with the assertion of the affirmative defense might entail. The EPA's
estimate for the required notification, reports and records, including
the root cause analysis associated with a single incident totals
approximately $3,375, and is based on the time and effort required of a
source to review relevant data, interview plant employees and document
the events surrounding a malfunction that has caused a violation of an
emission limit. The estimate also includes time to produce and retain
the record and reports for submission to the EPA.
    The EPA provides this illustrative estimate of this burden because
these costs are only incurred if there has been a violation and a
source chooses to take advantage of the affirmative defense. Given the
variety of circumstances under which malfunctions could occur, as well
as differences among sources' operation and maintenance practices, the
EPA cannot reliably predict the severity and frequency of malfunction-
related excess emissions events for a particular source. It is
important to note that the EPA has no basis currently for estimating
the number of malfunctions that would qualify for an affirmative
defense. Current historical records would be an inappropriate basis, as
source owners or operators previously operated their facilities in
recognition that they were exempt from the requirement to comply with
emissions standards during malfunctions. Of the number of violation
events reported by source operators, only a small number would be
expected to result from a malfunction (based on the definition of a
malfunction in 40 CFR 60.2), and only a subset of violations caused by
malfunctions would result in the source choosing to assert the
affirmative defense. Thus, the EPA believes the number of instances in
which source operators might be expected to avail themselves of the
affirmative defense will be extremely small.
    For this reason, the EPA estimates no more than two such
occurrences for all sources subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart BBa over
the 3-year period covered by the ICR. The EPA expects to gather
information on such events in the future and will revise this estimate
as better information becomes available.
    The annual burden for this information collection averaged over the
first 3 years of this ICR is estimated to total 1,905 labor-hours per
year at a cost of $186,324/yr. The annualized capital costs are
estimated at $411,300 per year. The annual O&M costs are $155,880. The
total annualized capital and O&M costs are $567,180 per year. Burden is
defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
    To comment on the agency's need for this information, the accuracy
of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for
minimizing respondent burden, the EPA has established a public docket
for this rule, which includes this ICR, under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2012-0640. Submit any comments related to the ICR to the EPA and
OMB. See ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this notice for where to
submit comments to the EPA. Send comments to OMB at the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,
725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for
the EPA. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR
between 30 and 60 days after May 23, 2013, a comment to OMB is best
assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it by June 24, 2013.
The final rule will respond to any OMB or public comments on the
information collection requirements contained in this proposal.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act 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 this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities (SISNOSE). Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this rule on small
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined
by the Small Business Administration's 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 impacts of this proposed rule on
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a SISNOSE.
This certification is based on the economic impact of this action to
all affected small entities. Only two small entities may be impacted by
this proposed rule. The EPA estimates that all affected small entities
will have annualized costs of less than 0.1 percent of their sales. The
EPA concludes that there is no SISNOSE for this rule.
    For more information on the small entity impacts associated with
this proposed rule, please refer to the Economic Impact and Small
Business Analyses in the public docket. Although this proposed rule
would not have a SISNOSE, the EPA nonetheless tried to reduce the
impact of this proposed rule on small entities. When developing these
proposed standards, the EPA took special steps to ensure that the
burdens imposed on small entities were minimal. The EPA conducted
several meetings with the industry trade association to discuss
regulatory options and the corresponding burden on industry, such as
recordkeeping and reporting, and impacts on existing sources that are
modified. The EPA continues 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

    This rule does not contain a federal mandate that may result in
expenditures

of $100 million or more for state, local and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or to the private sector in any 1 year. This proposed rule
is not expected to impact state, local or tribal governments. The
nationwide annualized cost of this proposed rule for affected
industrial sources is estimated to be $389,900/yr. Thus, this rule is
not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
    This rule is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of
UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This rule will not
apply to such governments and will not impose any obligations upon
them.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as
specified in Executive Order 13132. None of the facilities subject to
this action are owned or operated by state governments and nothing in
this proposal will supersede state regulations. Thus, Executive Order
13132 does not apply to this proposed rule. In the spirit of Executive
Order 13132, and consistent with the EPA policy to promote
communications between the EPA and state and local governments, the EPA
specifically solicits comment on this proposed rule from state and
local officials.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). It will 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. This proposed rule
imposes requirements on owners and operators of kraft pulp mills and
not tribal governments. The EPA does not know of any kraft pulp mills
owned or operated by Indian tribal governments. However, if there are
any, the effect of this proposed rule on communities of tribal
governments would not be unique or disproportionate to the effect on
other communities. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this
action. The EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this
proposed rule from tribal officials.

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

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 F.R. 19885, April 22,
1997) as applying to those regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of
the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This
action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is based
solely on technology performance.

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

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in
Executive Order 13211 (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 NTTAA of 1995, Public Law 104-113 (15 U.S.C.
272 note), directs the EPA to use VCS 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,
business practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. The
NTTAA directs the EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations
when the Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS.
    This proposed rulemaking involves technical standards. The EPA
proposes to use one VCS in this proposed rule. The VCS, ASME PTC 19.10-
1981, ``Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses,'' is cited in this proposed rule
for its manual method of measuring the content of the exhaust gas as an
acceptable alternative to EPA Method 3B of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-
2. This standard is available at http://www.asme.org or by mail at the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), P.O. Box 2900,
Fairfield, NJ 07007-2900; or at Global Engineering Documents, Sales
Department, 15 Inverness Way East, Englewood, CO 80112.
    The EPA has identified two other VCS as being potentially
applicable to this proposed rule. The first, ASTM D7520-09, is an
alternative to Method 9 (see part 60, appendix A-4 for a description of
Method 9). This rule currently provides the use of continuous opacity
monitors as an alternate to Method 9; therefore the EPA has decided not
to use ASTM D7520-09 in this rulemaking. The second, ANSI/ASME PTC 19-
10-1981-Part 10, is an alternative to Method 16A (see part 60, appendix
A-6 for a description of Method 16A). The EPA is incorporating this VCS
as an alternative to Method 3B above, but is not incorporating it as an
alternative to Method 16A because it is an alternate for only the
manual portion and not the instrumental portion of Method 16A. Given
that sources are already allowed four EPA methods for measuring TRS
(Methods 16, 16A, 16B and 16C), and that the VCS is only partially
applicable, the EPA has decided not to use this VCS in this rulemaking.
See the docket for this proposed rule for the reasons for these
determinations.
    The EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of the proposed rulemaking
and specifically invites the public to identify potentially applicable
VCS and to explain why such standards should be used in this
regulation.

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

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs,
policies and activities on minority populations and low-income
populations in the United States.
    The EPA has concluded that it is not practicable to determine
whether there would be disproportionately high and adverse human health
or environmental effects on minority, low income or indigenous
populations from this proposed rule as it is unknown where new
facilities will be located and the EPA does not expect new facilities
to be built. However, the agency has reviewed the areas surrounding all
existing kraft pulp mills to determine if there is an
overrepresentation of minority, low income or indigenous populations
near the sources such that they may currently face disproportionate
risks from pollutants.
    To gain a better understanding of the source category and near
source populations, the EPA conducted a demographic analysis on the
source

category for this rulemaking. This analysis only gives some indication
of the prevalence of subpopulations that may be exposed to air
pollution from the sources and, therefore, would be those populations
that may be expected to benefit most from this regulation; it does not
identify the demographic characteristics of the most highly affected
individuals or communities, nor does it quantify the level of risk
faced by those individuals or communities. The data show that most
demographic categories were below or within 20 percent of their
corresponding national averages except for the African American
population percentage within 3 miles of any source potentially affected
by this rulemaking. This segment of the population exceeds the national
average by 5 percentage points (18 percent vs. 13 percent), or plus 38
percent. There is no indication that this segment of the population
faces an unacceptable risk from emissions from these sources. However,
the additional information that will be collected from the increase in
testing requirements is expected to better inform the agency of the
emissions associated with this source category. This will ensure better
compliance with this rule, and will result in this rule being more
protective of human health. The demographic analysis results and the
details concerning their development are presented in the September 18,
2012, memorandum titled, Environmental Justice Review: Kraft Pulp Mills
NSPS, a copy of which is available in the docket for this action (EPA-
HQ-OAR-2012-0640).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: May 14, 2013.
Bob Perciasepe,
Acting EPA Administrator.
    40 CFR part 60 is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES

0
1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart A--[Amended]

0
2. Section 60.17 is amended by revising paragraph (h)(4) to read as
follows:

Sec.  60.17  Incorporations by reference.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *
    (4) ANSI/ASME PTC 19.10-1981, Flue and Exhaust Gas Analyses [Part
10, Instruments and Apparatus], (Issued August 31, 1981), IBR approved
for Sec.  60.56c(b), Sec.  60.63(f), Sec.  60.104a(d), (h), (i), and
(j), Sec.  60.105a(d), (f), and (g), Sec.  60.106(e), Sec.  60.106a(a),
Sec.  60.107a(a), (c), and (e), Sec.  60.285a(f), tables 1 and 3 of
subpart EEEE, tables 2 and 4 of subpart FFFF, table 2 of subpart JJJJ,
Sec.  60.2145(s), Sec.  60.2145(t), Sec.  60.2710(s), Sec.  60.2710(t),
Sec.  60.2710(w), Sec.  60.2730(q), Sec.  60.4415(a), Sec.  60.4900(b),
Sec.  60.5220(b), tables 1 and 2 to subpart LLLL, tables 2 and 3 to
subpart MMMM, Sec.  60.5406(c), and Sec.  60.5413(b).
* * * * *
0
3. Section 60.280 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as
follows:

Sec.  60.280  Applicability and designation of affected facility.

* * * * *
    (b) Except as noted in Sec.  60.283(a)(1)(iv), any facility under
paragraph (a) of this section that commences construction,
reconstruction, or modification after September 24, 1976, and on or
before May 23, 2013 is subject to the requirements of this subpart. Any
facility under paragraph (a) of this section that commences
construction, reconstruction, or modification after May 23, 2013 is
subject to the requirements of subpart BBa of this part.
0
4. Add subpart BBa to read as follows:

Subpart BBa--Standards of Performance for Kraft Pulp Mill Affected
Sources for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification
Commenced After May 23, 2013

Sec.
60.280a Applicability and designation of affected facility.
60.281a Definitions.
60.282a Standard for filterable particulate matter.
60.283a Standard for total reduced sulfur (TRS).
60.284a Monitoring of emissions and operations.
60.285a Test methods and procedures.
60.286a Affirmative defense for violations of emission standards
during malfunction.
60.287a Recordkeeping.
60.288a Reporting.

Subpart BBa--Standards of Performance for Kraft Pulp Mill Affected
Sources for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification
Commenced After May 23, 2013

Sec.  60.280a  Applicability and designation of affected facility.

    (a) The provisions of this subpart are applicable to the following
affected facilities in kraft pulp mills: Digester system, brown stock
washer system, multiple-effect evaporator system, recovery furnace,
smelt dissolving tank, lime kiln, and condensate stripper system. In
pulp mills where kraft pulping is combined with neutral sulfite
semichemical pulping, the provisions of this subpart are applicable
when any portion of the material charged to an affected facility is
produced by the kraft pulping operation.
    (b) Except as noted in Sec.  60.283a(a)(1)(iv), any facility under
paragraph (a) of this section that commences construction,
reconstruction, or modification after May 23, 2013, is subject to the
requirements of this subpart.

Sec.  60.281a  Definitions.

    As used in this subpart, all terms not defined herein must have the
same meaning given them in the Act and in subpart A of this part.
    Affirmative defense means, in the context of an enforcement
proceeding, a response or defense put forward by a defendant, regarding
which the defendant has the burden of proof, and the merits of which
are independently and objectively evaluated in a judicial or
administrative proceeding.
    Black liquor oxidation system means the vessels used to oxidize,
with air or oxygen, the black liquor, and associated storage tank(s).
    Black liquor solids (BLS) means the dry weight of the solids which
enter the recovery furnace in the black liquor.
    Brown stock washer system means brown stock washers and associated
knotters, vacuum pumps, and filtrate tanks used to wash the pulp
following the digester system. Diffusion washers are excluded from this
definition.
    Condensable particulate matter, for purposes of this subpart, means
particulate matter measured by EPA Method 202 of Appendix M of part 51
of this chapter that is vapor phase at stack conditions, but condenses
and/or reacts upon cooling and dilution in the ambient air to form
solid or liquid PM immediately after discharge from the stack.
    Condensate stripper system means a column, and associated
condensers,

used to strip, with air or steam, TRS compounds from condensate streams
from various processes within a kraft pulp mill.
    Cross recovery furnace means a furnace used to recover chemicals
consisting primarily of sodium and sulfur compounds by burning black
liquor which on a quarterly basis contains more than 7 weight percent
of the total pulp solids from the neutral sulfite semichemical process
and has a green liquor sulfidity of more than 28 percent.
    Digester system means each continuous digester or each batch
digester used for the cooking of wood in white liquor, and associated
flash tank(s), blow tank(s), chip steamer(s), and condenser(s).
    Filterable particulate matter, for purposes of this subpart, means
particulate matter measured by EPA Method 5 of Appendix A-3 of this
part.
    Green liquor sulfidity means the sulfidity of the liquor which
leaves the smelt dissolving tank.
    Kraft pulp mill means any stationary source which produces pulp
from wood by cooking (digesting) wood chips in a water solution of
sodium hydroxide and sodium sulfide (white liquor) at high temperature
and pressure. Regeneration of the cooking chemicals through a recovery
process is also considered part of the kraft pulp mill.
    Lime kiln means a unit used to calcine lime mud, which consists
primarily of calcium carbonate, into quicklime, which is calcium oxide.
    Monitoring system malfunction means a sudden, infrequent, not
reasonably preventable failure of the monitoring system to provide
valid data. Monitoring system failures that are caused in part by poor
maintenance or careless operation are not malfunctions. The owner or
operator is required to implement monitoring system repairs in response
to monitoring system malfunctions or out-of-control periods, and to
return the monitoring system to operation as expeditiously as
practicable.
    Multiple-effect evaporator system means the multiple-effect
evaporators and associated condenser(s) and hotwell(s) used to
concentrate the spent cooking liquid that is separated from the pulp
(black liquor).
    Neutral sulfite semichemical pulping operation means any operation
in which pulp is produced from wood by cooking (digesting) wood chips
in a solution of sodium sulfite and sodium bicarbonate, followed by
mechanical defibrating (grinding).
    Recovery furnace means either a straight kraft recovery furnace or
a cross recovery furnace, and includes the direct-contact evaporator
for a direct-contact furnace.
    Smelt dissolving tank means a vessel used for dissolving the smelt
collected from the recovery furnace.
    Straight kraft recovery furnace means a furnace used to recover
chemicals consisting primarily of sodium and sulfur compounds by
burning black liquor which on a quarterly basis contains 7 weight
percent or less of the total pulp solids from the neutral sulfite
semichemical process or has green liquor sulfidity of 28 percent or
less.
    Total reduced sulfur (TRS) means the sum of the sulfur compounds
hydrogen sulfide, methyl mercaptan, dimethyl sulfide, and dimethyl
disulfide that are released during the kraft pulping operation and
measured by Method 16 of Appendix A-6 of this part.

Sec.  60.282a  Standard for filterable particulate matter.

    (a) On and after the date on which the performance test required to
be conducted by Sec.  60.8 is completed, no owner or operator subject
to the provisions of this subpart must cause to be discharged into the
atmosphere:
    (1) From any modified recovery furnace any gases which:
    (i) Contain filterable particulate matter in excess of 0.10 g/dscm
(0.044 gr/dscf) corrected to 8 percent oxygen.
    (ii) Exhibit 20 percent opacity or greater, where an electrostatic
precipitator (ESP) emission control device is used.
    (2) From any new or reconstructed recovery furnace any gases which:
    (i) Contain filterable particulate matter in excess of 0.034 g/dscm
(0.015 gr/dscf) corrected to 8 percent oxygen.
    (ii) Exhibit 20 percent opacity or greater, where an ESP emission
control device is used.
    (3) From any modified or reconstructed smelt dissolving tank, or
from any new smelt dissolving tank that is not associated with a new or
reconstructed recovery furnace subject to the provisions of paragraph
(a)(2) of this section, any gases which contain filterable particulate
matter in excess of 0.1 g/kg black liquor solids (dry weight) [0.2 lb/
ton black liquor solids (dry weight)].
    (4) From any new smelt dissolving tank associated with a new or
reconstructed recovery furnace subject to the provisions of paragraph
(a)(2) of this section, any gases which contain filterable particulate
matter in excess of 0.060 g/kg black liquor solids (dry weight) [0.12
lb/ton black liquor solids (dry weight)].
    (5) From any modified lime kiln any gases which:
    (i) Contain filterable particulate matter in excess of 0.15 g/dscm
(0.064 gr/dscf) corrected to 10 percent oxygen.
    (ii) Exhibit 20 percent opacity or greater, where an ESP emission
control device is used.
    (6) From any new or reconstructed lime kiln any gases which:
    (i) Contain filterable particulate matter in excess of 0.023 g/dscm
(0.010 gr/dscf) corrected to 10 percent oxygen.
    (ii) Exhibit 20 percent opacity or greater, where an ESP emission
control device is used.
    (b) The standards in this section apply at all times.
    (c) The exemptions to opacity standards under 40 CFR 60.11(c) do
not apply to subpart BBa.

Sec.  60.283a  Standard for total reduced sulfur (TRS).

    (a) On and after the date on which the performance test required to
be conducted by Sec.  60.8 is completed, no owner or operator subject
to the provisions of this subpart must cause to be discharged into the
atmosphere:
    (1) From any digester system, brown stock washer system, multiple-
effect evaporator system, or condensate stripper system any gases which
contain TRS in excess of 5 ppm by volume on a dry basis, corrected to
10 percent oxygen, unless one of the following conditions are met:
    (i) The gases are combusted in a lime kiln subject to the
provisions of either paragraph (a)(5) of this section or Sec.
60.283(a)(5) of subpart BB of this part; or
    (ii) The gases are combusted in a recovery furnace subject to the
provisions of either paragraphs (a)(2) or (a)(3) of this section or
Sec.  60.283(a)(2) or (a)(3) of subpart BB of this part; or
    (iii) The gases are combusted with other waste gases in an
incinerator or other device, or combusted in a lime kiln or recovery
furnace not subject to the provisions of this subpart (or subpart BB of
this part), and are subjected to a minimum temperature of 650 [deg]C
(1200 [deg]F) for at least 0.5 second; or
    (iv) It has been demonstrated to the Administrator's satisfaction
by the owner or operator that incinerating the exhaust gases from a
new, modified, or reconstructed brown stock washer system is
technologically or economically unfeasible. Any exempt system will
become subject to the provisions of this subpart if the facility is
changed so that the gases can be incinerated.
    (v) The gases from the digester system, brown stock washer system,
or condensate stripper system are

controlled by a means other than combustion. In this case, this system
must not discharge any gases to the atmosphere which contain TRS in
excess of 5 ppm by volume on a dry basis, uncorrected for oxygen
content.
    (vi) The uncontrolled exhaust gases from a new, modified, or
reconstructed digester system contain TRS less than 0.005 g/kg air
dried pulp (ADP) (0.01 lb/ton ADP).
    (2) From any straight kraft recovery furnace any gases which
contain TRS in excess of 5 ppm by volume on a dry basis, corrected to 8
percent oxygen.
    (3) From any cross recovery furnace any gases which contain TRS in
excess of 25 ppm by volume on a dry basis, corrected to 8 percent
oxygen.
    (4) From any smelt dissolving tank any gases which contain TRS in
excess of 0.016 g/kg black liquor solids as H2S (0.033 lb/
ton black liquor solids as H2S).
    (5) From any lime kiln any gases which contain TRS in excess of 8
ppm by volume on a dry basis, corrected to 10 percent oxygen.
    (b) The standards in this section apply at all times.

Sec.  60.284a  Monitoring of emissions and operations.

    (a) Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this subpart
must install, calibrate, maintain, and operate the continuous
monitoring systems specified in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this
section:
    (1) A continuous monitoring system to monitor and record the
opacity of the gases discharged into the atmosphere from any recovery
furnace or lime kiln using an ESP emission control device, except as
specified in paragraph (b)(4) of this section. The span of this system
must be set at 70 percent opacity. You must install, certify, and
operate the continuous opacity monitoring system in accordance with
Performance Specification (PS) 1 in Appendix B to 40 CFR part 60.
    (2) Continuous monitoring systems to monitor and record the
concentration of TRS emissions on a dry basis and the percent of oxygen
by volume on a dry basis in the gases discharged into the atmosphere
from any lime kiln, recovery furnace, digester system, brown stock
washer system, multiple-effect evaporator system, or condensate
stripper system, except where the provisions of Sec.
60.283a(a)(1)(iii) or (iv) apply. You must install, certify, and
operate the continuous TRS monitoring system in accordance with
Performance Specification (PS) 5 in Appendix B to 40 CFR part 60. These
systems must be located downstream of the control device(s) and the
spans of these continuous monitoring system(s) must be set:
    (i) At a TRS concentration of 30 ppm for the TRS continuous
monitoring system, except that for any cross recovery furnace the span
must be set at 50 ppm.
    (ii) At 21 percent oxygen for the continuous oxygen monitoring
system.
    (b) Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this subpart
must install, calibrate, maintain, and operate the following continuous
parameter monitoring devices specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4)
of this section.
    (1) For any incinerator, a monitoring device for the continuous
measurement of the combustion temperature at the point of incineration
of effluent gases which are emitted from any digester system, brown
stock washer system, multiple effect evaporator system, black liquor
oxidation system, or condensate stripper system where the provisions of
Sec.  60.283a(a)(1)(iii) apply. The monitoring device is to be
certified by the manufacturer to be accurate within 1
percent of the temperature being measured.
    (2) For any recovery furnace, lime kiln, or smelt dissolving tank
using a wet scrubber emission control device:
    (i) A monitoring device for the continuous measurement of the
pressure drop of the gas stream through the control equipment. The
monitoring device is to be certified by the manufacturer to be accurate
to within a gage pressure of 500 Pascals (2
inches water gage pressure).
    (ii) A monitoring device for the continuous measurement of the
scrubbing liquid flow rate. The monitoring device used for continuous
measurement of the scrubbing liquid flow rate must be certified by the
manufacturer to be accurate within 5 percent of the design
scrubbing liquid flow rate.
    (iii) As an alternative to pressure drop measurement under
paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section, a monitoring device for
measurement of fan amperage may be used for smelt dissolving tank
dynamic scrubbers that operate at ambient pressure or for low-energy
entrainment scrubbers where the fan speed does not vary.
    (iv) As an alternative to scrubbing liquid flow rate measurement
under paragraph (b)(2)(ii) of this section, a monitoring device for
measurement of scrubbing liquid supply pressure may be used. The
monitoring device is to be certified by the manufacturer to be accurate
within 15 percent of design scrubbing liquid supply
pressure. The pressure sensor or tap is to be located close to the
scrubber liquid discharge point. The Administrator may be consulted for
approval of alternative locations.
    (3) For any recovery furnace or lime kiln using an ESP emission
control device, the owner or operator must use the continuous parameter
monitoring devices specified in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (ii) of this
section.
    (i) A monitoring device for the continuous measurement of the
secondary voltage of each ESP collection field.
    (ii) A monitoring device for the continuous measurement of the
secondary current of each ESP collection field.
    (iii) Total secondary power may be calculated as the product of the
secondary voltage and secondary current measurements for each ESP
collection field and used to demonstrate compliance as an alternative
to the secondary voltage and secondary current measurements.
    (4) For any recovery furnace or lime kiln using an ESP followed by
a wet scrubber, the owner or operator must use the continuous parameter
monitoring devices specified in paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) of this
section. The opacity monitoring system specified in paragraph (a)(1) of
this section is not required for combination ESP/wet scrubber control
device systems.
    (c) Monitor operation and calculations. Any owner or operator
subject to the provisions of this subpart must follow the procedures
for collecting and reducing monitoring data and setting operating
limits in paragraphs (c)(1) through (6) of this section. Subpart A of
this part specifies methods for reducing continuous opacity monitoring
system data.
    (1) Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this subpart
must, except where the provisions of Sec.  60.283a(a)(1)(iii) or (iv)
apply, perform the following:
    (i) Calculate and record on a daily basis 12-hour average TRS
concentrations for the two consecutive periods of each operating day.
Each 12-hour average must be determined as the arithmetic mean of the
appropriate 12 contiguous 1-hour average TRS concentrations provided by
each continuous monitoring system installed under paragraph (a)(2) of
this section.
    (ii) Calculate and record on a daily basis 12-hour average oxygen
concentrations for the two consecutive periods of each operating day
for the recovery furnace and lime kiln. These 12- hour averages must
correspond to the 12-hour average TRS concentrations

under paragraph (c)(1) of this section and must be determined as an
arithmetic mean of the appropriate 12 contiguous 1-hour average oxygen
concentrations provided by each continuous monitoring system installed
under paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
    (iii) Using the following equation, correct all 12-hour average TRS
concentrations to 10 volume percent oxygen, except that all 12-hour
average TRS concentrations from a recovery furnace must be corrected to
8 volume percent oxygen instead of 10 percent, and all 12-hour average
TRS concentrations from a facility to which the provisions of Sec.
60.283a(a)(1)(v) apply must not be corrected for oxygen content:

Ccorr = Cmeas x (21-X/21-Y)

where:

Ccorr = the concentration corrected for oxygen.
Cmeas = the concentration uncorrected for oxygen.
    X = the volumetric oxygen concentration in percentage to be
corrected to (8 percent for recovery furnaces and 10 percent for
lime kilns, incinerators, or other devices).
    Y = the measured 12-hour average volumetric oxygen
concentration.

    (2) Record at least once each successive 5-minute period all
measurements obtained from the continuous monitoring devices installed
under paragraph (b)(1) of this section. Calculate 3-hour block averages
from the recorded measurements of incinerator temperature. Temperature
measurements recorded when no TRS emissions are fired in the
incinerator (e.g., during incinerator warm-up and cool-down periods
when no TRS emissions are generated or an alternative control device is
used) may be omitted from the block average calculation.
    (3) Record at least once each successive 15-minute period all
measurements obtained from the continuous monitoring devices installed
under paragraph (b)(2) through (4) of this section and reduce the data
as follows:
    (i) Calculate 12-hour block averages from the recorded measurements
of wet scrubber pressure drop (or smelt dissolving tank scrubber fan
amperage) and liquid flow rate (or liquid supply pressure), as
applicable.
    (ii) Calculate quarterly averages from the recorded measurements of
ESP parameters (secondary voltage and secondary current, or total
secondary power) for ESP-controlled recovery furnaces or lime kilns
that measure opacity in addition to ESP parameters.
    (iii) Calculate 12-hour block averages from the recorded
measurements of ESP parameters (secondary voltage and secondary
current, or total secondary power) for recovery furnaces or lime kilns
with combination ESP/wet scrubber controls.
    (4) During the initial performance test required in Sec.  60.285a,
the owner or operator must establish site-specific operating limits for
the monitoring parameters in paragraphs (b)(2) through (4) of this
section by continuously monitoring the parameters and determining the
arithmetic average value of each parameter during the performance test.
The arithmetic average of the measured values for the three test runs
establishes your minimum site-specific operating limit for each wet
scrubber or ESP parameter. Multiple performance tests may be conducted
to establish a range of parameter values. The owner or operator may
establish replacement operating limits for the monitoring parameters
during subsequent performance tests using the test methods in Sec.
60.285a.
    (5) You must operate the continuous monitoring systems required in
paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section to collect data at all required
intervals at all times the affected facility is operating except for
periods of monitoring system malfunctions or out-of-control periods,
repairs associated with monitoring system malfunctions or out-of-
control periods, and required monitoring system quality assurance or
quality control activities including, as applicable, calibration checks
and required zero and span adjustments.
    (6) You may not use data recorded during monitoring system
malfunctions or out-of-control periods, repairs associated with
monitoring system malfunctions or out-of-control periods, or required
monitoring system quality assurance or control activities in
calculations used to report emissions or operating limits. You must use
all the data collected during all other periods in assessing the
operation of the control device and associated control system.
    (7) Except for periods of monitoring system malfunctions, repairs
associated with monitoring system malfunctions, and required quality
monitoring system quality assurance or quality control activities
(including, as applicable, system accuracy audits and required zero and
span adjustments), failure to collect required data is a deviation of
the monitoring requirements.
    (d) Excess emissions are defined for this subpart as follows:
    (1) For emissions from any recovery furnace, periods of excess
emissions are:
    (i) All 12-hour averages of TRS concentrations above 5 ppm by
volume at 8 percent oxygen for straight kraft recovery furnaces and
above 25 ppm by volume at 8 percent oxygen for cross recovery furnaces
during times when BLS is fired.
    (ii) All 6-minute average opacities that exceed 20 percent during
times when BLS is fired.
    (2) For emissions from any lime kiln, periods of excess emissions
are:
    (i) All 12-hour average TRS concentration above 8 ppm by volume at
10 percent oxygen during times when lime mud is fired.
    (ii) All 6-minute average opacities that exceed 20 percent during
times when lime mud is fired.
    (3) For emissions from any digester system, brown stock washer
system, multiple-effect evaporator system, or condensate stripper
system, periods of excess emissions are:
    (i) All 12-hour average TRS concentrations above 5 ppm by volume at
10 percent oxygen unless the provisions of Sec.  60.283a(a)(1)(i),
(ii), or (iv) apply; or
    (ii) All 3-hour block averages during which the combustion
temperature at the point of incineration is less than 650 [deg]C (1200
[deg]F), where the provisions of Sec.  60.283a(a)(1)(iii) apply.
    (4) For any recovery furnace, lime kiln, or smelt dissolving tank
controlled with a wet scrubber emission control device that complies
with the parameter monitoring requirements specified in Sec.
60.284a(b)(2), periods of excess emissions are:
    (i) All 12-hour block average scrubbing liquid flow rate (or
scrubbing liquid supply pressure) measurements below the minimum site-
specific limit established during performance testing during times when
BLS or lime mud is fired (as applicable), and
    (ii) All 12-hour block average scrubber pressure drop (or fan
amperage, if used as an alternative under paragraph (b)(2)(iii) of this
section) measurements below the minimum site-specific limit established
during performance testing during times when BLS or lime mud is fired
(as applicable), except during startup and shutdown.
    (5) For any recovery furnace or lime kiln controlled with an ESP
followed by a wet scrubber that complies with the parameter monitoring
requirements specified in Sec.  60.284a(b)(4), periods of excess
emissions are:
    (i) All 12-hour block average scrubbing liquid flow rate (or
scrubbing liquid supply pressure) measurements below the minimum site-
specific limit established during performance testing during times when
BLS or lime mud is fired (as applicable), and
    (ii) All 12-hour block average scrubber pressure drop measurements
below the

minimum site-specific limit established during performance testing
during times when BLS or lime mud is fired (as applicable) except
during startup and shutdown,
    (iii) All 12-hour block average ESP secondary voltage and secondary
current measurements (or total secondary power values) below the
minimum site-specific limit established during performance testing
during times when BLS or lime mud is fired (as applicable).
    (e) The Administrator will not consider periods of excess emissions
reported under Sec.  60.288a(a) to be indicative of a violation of the
standards provided the criteria in paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) of this
section are met.
    (1) The percent of the total number of possible contiguous periods
of excess emissions in a quarter does not exceed:
    (i) One percent for TRS emissions from recovery furnaces, provided
that the TRS concentration does not exceed 30 ppm corrected to 8
percent oxygen.
    (ii) Two percent for average opacities from recovery furnaces,
provided that the ESP secondary voltage and secondary current averaged
over the quarter remained above the minimum operating limits
established during the performance test.
    (iii) One percent for TRS emissions from lime kilns, provided that
the TRS concentration does not exceed 22 ppm corrected to 10 percent
oxygen.
    (iv) One percent for average opacities from lime kilns, provided
that the ESP secondary voltage and secondary current (or total
secondary power) averaged over the quarter remained above the minimum
operating limits established during the performance test.
    (2) The Administrator determines that the affected facility,
including air pollution control equipment, is maintained and operated
in a manner which is consistent with good air pollution control
practice for minimizing emissions during periods of excess emissions.
    (3) The TRS concentration uncorrected for oxygen may be considered
when determining compliance with the excess emissions provisions in
paragraphs (e)(1)(i) and (iii) of this section during periods of
startup or shutdown when stack oxygen percentage approaches ambient
conditions. If the measured TRS concentration uncorrected for oxygen is
less than the applicable limit (5 ppm for recovery furnaces or 8 ppm
for lime kilns) during periods of startup or shutdown when the stack
oxygen concentration is 15 percent or greater, then the Administrator
will consider the TRS average to be in compliance. This provision only
applies during periods of affected facility startup and shutdown.
    (f) The procedures under Sec.  60.13 must be followed for
installation, evaluation, and operation of the continuous monitoring
systems required under this section. All continuous monitoring systems
must be operated in accordance with the applicable procedures under
Performance Specifications 1, 3, and 5 of appendix B of this part.

Sec.  60.285a  Test methods and procedures.

    (a) In conducting the performance tests required by this subpart
and Sec.  60.8, the owner or operator must use as reference methods and
procedures the test methods in appendix A of this part or other methods
and procedures in this section, except as provided in Sec.  60.8(b).
Acceptable alternative methods and procedures are given in paragraph
(f) of this section.
    (b) The owner or operator must determine compliance with the
filterable particulate matter standards in Sec.  60.282a(a)(1), (2),
(5) and (6) as follows:
    (1) Method 5 of Appendix A-3 of this part must be used to determine
the filterable particulate matter concentration. The sampling time and
sample volume for each run must be at least 60 minutes and 0.90 dscm
(31.8 dscf). Water must be used as the cleanup solvent instead of
acetone in the sample recovery procedure. The particulate concentration
must be corrected to the appropriate oxygen concentration according to
Sec.  60.284a(c)(3).
    (2) The emission rate correction factor, integrated sampling and
analysis procedure of Method 3B of Appendix A-2 of this part must be
used to determine the oxygen concentration. The gas sample must be
taken at the same time and at the same traverse points as the
particulate sample.
    (3) Method 9 of Appendix A-4 of this part and the procedures in
Sec.  60.11 must be used to determine opacity. Opacity measurement is
not required for recovery furnaces or lime kilns operating with a wet
scrubber alone or a wet scrubber in combination with an ESP.
    (4) In addition to the initial performance test required by this
subpart and Sec.  60.8(a), you must conduct repeat performance tests
for filterable particulate matter at intervals no longer than 60 months
following the previous performance test using the procedures in
paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section.
    (5) When the initial and repeat performance tests are conducted for
filterable particulate matter, the owner or operator must also measure
condensable particulate matter using Method 202 of Appendix M of part
51 of this chapter.
    (c) The owner or operator must determine compliance with the
filterable particular matter standards in Sec.  60.282a(a)(3) and (4)
as follows:
    (1) The emission rate (E) of filterable particulate matter must be
computed for each run using the following equation:

E = csQsd/BLS

Where:

E = emission rate of filterable particulate matter, g/kg (lb/ton) of
BLS.
cs = Concentration of filterable particulate matter, g/
dscm (lb/dscf).
Qsd = volumetric flow rate of effluent gas, dscm/hr
(dscf/hr).
BLS = black liquor solids (dry weight) feed rate, kg/hr (ton/hr).

    (2) Method 5 of Appendix A-3 of this part must be used to determine
the filterable particulate matter concentration (cs) and the
volumetric flow rate (Qsd) of the effluent gas. The sampling
time and sample volume must be at least 60 minutes and 0.90 dscm (31.8
dscf). Water must be used instead of acetone in the sample recovery.
    (3) Process data must be used to determine the black liquor solids
(BLS) feed rate on a dry weight basis.
    (4) In addition to the initial performance test required by this
subpart and Sec.  60.8(a), you must conduct repeat performance tests
for filterable particulate matter at intervals no longer than 60 months
following the previous performance test using the procedures in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this section must be conducted within
60 months following the previous filterable particulate matter
performance test.
    (5) When the initial and repeat performance tests are conducted for
filterable particulate matter, the owner or operator must also measure
condensable particulate matter using Method 202 of Appendix M of part
51.
    (d) The owner or operator must determine compliance with the TRS
standards in Sec.  60.283a, except Sec.  60.283a(a)(1)(vi) and (4), as
follows:
    (1) Method 16 of Appendix A-6 of this part must be used to
determine the TRS concentration. The TRS concentration must be
corrected to the appropriate oxygen concentration using the procedure
in Sec.  60.284a(c)(3). The sampling time must be at least 3 hours, but
no longer than 6 hours.
    (2) The emission rate correction factor, integrated sampling and
analysis procedure of Method 3B of Appendix A-2 of this part must be
used to determine the oxygen concentration. The sample must be taken
over the same time period as the TRS samples.

    (3) When determining whether a furnace is a straight kraft recovery
furnace or a cross recovery furnace, TAPPI Method T.624 (incorporated
by reference--see Sec.  60.17(d)(1)) must be used to determine sodium
sulfide, sodium hydroxide, and sodium carbonate. These determinations
must be made 3 times daily from the green liquor, and the daily average
values must be converted to sodium oxide (Na20) and
substituted into the following equation to determine the green liquor
sulfidity:

GLS = 100 CNa2S/(CNa2SCNaOHCNa2CO3)
Where:

GLS = green liquor sulfidity, percent.
CNa2S = concentration of Na2S as
Na2O, mg/liter (gr/gal).
CNaOH = concentration of NaOH as Na2O, mg/
liter (gr/gal).
CNa2CO3 = concentration of Na2CO3
as Na2O, mg/ liter (gr/gal).

    (4) For recovery furnaces and lime kilns, in addition to the
initial performance test required in this subpart and Sec.  60.8(a),
you must conduct repeat TRS performance tests at intervals no longer
than 60 months following the previous performance test using the
procedures in paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section.
    (e) The owner or operator must determine compliance with the TRS
standards in Sec.  60.283a(a)(1)(vi) and (a)(4) as follows:
    (1) The emission rate (E) of TRS must be computed for each run
using the following equation:

E = CTRS F Qsd/P

Where:

E = emission rate of TRS, g/kg (lb/ton) of BLS or ADP.
CTRS = average combined concentration of TRS, ppm.
F = conversion factor, 0.001417 g H2S/m\3\-ppm (8.846 x
10-8 lb H2S/ft\3\-ppm).
Qsd = volumetric flow rate of stack gas, dscm/hr (dscf/
hr).
P = black liquor solids feed or pulp production rate, kg/hr (ton/
hr).

    (2) Method 16 of Appendix A-6 of this part must be used to
determine the TRS concentration (CTRS).
    (3) Method 2 of Appendix A-1 of this part must be used to determine
the volumetric flow rate (Qsd) of the effluent gas.
    (4) Process data must be used to determine the black liquor feed
rate or the pulp production rate (P).
    (5) For smelt dissolving tanks, in addition to the initial
performance test required in this subpart and Sec.  60.8(a), you must
conduct repeat TRS performance tests at intervals no longer than 60
months following the previous performance test using the procedures in
paragraphs (e)(1) through (4) of this section.
    (f) The owner or operator may use the following as alternatives to
the reference methods and procedures specified in this section:
    (1) In place of Method 5 of Appendix A-3 of this part, Method 17 of
Appendix A-6 of this part may be used if a constant value of 0.009 g/
dscm (0.004 gr/dscf) is added to the results of Method 17 and the stack
temperature is no greater than 204 [deg]C (400 [deg]F).
    (2) In place of Method 16 of Appendix A-6 of this part, Method 16A,
16B, or 16C of Appendix A-6 of this part may be used.
    (3) In place of Method 3B of Appendix A-2 of this part, ASME PTC
19.10-1981 [Part 10] (incorporated by reference--see Sec.  60.17(h)(4))
may be used.

Sec.  60.286a  Affirmative defense for violations of emission standards
During malfunction.

    In response to an action to enforce the standards set forth in
Sec. Sec.  60.282a and 60.283a, you may assert an affirmative defense
to a claim for civil penalties for violations of such standards that
are caused by malfunction, as defined at Sec.  60.2. Appropriate
penalties may be assessed if you fail to meet your burden of proving
all of the requirements in the affirmative defense. The affirmative
defense must not be available for claims for injunctive relief.
    (a) Assertion of affirmative defense. To establish the affirmative
defense in any action to enforce such a standard, you must timely meet
the reporting requirements in paragraph (b) of this section, and must
prove by a preponderance of evidence that: (1) The violation:
    (i) Was caused by a sudden, infrequent, and unavoidable failure of
air pollution control equipment, process equipment, or a process to
operate in a normal or usual manner; and
    (ii) Could not have been prevented through careful planning, proper
design or better operation and maintenance practices; and
    (iii) Did not stem from any activity or event that could have been
foreseen and avoided, or planned for; and
    (iv) Was not part of a recurring pattern indicative of inadequate
design, operation, or maintenance; and
    (2) Repairs were made as expeditiously as possible when a violation
occurred; and
    (3) The frequency, amount, and duration of the violation (including
any bypass) were minimized to the maximum extent practicable; and
    (4) If the violation resulted from a bypass of control equipment or
a process, then the bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life,
personal injury, or severe property damage; and
    (5) All possible steps were taken to minimize the impact of the
violation on ambient air quality, the environment, and human health;
and
    (6) All emissions monitoring and control systems were kept in
operation if at all possible, consistent with safety and good air
pollution control practices; and
    (7) All of the actions in response to the violation were documented
by properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs; and
    (8) At all times, the affected source was operated in a manner
consistent with good practices for minimizing emissions; and
    (9) A written root cause analysis has been prepared, the purpose of
which is to determine, correct, and eliminate the primary causes of the
malfunction and the violation resulting from the malfunction event at
issue. The analysis must also specify, using best monitoring methods
and engineering judgment, the amount of any emissions that were the
result of the malfunction.
    (b) Report. The owner or operator seeking to assert an affirmative
defense must submit a written report to the Administrator with all
necessary supporting documentation that explains how it has met the
requirements set forth in paragraph (a) of this section. This
affirmative defense report must be included in the first periodic
compliance, deviation report or excess emission report otherwise
required after the initial occurrence of the violation of the relevant
standard (which may be the end of any applicable averaging period). If
such compliance, deviation report or excess emission report is due less
than 45 days after the initial occurrence of the violation, the
affirmative defense report may be included in the second compliance,
deviation report or excess emission report due after the initial
occurrence of the violation of the relevant standard.

Sec.  60.287a  Recordkeeping.

    (a) The owner or operator must maintain records of the performance
evaluations of the continuous monitoring systems.
    (b) For each continuous monitoring system, the owner or operator
must maintain records of the following information, as applicable:
    (1) Records of the opacity of the gases discharged into the
atmosphere from any recovery furnace or lime kiln using an ESP emission
control device, except as specified in paragraph (b)(6) of this

section, and records of the ESP secondary voltage and secondary current
(or total secondary power) averaged over the reporting period for the
opacity allowances specified in Sec.  60.284a(e)(1)(ii) and (iv).
    (2) Records of the concentration of TRS emissions on a dry basis
and the percent of oxygen by volume on a dry basis in the gases
discharged into the atmosphere from any lime kiln, recovery furnace,
digester system, brown stock washer system, multiple-effect evaporator
system, or condensate stripper system, except where the provisions of
Sec.  60.283a(a)(1)(iii) or (iv) apply.
    (3) Records of the combustion temperature at the point of
incineration of effluent gases which are emitted from any digester
system, brown stock washer system, multiple effect evaporator system,
black liquor oxidation system, or condensate stripper system where the
provisions of Sec.  60.283a(a)(1)(iii) apply.
    (4) For any recovery furnace, lime kiln, or smelt dissolving tank
using a wet scrubber emission control device:
    (i) Records of the pressure drop of the gas stream through the
control equipment (or smelt dissolving tank scrubber fan amperage), and
    (ii) Records of the scrubbing liquid flow rate (or scrubbing liquid
supply pressure).
    (5) For any recovery furnace or lime kiln using an ESP control
device:
    (i) Records of the secondary voltage of each ESP collection field,
and
    (ii) Records of the secondary current of each ESP collection field,
and
    (iii) If used as an alternative to secondary voltage and current,
records of the total secondary power of each ESP collection field.
    (6) For any recovery furnace or lime kiln using an ESP followed by
a wet scrubber, the records specified under paragraphs (b)(4) and (5)
of this section.
    (7) Records of excess emissions as defined in Sec.  60.284a(d).
    (c) For each malfunction, the owner or operator must maintain
records of the following information:
    (1) Records of the occurrence and duration of each malfunction of
operation (i.e., process equipment) or the air pollution control and
monitoring equipment.
    (2) Records of actions taken during periods of malfunction to
minimize emissions in accordance with Sec.  60.11(d), including
corrective actions to restore malfunctioning process and air pollution
control and monitoring equipment to its normal or usual manner of
operation.

Sec.  60.288a  Reporting.

    (a) For the purpose of reports required under Sec.  60.7(c), any
owner or operator subject to the provisions of this subpart must report
semiannually periods of excess emissions defined in 60.284a(d).
    (b) Within 60 days after the date of completing each performance
test (defined in Sec.  60.8) as required by this subpart you must
submit the results of the performance tests, including any associated
fuel analyses, required by this subpart to the EPA as follows. You must
use the latest version of the EPA's Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT)
(see http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/index.html) existing at the time
of the performance test to generate a submission package file, which
documents performance test data. You must then submit the file
generated by the ERT through the EPA's Compliance and Emissions Data
Reporting Interface (CEDRI), which can be accessed by logging in to the
EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) (https://cdx.epa.gov/). Only data
collected using test methods supported by the ERT as listed on the ERT
Web site are subject to the requirement to submit the performance test
data electronically. Owners or operators who claim that some of the
information being submitted for performance tests is confidential
business information (CBI) must submit a complete ERT file including
information claimed to be CBI on a compact disk, flash drive, or other
commonly used electronic storage media to the EPA. The electronic media
must be clearly marked as CBI and mailed to U.S. EPA/OAPQS/CORE CBI
Office, Attention: WebFIRE Administrator, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page
Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same ERT file with the CBI omitted must be
submitted to the EPA via CDX as described earlier in this paragraph. At
the discretion of the delegated authority, you must also submit these
reports, including the confidential business information, to the
delegated authority in the format specified by the delegated authority.
For any performance test conducted using test methods that are not
listed on the ERT Web site, the owner or operator must submit the
results of the performance test to the Administrator at the appropriate
address listed in Sec.  60.4.
    (c) Within 60 days after the date of completing each CEMS
performance evaluation test as defined in Sec.  60.13, you must submit
relative accuracy test audit (RATA) data to the EPA's Central Data
Exchange (CDX) by using CEDRI in accordance with paragraph (b) of this
section. Only RATA pollutants that can be documented with the ERT (as
listed on the ERT Web site) are subject to this requirement. For any
performance evaluations with no corresponding RATA pollutants listed on
the ERT Web site, the owner or operator must submit the results of the
performance evaluation to the Administrator at the appropriate address
listed in Sec.  60.4.
    (d) If a malfunction occurred during the reporting period, you must
submit a report that contains the following:
    (1) The number, duration, and a brief description for each type of
malfunction which occurred during the reporting period and which caused
or may have caused any applicable emission limitation to be exceeded.
    (2) A description of actions taken by an owner or operator during a
malfunction of an affected facility to minimize emissions in accordance
with Sec.  60.11(d), including actions taken to correct a malfunction.

[FR Doc. 2013-12081 Filed 5-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 2, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39574-39576]
[FR Doc No: 2013-15402]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2013-0214; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-152-AD;
Amendment 39-17497; AD 2013-13-09]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Learjet Inc. Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain
Learjet Inc. Model 60 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of a
high-speed rejected takeoff caused by all four main landing gear (MLG)
tires blowing out during the takeoff roll. This AD requires installing
new rigid hydraulic tube assemblies to the MLG struts; installing a new
MLG squat switch bracket, modifying the MLG squat switch wire harness;
modifying the MLG anti-skid wheel transducer electrical wire harnesses;
routing and securing the anti-skid wheel and squat switch electrical
wire harnesses to the MLG strut assembly; installing outboard bracket
assemblies, anti-skid shield, forward electrical cover on the forward
stiffener, upper and lower inboard bracket assemblies, and clamps that
support the electrical wire harness; modifying the aft stiffener for
the new electrical wire harness support; installing the aft electrical
cover and strap on the aft stiffener; installing a new flat landing
light lamp if necessary; and, for certain airplanes, installing a new
wheel speed detect box assembly, nutplates, and brackets and a new
thrust reverser interface box, and modifying the wiring for the new
thrust reverser interface box. We are issuing this AD to prevent
failure of the braking system or adverse operation of the spoiler and
thrust reverser system due to external damage, particularly from tire
failure, which could result in loss of control of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective August 6, 2013.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of certain publications listed in the AD as of August 6,
2013.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Learjet, Inc., One Learjet Way, Wichita, KS 67209-2942; telephone 316-
946-2000; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet
http://www.bombardier.com. You may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601
Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don Ristow, Aerospace Engineer,
Mechanical Systems and Propulsion Branch, ACE-116W, FAA, Wichita
Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road, Room 100, Mid-
Continent Airport, Wichita, KS 67209; phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: 316-
946-4107; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to include an AD that would apply to the specified products.
The NPRM published in the Federal Register on March 27, 2013 (78 FR
18531). The NPRM proposed to require installing new rigid hydraulic
tube assemblies to the MLG struts; installing a new MLG squat switch
bracket; modifying the MLG squat switch wire harness; modifying the MLG
anti-skid wheel transducer electrical wire harnesses; routing and
securing the anti-skid wheel and squat switch electrical wire harnesses
to the MLG strut assembly; installing outboard bracket assemblies,
anti-skid shield, forward electrical cover on the forward stiffener,
upper and lower inboard bracket assemblies, and clamps that support the
electrical wire harness; modifying the aft stiffener for the new
electrical wire harness support; installing the aft electrical cover
and strap on the aft stiffener; installing a new flat landing light
lamp if necessary; and, for certain airplanes, installing a new wheel
speed detect box assembly, nutplates, and brackets and a new thrust
reverser

interface box, and modifying the wiring for the new thrust reverser
interface box.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We have considered the comment received. The National
Transportation Safety Board supported the NPRM (78 FR 18531, March 27,
2013).

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data, considered the comment received, and
determined that air safety and the public interest require adopting the
AD as proposed except for minor editorial changes. We have determined
that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM (78 FR 18531, March 27, 2013) for correcting the unsafe condition;
and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM (78 FR 18531, March 27, 2013).

Interim Action

    We consider this AD to be the second of three ADs that are related
to each other, and collectively address unsafe conditions that might
result from damage to critical components on the landing gear or in the
wheel well that affect the braking, spoiler, and thrust reverser
systems. The manufacturer is currently developing a final modification
for the thrust reverser. Once the new thrust reverser modification is
developed, approved, and available, we might consider additional
rulemaking.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this AD affects 275 airplanes of U.S. registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this AD:

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Action                          Labor cost          Parts cost           Cost per  product                 Cost on U.S.  operators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Installation of rigid hydraulic tube    Up to 53 work-hours x $85       $7,093  Up to $11,598......................  Up to $3,189,450.
 assemblies and MLG squat switch         per hour = $4,505.
 bracket; modification of MLG squat
 switch wire harness and MLG anti-skid
 wheel transducer electrical wire
 harnesses; and routing and securing
 anti-skid wheel and squat switch
 electrical wire harnesses to MLG
 strut assembly (Bombardier Service
 Bulletin 60[dash]32-33, dated July
 23, 2012).
Installation of outboard bracket        Up to 25 work-hours x $85       17,960  Up to $20,085......................  Up to $5,523,375.
 assemblies, anti-skid shield, forward   per hour = $2,125.
 electrical cover, upper and lower
 inboard bracket assemblies, and
 clamps; modification of aft
 stiffener; and installation of aft
 electrical cover and strap, and flat
 landing light lamp (Bombardier
 Service Bulletin 60-57-7, dated July
 23, 2012).
Installation of wheel speed detect box  Up to 65 work-hours x $85        1,154  $6,679.............................  Up to $881,628.
 assembly, nutplates brackets, and       per hour = $5,525.
 thrust reverser interface box; and
 modification of wiring for serial
 numbers 60[dash]002 through 60-276
 (Bombardier Service Bulletin 60-78-7,
 Revision 2, dated May 1, 2006) (132
 U.S. airplanes).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    According to the manufacturer, some of the costs of this AD may be
covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected
individuals. We do not control warranty coverage for affected
individuals. As a result, we have included all costs in our cost
estimate.

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    This AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order
13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect 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.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

2013-13-09 Learjet Inc.: Amendment 39-17497; Docket No. FAA-2013-
0214; Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-152-AD.

(a) Effective Date

    This AD is effective August 6, 2013.

(b) Affected ADs

    Certain requirements of this AD affect certain requirements of
AD 2010-11-11, Amendment 39-16316 (75 FR 32255, June 8, 2010).

(c) Applicability

    This AD applies to Learjet Inc. Model 60 airplanes, certificated
in any category, serial numbers 60-001 through 60-413 inclusive.

(d) Subject

    Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport Association
(ATA) of America Code 32, Landing gear; 57, Wings; 78, Engine
exhaust.

(e) Unsafe Condition

    This AD was prompted by a report of a high-speed rejected
takeoff caused by all four main landing gear (MLG) tires blowing out
during the takeoff roll. We are issuing this AD to prevent failure
of the braking system or adverse operation of the spoiler and thrust
reverser system due to external damage, particularly from tire
failure, which could result in loss of control of the airplane.

(f) Compliance

    Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

(g) Modification and Installation

    Within 600 flight hours or 12 months after the effective date of
this AD, whichever occurs first: Do the actions required by
paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), and (g)(3) of this AD, as applicable.
    (1) For all airplanes: Install new rigid hydraulic tube
assemblies to the MLG struts, install a new MLG squat switch bracket
and modify the MLG squat switch wire harness, modify the MLG anti-
skid wheel transducer electrical wire harnesses, and route and
secure the anti-skid wheel and squat switch electrical wire
harnesses to the MLG strut assembly, in accordance with the
Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 60-32-33,
dated July 23, 2012.
    (2) For all airplanes: Install outboard bracket assemblies,
anti-skid shield, forward electrical cover on the forward stiffener,
upper and lower inboard bracket assemblies, and clamps that support
the electrical wire harness; modify the aft stiffener for the new
electrical wire harness support; install the aft electrical cover
and strap on the aft stiffener; and install a new flat landing light
lamp, as applicable; in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 60-57-7, dated July 23,
2012.
    (3) For airplanes having serial numbers 60-002 through 60-276
inclusive: Install a new wheel speed detect box assembly, nutplates,
brackets, and interface box; and modify the wiring for the new
thrust reverser interface box; in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Bombardier Service Bulletin 60-78-7, Revision 2,
dated May 1, 2006.

(h) Terminating Action for AD 2010-11-11, Amendment 39-16316 (75 FR
32255, June 8, 2010)

    After accomplishing the actions required by paragraph (g) of
this AD, the requirement in paragraph (h) of AD 2010-11-11,
Amendment 39-16316 (75 FR 32255, June 8, 2010), to check the nose
and main tire pressures before 96 hours prior to takeoff, is
terminated. All provisions of paragraphs (g) and (h) of AD 2010-11-
11 that are not specifically referenced by this paragraph remain
fully applicable and must be complied with.

(i) Credit for Previous Actions

    This paragraph provides credit for the corresponding actions
specified in paragraph (g)(3) of this AD, if those actions were
performed before the effective date of this AD using Bombardier
Service Bulletin SB60-78-7, dated February 21, 2005; or Revision 1,
dated June 30, 2005; which are not incorporated by reference in this
AD.

(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (1) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the Related Information
section of this AD.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

(k) Related Information

    For more information about this AD, contact Don Ristow,
Aerospace Engineer, Mechanical Systems and Propulsion Branch, ACE-
116W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road,
Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, KS 67209; phone: 316-946-
4120; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
(l) Material Incorporated by Reference

    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference (IBR) of the service information listed
in this paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) You must use this service information as applicable to do
the actions required by this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
    (i) Bombardier Service Bulletin 60-32-33, dated July 23, 2012.
    (ii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 60-57-7, dated July 23, 2012.
    (iii) Bombardier Service Bulletin 60-78-7, Revision 2, dated May
1, 2006.
    (3) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Learjet, Inc., One Learjet Way, Wichita, KS 67209-2942; telephone
316-946-2000; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Internet http://www.bombardier.com.
    (4) You may view this service information at FAA, Transport
Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
information on the availability of this material at the FAA, call
425-227-1221.
    (5) You may view this service information that is incorporated
by reference at the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA). For information on the availability of this material at
NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 13, 2013.
Jeffrey E. Duven,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-15402 Filed 7-1-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 239 (Tuesday, December 13, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77588-77589]
[FR Doc No: 2011-31700]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration

Office of Hazardous Materials Safety; Notice of Applications for
Modification of Special Permit

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.

ACTION: List of Applications for Modification of Special Permits.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures governing the application
for, and the processing of, special permits from the Department of
Transportation's Hazardous Material Regulations (49 CFR part 107,
subpart B), notice is hereby given that the Office of Hazardous
Materials Safety has received the applications described herein. This
notice is abbreviated to expedite docketing and public notice. Because
the sections affected, modes of transportation, and the nature of
application have been shown in earlier Federal Register publications,
they are not repeated here. Requests for modification of special
permits (e.g. to provide for additional hazardous materials, packaging
design changes, additional mode of transportation, etc.) are described
in footnotes to the application number. Application numbers with the
suffix ``M'' denote a modification request. These applications have
been separated from the new application for special permits to
facilitate processing.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 28, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Address comments to: Record Center, Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Washington, DC 20590.
    Comments should refer to the application number and be submitted in
triplicate. If confirmation of receipt of comments is desired, include
a self-addressed stamped postcard showing the special permit number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Copies of the applications are
available for inspection in the Records Center, East Building, PHH-30,
1200 New

Jersey Avenue Southeast, Washington DC or at http://www.regulations.gov.
    This notice of receipt of applications for modification of special
permit is published in accordance with Part 107 of the Federal
hazardous materials transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5117(b); 1.53(b)).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on December 6, 2011.
Donald Burger,
Chief, General Approvals and Permits.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      Regulation(s)     Nature of special permit
   Application No.          Docket No.             Applicant             affected                thereof
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          MODIFICATION SPECIAL PERMITS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7945-M..............  ......................  Pacific Scientific,  49 CFR               To modify the special
                                               Duarte, CA.          173.304(a)(1);       permit to authorize
                                                                    175.3.               additional 2.2
                                                                                hazardous materials in
                                                                                non-DOT secification
                                                                                cylinders.
13381-M.............  ......................  Carleton             49 CFR               To modify the special
                                               Technologies,        173.302(a)(1);       permit to authorize an
                                               Pressure             173.304(a), 175.3    extended testing time
                                               Technology           and 180.205.         period for cylinders
                                               Division,                                 which are past their
                                               Westminster, MD.                          retest date but are not
                                                                                empty.
14616-M.............  ......................  Chlorine Service     49 CFR 178.245-1(a)  To modify the special
                                               Company, Kingwood,                        permit to correct
                                               TX.                                       pressure ranges to
                                                                                bring it in line with
                                                                                other special permits
                                                                                issued.
15258-M.............  ......................  Air Products and     49 CFR 180.205 and   To modify the special
                                               Chemicals, Inc,      173.302a.            permit to authorize
                                               Tamaqua, PA.                              additional cylinders
                                                                                which may be tested by
                                                                                the untrasonic test
                                                                                method.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2011-31700 Filed 12-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4909-60-M


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 196 (Wednesday, October 9, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61983-61984]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24406]

========================================================================
Notices
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains documents other than rules
or proposed rules that are applicable to the public. Notices of hearings
and investigations, committee meetings, agency decisions and rulings,
delegations of authority, filing of petitions and applications and agency
statements of organization and functions are examples of documents
appearing in this section.

========================================================================

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 9, 2013 /
Notices

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC14-1-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-555); Comment
Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is soliciting public comment on the
currently approved information collection, FERC-555 (Records Retention
Requirements).

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due December 9,
2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments (identified by Docket No. IC14-1-
000) by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Web site: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at (202)
273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-555, Records Retention Requirements.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0098.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-555 information
collection requirements with no changes to the current reporting
requirements.
    Abstract: The Commission collects the information under the
requirements of FERC-555 (Records Retention Requirements) to carry out
its responsibilities in implementing the statutory provisions of
Sections 301, 304 and 309 of the Federal Power Act (FPA),\1\ Sections
8, 10 and 16 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA),\2\ and Section 20 of the
Interstate Commerce Act (ICA).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 16 U.S.C. 825, 825c and 825h.
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 717-717w.
    \3\ 49 U.S.C. 20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The regulations for preservation of records establish retention
periods, necessary guidelines, and requirements for retention of
applicable records. These requirements apply to the regulated public
utilities, natural gas and oil pipeline companies subject to the
Commission's jurisdiction. Regulated entities use these records as the
basis for required rate filings and reports to the Commission.
Additionally, the Commission's audit staff will use the records during
compliance reviews. The Commission's enforcement staff will also use
the information during investigations. Finally, the Commission will use
the records for special analyses when necessary.
    On January 8, 1999 the Commission issued AI99-2-000, an Accounting
Issuance providing guidance on records storage media. More
specifically, the Commission gave each jurisdictional company the
flexibility to select its own storage media. The storage media selected
must have a life expectancy equal to the applicable record period
unless the quality of the data transferred from one media to another
with no loss of data would exceed the record period.
    On January 27, 2000, the Commission issued a final rule amending
its records retention regulations for public utilities and licensees as
well as natural gas and oil pipeline companies. These changes included
revising the general instructions, and shortening various records
retention periods. The objective of the final rule was to reduce or
eliminate burdensome and unnecessary regulatory requirements.
    The Commission is not making any additional changes to the record
retention requirements specified under FERC-555. The Commission
implements these filing requirements in the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) under 18 CFR Parts 125, 225, and 356.
    Type of Respondents: Public utilities, natural gas companies, and
oil companies.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: \4\ In 2010 Commission staff surveyed a
small number of FERC-555 respondents in order to improve the burden
estimates. We are using the same methodology as before. However, we are
updating the figures due to current cost information and differences in
the total number of respondents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Commission defines burden as 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. For further explanation of what is included in the
information collection burden, reference 5 CFR 1320.3.

   FERC-555: Preservation of Records for Public Utilities and Licenses, Natural Gas and Oil Pipeline Companies
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Number of                       Average burden
            Number of respondents              responses per   Total number of     hours per     Estimated total
                                                 respondent       responses         response      annual burden
(A)                                                      (B)        (A)x(B)=(C)            (D)                (C)x(D)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
509.........................................               1              509            5,218        2,655,962
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The total estimated annual cost burden to respondents is
$154,949,271, which includes $78,242,971 for non-labor record storage
costs and $76,706,300 for employee costs. The average cost per
respondent is $304,419, which includes $153,719 for non-labor record
storage costs and $150,700 for employee costs. All of these cost
figures are based on staff analysis of the data we received in 2010.
    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

    Dated: October 2, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-24406 Filed 10-8-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P