St., S. W. Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Fax Number: 404/ 562 9095 Electronic Transmission MEMORANDUM DATE: October 19, 1999 SUBJ: Initial EPA Comments on SCE& G's Canadys Station FROM: Scott Miller, Environmental Engineer Operating Source Section, ARTB TO: Mr. Matt Wike South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control cc: Mr. Robert Brown, Permit Manager South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control Below are initial comments from EPA Region 4 on the above referenced source. Our comments are divided into two categories: 1) Significant Comments and 2) General Comments. Significant comments are defined as those comments that would trigger an objection under 40 CFR Part 70. Given that we have several significant comments on this permit, which was originally submitted as a draft/ proposed permit, EPA no longer considers the permit eligible for parallel review. Please contact me at your convenience in order that we may seek to resolve these issues prior to your submittal of a proposed permit for this source. You may reach me at ( 404) 562 9120. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Significant Comments 1. The periodic monitoring for particulate matter from the electric utility boilers in permit condition 6. B. 1 on page 23 is inadequate. The only monitoring is an annual stack test. This monitoring is not frequent enough since the sources can not in good faith certify compliance with the particulate matter standard for all times during the year. EPA understands that the utility companies desire to have the same monitoring requirements in their title V permits in South Carolina as they do in North Carolina. It should be noted that although the North Carolina electric utility permits were initially issued with this annual test requirement, these same North Carolina permits have been rescinded, and EPA has informed North Carolina that the monitoring requirements must be changed. EPA maintains that once a year monitoring is not adequate, and EPA does not plan on approving this level of monitoring in any state in Region 4. One approach that the State may want to consider is the use of continuous opacity monitoring data to show compliance with the particulate emission standard. The condition given below is one acceptable way for the State to implement periodic monitoring at the utilities to show compliance with the relevant particulate emission rate:

" Pursuant to Regulation 401 KAR 50: 035, Section 7( 1)( c), to meet the periodic monitoring requirement for particulate, the permittee shall use a continuous opacity monitor ( COM). Excluding the startup, shutdown, and once per hour exemption periods, if any six minute average opacity value exceeds the opacity standard, the permittee shall, as appropriate, initiate an inspection of the control equipment and/ or the COM system and make the necessary repairs. If five ( 5) percent or greater of COM data ( excluding startup, shutdown, and malfunction periods, data averaged over six minute period) recorded in a calendar quarter show excursions above the opacity standard, the permittee shall perform a stack test in the following calendar quarter to demonstrate compliance with the particulate standard while operating at representative conditions. The permittee shall submit a compliance test protocol as required by condition Section G( a)( 20) of this permit before conducting the test. The Division may waive this testing requirement upon a demonstration that the cause( s) of the excursions has been corrected, or may require stack tests at any time pursuant to Regulation 401 KAR 50: 045, Performance tests."

The Region's comments on this approach are attached to this letter.

Another similar approach accepted by the Region for facilities that do not generally operate near the allowable particulate emission rate is as follows:

E6. The particulate emissions from this fuel burning installation shall not exceed 0.105 pounds per million Btu of heat input as specified in Paragraph 1200 3 6. 02( 1) of the Tennessee Air Pollution Control Regulations ( TAPCR).

Compliance Method: Monitoring of this fuelburning source for compliance with the applicable particulate emissions limitations shall be conducted by stack testing in accordance with 40 CFR60, Appendix A, Method 17. This testing shall be performed on a biennial basis and a particulate source test report shall be filed with the Technical Secretary within 60 days after completion of the testing. The source test shall be conducted in accordance with specifications for source sampling given in Chapter 1200 3 12 of the Tennessee Air Pollution Control Regulations. The continuous in stack opacity monitor( s) shall be fully operational prior to and during this compliance testing. The opacity data generated during this compliance testing shall be incorporated into the test report.

Ten ( 10) days prior to conducting the source test, the permittee shall provide notice of such test of the Technical Secretary to afford him the opportunity to have an observer present.

Should atmospheric sulfates ever become an issue, the Division will reassess the applicability of the test procedure as it relates to this issue. This is per the October 25, 1977 letter to Dr. Peter A. Krenkel, P. E.

Compliance with condition E8 of the permit shall be used as an indicator to determine whether compliance with this condition should be confirmed with a Method 17 test. Within sixty ( 60) days of an exceedance of the de minimis criteria specified in condition E8, the facility will conduct a Method 17 test.

TAPCR 1200 3 9. 02( 11)( e) 1.( iii)

E8. The visible emissions from each stack of this fuel burning installation shall not exceed twenty ( 20) percent opacity except for one  six ( 6) minute period per one ( 1) hour of not more than forty ( 40) percent opacity as specified in Paragraph 1200 3 5. 01( 1) of the Tennessee Air Pollution Control Regulations.

Compliance Method: Consistent with the provisions of Paragraph 1200 3 5. 03( 5) of the Regulations, compliance with the applicable visible emissions standards shall be determined from data generated by the opacity monitoring system, provided the quality assurance and operational availability requirements set forth in this permit are met.

Consistent with the provisions of Rule 1200 3 20. 06 of the Tennessee Air Pollution Control Regulations, no notice of violation shall be automatically issued for periods of visible emissions from this fuel burning installation that are in excess of the applicable visible emission standard so long as the total amount of time that the fuel burning installation is exceeding the applicable visible emission standard ( excluding periods of permitted startup, permitted shutdown, or malfunction and periods when the fuel burning installation is not operating) is not in excess of two ( 2) percent of the total amount of time in a calendar quarter. This exemption is applicable provided that good operational and maintenance practices are utilized for both the fuel burning equipment and the associated air pollution control equipment, the required ninety five ( 95) percent operational availability of the opacity monitoring system is maintained, and that no more than one exceedance of greater than twenty four ( 24) hours duration occurs per calendar year.

Written responses to the quarterly reports of excess emissions shall constitute prima facie evidence of compliance with the applicable visible emission standard. For purposes of annual certification of compliance with the applicable visible emissions condition, the acceptance, by the Division, of the quarterly reports of excess emissions shall be the basis of said certification.

TAPCR 1200 3 20. 06 2. In Table 6.1 Monitoring and Reporting, the facility is required to make one annual visible emissions inspection to demonstrate compliance with 20% and 40% opacity regulations for emission unit 10 ( the coal handling system). The Region believes that more frequent periodic monitoring is necessary to determine the compliance status of the coal handling system with applicable opacity standards. One acceptable approach to periodic monitoring for the facility in determining compliance with the opacity standard:

" The facility shall do a qualitative emissions evaluation on a daily basis for those emission sources controlled by a control device ( i. e. baghouse). Should the observer see visible emissions, the emissions observer must perform an EPA Method 9 reading and log the results of such a reading. For emission units that are uncontrolled, the facility will conduct an annual EPA Method 9 reading to determine compliance with the applicable opacity standard."

General 1. Permit condition 6. B. 11 on page 25 should be updated to clarify that the continuous opacity monitoring system data is being used to satisfy the opacity periodic monitoring requirement under title V of the Clean Air Act to demonstrate compliance with the applicable opacity limit of 40%. The title V permit should be clear on this point since the language in permit condition 6. B. 11 may give one the mistaken belief that compliance with the 40% opacity standard will be determined based on an annual Method 9 test. One way to effect such a clarification would be to add the following language to permit condition 6. B. 11:

" The data generated by the COMS is the periodic monitoring method chosen to assure compliance with the 40% opacity standard."

2. Permit condition 6. B. 4 on page 24 should be updated to clarify that the quarterly continuous emissions monitoring report for sulfur dioxide is to be based on the CEMS data except when the CEMS data is not available. When the CEMS data is not available, fuel sampling analysis would serve as an acceptable substitute during CEMS unavailability.

3. The Btu weighted annual emission rate and the Btu weighted annual average emission rate indicated on the Phase II NOx Averaging plan submitted by South Carolina Electric and Gas Company should be rounded to the nearest one hundredth.

4. Any Phase II NOx Compliance Plans and Averaging Plans attached to the proposed phase II permits for these sources should be clearly identified under Section 4 of the proposed permits as enforceable parts of the Phase II permits ( e. g., " The acid rain permit application ( dated   /   /   ) , Phase II NOx Compliance Plan ( dated   /   /   ) and the Phase II NOx Averaging Plan ( dated   /   /   ) are incorporate into the permit and constitute enforceable parts of the permit).

5. The regulatory citation for the NOx limit under Section 2 of the proposed Acid Rain Permit for Canadys Station units " CAN1" and " CAN2" is in error. The NOx limit of 0.40 lb/ mmBtu for tangentially fired boilers is required under 40 CFR 76.5( a)( 1) rather than 40 CFR 76.5( a)( 2). The permit should be revised to indicate the appropriate regulatory citation.


[Federal Register: May 22, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 100)]
[Notices]
[Page 29764-29769]
[DOCID:fr22my08-55]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[FDA No. 225-08-2000]

Memorandum of Understanding With the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Mobile District

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is providing notice of
a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between FDA and the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, Mobile District. This MOU establishes a mutual framework
governing the respective responsibilities of the parties for the
provision of health services through the Corps' Regional Occupational
Health Center to FDA employees at the FDA Gulf Coast Seafood
Laboratory. Goods and services the Corps may provide include, but are
not limited to, physicals at age-appropriate intervals, referral of
employees to private physicians, prevention programs related to health,
and other related goods and services as meet the criteria and standards
of the Public Health Service, immunizations for influenza and tetanus,
and safety and environmental counseling

DATES: The agreement became effective April 28, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julia Pryor, Center for Food Safety
and Nutrition, rm. 122 (HFS-400), Food and Drug Administration, P.O.
Box 158, One Iberville Dr., Dauphin Island, AL 36528,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 21 CFR 20.108(c), which
states that all written agreements and MOUs between FDA and others
shall be published in the Federal Register, the agency is publishing
notice of this MOU.

    Dated: May 13, 2008.
Jeffrey Shuren,
Associate Commissioner for Policy and Planning.
BILLING CODE 4160-01-S

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22MY08.005

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22MY08.006

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22MY08.007

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22MY08.008

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22MY08.009

[FR Doc. E8-11521 Filed 5-21-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-C


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 177 (Monday, September 14, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 55164]
[FR Doc No: 2015-23071]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Sixteenth Meeting: NextGen Advisory Committee (NAC)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of Sixteenth NextGen Advisory committee meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the
sixteenth NextGen Advisory Committee meeting.

DATES: The meeting will be held October 8th from 9:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at FedEx Express Headquarters, 3855
Airways Boulevard, Module D, 3rd Floor, Memphis, TN 38116, Tel: (202)
330-0652.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 833-
9339, fax at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org or Andy
Cebula, NAC Secretary, RTCA, Inc<EMAIL_ADDRESS>(202) 330-0652.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is
hereby given for a meeting of the NextGen Advisory Committee. The
agenda will include the following:

Thursday, October 8, 2015

1. Opening of Meeting/Introduction of NAC Members--Chairman Richard
Anderson, Chief Executive Officer, Delta Air Lines, Inc.
2. Official Statement of Designated Federal Official--The Honorable
Mike Whitaker, FAA Deputy Administrator
3. Review and Approval of June 5, 2015 Meeting Summary
4. Chairman's Report--Chairman Anderson
5. FAA Report--Mr. Whitaker
6. NextGen Integration Working Group (NIWG) Reports & Discussion--
DataComm, Multiple Runway Operations, Performance Based Navigation,
Surface
7. Metrics: Measuring Effects of Implementations--Overview of Reporting
Process; FAA Actions on Performance Reporting; Industry Performance
Tracking-vendor presentation
8. ADS-B--Status of implementation; Spaced based deployment, oceanic
surveillance, common weather picture
9. Performance Based Navigation (PBN) National Airspace System
Navigation Strategy
10. NextGen Plan
11. Summary of meeting and next steps--DFO and NAC Chairman Closing
Comments
12. Other business
13. Adjourn
    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Contact Betty Reschenberg
at<PHONE_NUMBER> or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>to register. In order for
US Citizens to pre-register, please provide your first and last name
(as it appears on your state Driver's License or Identification);
employer's name and address; and phone number. In order to Non-US
Citizens to pre-register, please provide your full name (as it appears
on your passport); country of citizenship; passport and Visa numbers,
type and expiration date; employer name and address; and phone number.
Members of the public may present a written statement to the committee
at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 10, 2015.
Latasha Robinson,
Management & Program Analyst, Next Generation, Enterprise Support
Services Division, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2015-23071 Filed 9-11-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P