2. Applicability Cutoffs for Threshold Pollutants Under Section 112( d)( 4) of the CAA The first approach is an applicability cutoff for threshold pollutants that is based on EPA's authority under CAA section 112( d)( 4) to establish standards for HAP which are threshold pollutants. A threshold pollutant is one for which there is a concentration or dose below which adverse effects are not expected to occur over a lifetime of exposure. For such pollutants, CAA section 112( d)( 4) allows EPA to consider the threshold level, with an ample margin of safety, when establishing emissions standards. Specifically, CAA section 112( d)( 4) allows EPA to establish emission standards that are not based upon the MACT specified under CAA section 112( d)( 2) for pollutants for which a health threshold has been established. Such standards may be less stringent than MACT. Historically, EPA has interpreted CAA section 112( d)( 4) to allow categories of sources that emit only threshold pollutants to avoid further regulation if those emissions result in ambient levels that do not exceed the threshold, with an ample margin of safety. 2 A different interpretation would allow us to exempt individual facilities within a source category that meet the CAA section 112( d)( 4) requirements. There are three potential scenarios under this interpretation of the CAA section 112( d)( 4) provision. One scenario would allow an exemption for individual facilities that emit only threshold pollutants and can demonstrate that their emissions of threshold pollutants would not result in air concentrations above the threshold levels, with an ample margin of safety, even if the category is otherwise subject to MACT. A second scenario would allow the CAA section 112( d)( 4) provision to be applied to both threshold and non threshold pollutants, using the one in a million cancer risk level for decisionmaking for non threshold pollutants. A third scenario would allow a CAA section 112( d)( 4) exemption at a facility that emits both threshold and nonthreshold pollutants. For those emission points where only threshold pollutants are emitted and where emissions of the threshold pollutants would not result in air concentrations above the threshold levels, with an ample margin of safety, those emission points could be exempt from the MACT standards. The MACT standards would still apply to nonthreshold emissions from other emission points at the source. For this third scenario, emission points that emit a combination of threshold and nonthreshold pollutants that are cocontrolled by MACT would still be subject to the MACT level of control. However, any threshold HAP eligible for exemption under CAA section 112( d)( 4) that are controlled by control devices different from those controlling nonthreshold HAP would be able to use the exemption, and the facility would still be subject to the parts of the standards that control non threshold pollutants or that control both threshold and non threshold pollutants. a. Estimation of hazard quotients and hazard indices. Under the CAA section 112( d)( 4) approach, EPA would have to determine that emissions of each of the threshold pollutants emitted by stationary combustion turbines at the facility do not result in exposures which exceed the threshold levels, with an ample margin of safety. The common approach for evaluating the potential hazard of a threshold air pollutant is to calculate a hazard quotient by dividing the pollutant's inhalation exposure concentration ( often assumed to be equivalent to its estimated concentration in air at a location where people could be exposed) by the pollutant's inhalation Reference Concentration ( RfC). An RfC is an estimate ( with uncertainty spanning perhaps an order of magnitude) of a continuous inhalation exposure that, over a lifetime, likely would not result in the occurrence of adverse health effects in humans, including sensitive individuals. The EPA typically establishes an RfC by applying uncertainty factors to the critical toxic effect derived from the lowest or no observed adverse effect level of a pollutant. 3 A hazard quotient less than one means that the exposure concentration of the pollutant is less than the RfC, and, therefore, presumed to be without appreciable risk of adverse health effects. A hazard quotient greater than one means that the exposure concentration of the pollutant is greater than the RfC. Further, EPA guidance for assessing exposures to mixtures of threshold pollutants recommends calculating a hazard index ( HI) by summing the individual hazard quotients for those pollutants in the mixture that affect the same target organ or system by the same mechanism. 4 The HI values would be interpreted similarly to hazard quotients; values below one would generally be considered to be without appreciable risk of adverse health effects, and values above one would generally be cause for concern. For the determinations discussed herein, EPA would generally plan to use RfC values contained in EPA's toxicology database, the Integrated Risk Information System ( IRIS). When a pollutant does not have an approved RfC in IRIS, or when a pollutant is a carcinogen, EPA would have to determine whether a threshold exists based upon the availability of specific data on the pollutant's mode or mechanism of action, potentially using a health threshold value from an alternative source such as the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry ( ATSDR) or the California Environmental Protection Agency ( CalEPA). Table 3 provides RfC, as well as unit risk estimates, for the HAP emitted by VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1906 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules 5 ibid. combustion turbine operations. A unit risk estimate is defined as the upperbound excess lifetime cancer risk estimated to result from continuous exposure to an agent at a concentration of 1 ug/ m3 in the air.

TABLE 3.   DOSE RESPONSE ASSESSMENT VALUES FOR HAP REPORTED EMITTED BY THE COMBUSTION TURBINE SOURCE CATEGORY Chemical name CAS No. Reference concentration a ( mg/ m3) Unit risk estimate b ( 1/( ug/ m3))

Acetaldehyde ............................................................................................................................ 75   07   0 9.0E   03 IRIS 2.2E   06 IRIS Acrolein .................................................................................................................................... 107   02   8 2.0E   05 IRIS Arsenic compounds .................................................................................................................. 7440   38   2 3.0E   05 CAL 4.3E   03 IRIS Benzene ................................................................................................................................... 71   43   2 6.0E   02 CAL 7.8E   06 IRIS Beryllium compounds ............................................................................................................... 7440   41   7 2.0E   05 IRIS 2.4E   03 IRIS 1,3 Butadiene ........................................................................................................................... 106   99   0 2.0E   03 IRIS 3.0E   05 EPA ORD Cadmium compounds .............................................................................................................. 7440   43   9 2.0E   05 IRIS 1.8E   03 IRIS Chromium ( VI) compounds ...................................................................................................... 18540   29   9 1.0E   04 IRIS 1.2E   02 IRIS Ethyl benzene .......................................................................................................................... 100   41   4 1.0E+ 00 IRIS Formaldehyde .......................................................................................................................... 50   00   0 9.8E   03 ATSDR 1.3E   05 IRIS Lead compounds ...................................................................................................................... 7439   92   1 1.2E   05 CAL Manganese compounds ........................................................................................................... 7439   96   5 5.0E   05 IRIS Mercury compounds ................................................................................................................. HG_ CMPDS 9.0E   05 CAL Naphthalene ............................................................................................................................. 91   20   3 3.0E   03 IRIS Nickel compounds .................................................................................................................... 7440   02   0 2.0E   04 ATSDR 9.1E   01 CAL PAH ( shown below as 7   PAH) ................................................................................................ Benzo ( a) anthracene .............................................................................................................. 56   55   3 1.1E   04 CAL Benzo ( b) fluoranthene ............................................................................................................ 205   99   2 1.1E   04 CAL Benzo ( k) fluoranthene ............................................................................................................. 207   08   9 1.1E   04 CAL Benzo ( a) pyrene ..................................................................................................................... 50   32   8 1.1E   03 CAL Chrysene .................................................................................................................................. 218   01   9 1.1E   05 CAL Dibenz ( a, h) anthracene .......................................................................................................... 53   70   3 1.2E   03 CAL Indeno ( 1,2,3 cd) pyrene .......................................................................................................... 193   39   5 . 1.4E   04 CAL Propylene oxide ....................................................................................................................... 75   56   9 3.0E   02 IRIS 3.7E   06 IRIS Selenium compounds ............................................................................................................... 7782   49   2 2.0E   02 CAL Toluene .................................................................................................................................... 108   88   3 4.0E   01 IRIS Xylenes ( mixed) ....................................................................................................................... 1330   20   7 4.3E   01 ATSDR a Reference Concentration: An estimate ( with uncertainty spanning perhaps an order of magnitude) of a continuous inhalation exposure to the human population ( including sensitive subgroups which include children, asthmatics, and the elderly) that is likely to be without an appreciable risk of deleterious effects during a lifetime. It can be derived from various types of human or animal data, with uncertainty factors generally applied to reflect limitations of the data used. b Unit Risk Estimate: The upper bound excess lifetime cancer risk estimated to result from continuous exposure to an agent at a concentration of 1 ug/ m3 in air. The interpretation of the Unit Risk Estimate would be as follows: If the Unit Risk Estimate = 1.5 × 10   6 per ug/ m3, 1.5 excess tumors are expected to develop per 1,000,000 people if exposed daily for a lifetime to 1 ug of the chemical in 1 cubic meter of air. Unit Risk Estimates are considered upper bound estimates, meaning they represent a plausible upper limit to the true value. ( Note that this is usually not a true statistical confidence limit.) The true risk is likely to be less, but could be greater. Sources: IRIS = EPA Integrated Risk Information System ( http:// www. epa. gov/ iris/ subst/ index. html). ATSDR = U. S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry ( http:// www. atsdr. cdc. gov/ mrls. html). CAL = California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. ( http:// www. oehha. ca. gov/ air/ hot_ spots/ index. html). HEAST = EPA Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (# PB(= 97   921199, July 1997).

To establish an applicability cutoff under CAA section 112( d)( 4), EPA would need to define ambient air exposure concentration limits for any threshold pollutants involved. There are several factors to consider when establishing such concentrations. First we would need to ensure that the concentrations that would be established would protect public health with an ample margin of safety. As discussed above, the approach EPA commonly uses when evaluating the potential hazard of a threshold air pollutant is to calculate the pollutant's hazard quotient, which is the exposure concentration divided by the RfC. The EPA's `` Supplementary Guidance for Conducting Health Risk Assessment of Chemical Mixtures'' suggests that the noncancer health effects associated with a mixture of pollutants ideally are assessed by considering the pollutants' common mechanisms of toxicity 5. The guidance also suggests that when exposures to mixtures of pollutants are being evaluated, the risk assessor may calculate a HI. The recommended method is to calculate multiple hazard indices for each exposure route of interest, and for a single specific toxic effect or toxicity to a single target organ. The default approach recommended by the guidance is to sum the hazard quotients for those pollutants that induce the same toxic effect or affect the same target organ. A mixture is then assessed by several HI, each representing one toxic effect or target organ. The guidance notes that the pollutants included in the HI calculation are any pollutants that show the effect being assessed, regardless of the critical effect upon which the RfC is based. The guidance cautions that if the target organ or toxic effect for which the HI is calculated is different from the RfC's critical effect, then the RfC for that chemical will be an overestimate, that is, the resultant HI potentially may be overprotective. Conversely, since the calculation of a HI does not account for the fact that the potency of a mixture of HAP can be more potent than the sum of the individual HAP potencies, a HI may potentially be underprotective in some situations.

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1907 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules 6 Senate Debate on Conference Report ( October 27, 1990), reprinted in `` A Legislative History of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' Comm. Print S. Prt. 103   38 ( 1993) (`` Legis. Hist.'') at 868. 7 See http:// www. epa. gov/ ttn/ atw/ nata. 8 See http:// www. atsdr. cdc. gov/ toxpro2. html. 9 `` A Tiered Modeling Approach for Assessing the Risks due to Sources of Hazardous Air Pollutants.'' EPA   450/ 4   92   001. David E. Guinnup, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, USEPA, March 1992. 10 `` Draft Revised Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment.'' NCEA   F   0644, USEPA, Risk Assessment Forum, July 1999. pp 3   9ff. http:// www. epa. gov/ ncea/ raf/ pdfs/ cancer l gls. pdf. b. Options for establishing a HI limit. One consideration in establishing a HI limit is whether the analysis considers the total ambient air concentrations of all the emitted HAP to which the public is exposed 6. There are several options for establishing a HI limit for the § 112( d)( 4) analysis that reflect, to varying degrees, public exposure. One option is to allow the hazard index posed by all threshold HAP emitted by combustion turbines at the facility to be no greater than one. This approach is protective if no additional threshold HAP exposures would be anticipated from other sources at, or in the vicinity of, the facility or through other routes of exposure ( i. e., through ingestion). A second option is to adopt a default percentage approach, whereby the HI limit of the HAP emitted by the facility is set at some percentage or fraction of one ( e. g., 20 percent or 0.2). This approach recognizes the fact that the facility in question is only one of many sources of threshold HAP to which people are typically exposed every day. Because noncancer risk assessment is predicated on total exposure or dose, and because risk assessments focus only on an individual source, establishing a HI limit of 0.2 would account for an assumption that 20 percent of an individual's total exposure is from that individual source. For the purposes of this discussion, we will call all sources of HAP, other than operations within the source category at the facility in question, `` background'' sources. If the affected source is allowed to emit HAP such that its own impacts could result in HI values of one, total exposures to threshold HAP in the vicinity of the facility could be substantially greater than one due to background sources, and this would not be protective of public health, since only HI values below one are considered to be without appreciable risk of adverse health effects. Thus, setting the HI limit for the facility at some default percentage of one will provide a buffer which would help to ensure that total exposures to threshold HAP near the facility ( i. e., in combination with exposures due to background sources) will generally not exceed one, and can generally be considered to be without appreciable risk of adverse health effects. The EPA requests comment on using the default percentage approach and on setting the default HI limit at 0.2. The EPA is also requesting comment on whether an alternative HI limit, in some multiple of one, would be a more appropriate applicability cutoff. A third option is to use available data ( from scientific literature or EPA studies, for example) to determine background concentrations of HAP, possibly on a national or regional basis. These data would be used to estimate the exposures to HAP from noncombustion turbine sources in the vicinity of an individual facility. For example, EPA's National Scale Air Toxics Assessment ( NATA) 7 and ATSDR's Toxicological Profiles 8 contain information about background concentrations of some HAP in the atmosphere and other media. The combined exposures from an affected source and from background emissions ( as determined from the literature or studies) would then not be allowed to exceed a HI limit of 1. The EPA requests comment on the appropriateness of setting the hazard index limit at one for such an analysis. A fourth option is to allow facilities to estimate or measure their own facility specific background HAP concentrations for use in their analysis. With regard to the third and fourth options, EPA requests comment on how these analyses could be structured. Specifically, EPA requests comment on how the analyses should take into account background exposure levels from air, water, food and soil encountered by the individuals exposed to emissions from this source category. In addition, we request comment on how such analyses should account for potential increases in exposures due to the use of a new HAP or the increased use of a previously emitted HAP, or the effect of other nearby sources that release HAP. The EPA requests comment on the feasibility and scientific validity of each of these or other options. Finally, EPA requests comment on how we should implement the CAA section 112( d)( 4) applicability cutoffs, including appropriate mechanisms for applying cutoffs to individual facilities. For example, would the title V permit process provide an appropriate mechanism? c. Tiered analytical approach for predicting exposure. Establishing that a facility meets the cutoffs established under CAA section 112( d)( 4) will necessarily involve combining estimates of pollutant emissions with air dispersion modeling to predict exposures. The EPA envisions that we would promote a tiered analytical approach for these determinations. A tiered analysis involves making successive refinements in modeling methodologies and input data to derive successively less conservative, more realistic estimates of pollutant concentrations in air and estimates of risk. As a first tier of analysis, EPA could develop a series of simple look up tables based on the results of air dispersion modeling conducted using conservative input assumptions. By specifying a limited number of input parameters, such as stack height, distance to property line, and emission rate, a facility could use these look up tables to determine easily whether the emissions from their sources might cause a hazard index limit to be exceeded. A facility that does not pass this initial conservative screening analysis could implement increasingly more sitespecific but more resource intensive tiers of analysis using EPA approved modeling procedures, in an attempt to demonstrate that their facility does not exceed the HI limit. Existing EPA guidance could provide the basis for conducting such a tiered analysis. 9 The EPA requests comment on methods for constructing and implementing a tiered analysis for determining applicability of the CAA section 112( d)( 4) criterion to specific combustion turbine sources. Ambient monitoring data could possibly be used to supplement or supplant the tiered modeling analysis described above. We envision that the appropriate monitoring to support such a determination could be extensive. The EPA requests comment on the appropriate use of monitoring in the determinations described above. d. Accounting for dose response relationships. In the past, EPA routinely treated carcinogens as nonthreshold pollutants. The EPA recognizes that advances in risk assessment science and policy may affect the way EPA differentiates between threshold and nonthreshold HAP. The EPA's draft Guidelines for Carcinogen Risk Assessment 10 suggest that carcinogens be assigned non linear dose response relationships where data warrant. Moreover, it is possible that doseresponse curves for some pollutants may reach zero risk at a dose greater VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1908 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules than zero, creating a threshold for carcinogenic effects. It is possible that future evaluations of the carcinogens emitted by this source category would determine that one or more of the carcinogens in the category is a threshold carcinogen or is a carcinogen that exhibits a non linear dose response relationship but does not have a threshold. The dose response assessment for formaldehyde is currently undergoing revision by EPA. As part of this revision effort, EPA is evaluating formaldehyde as a potential non linear carcinogen. The revised dose response assessment will be subject to review by the EPA Science Advisory Board, followed by full consensus review, before adoption into the EPA IRIS. At this time, EPA estimates that the consensus review will be completed by the end of 2003. The revision of the dose response assessment could affect the potency factor of formaldehyde, as well as its status as a threshold or nonthreshold pollutant. At this time, the outcome is not known. In addition to the current reassessment by EPA, there have been several reassessments of the toxicity and carcinogenicity of formaldehyde in recent years, including work by the World Health Organization and the Canadian Ministry of Health. The EPA requests comment on how we should consider the state of the science as it relates to the treatment of threshold pollutants when making determinations under CAA section CAA section 112( d)( 4). In addition, EPA requests comment on whether there is a level of emissions of a non threshold carcinogenic HAP at which it would be appropriate to allow a facility to use the scenarios discussed under the CAA section 112( d)( 4) approach. If the CAA section 112( d)( 4) approach were adopted, the requirements of the rule as proposed would not apply to any source that demonstrates, based on a tiered analysis that includes EPAapproved modeling of the affected source's emissions, that the anticipated HAP exposures do not exceed the specified HI limit.

3. Subcategory Delisting Under Section 112( c)( 9)( B) of the CAA The EPA is authorized to establish categories and subcategories of sources, as appropriate, pursuant to CAA section 112( c)( 1), in order to facilitate the development of MACT standards consistent with section 112 of the CAA. Further, section CAA section 112( c)( 9)( B) allows EPA to delete a category ( or subcategory) from the list of major sources for which MACT standards are to be developed when the following can be demonstrated: ( 1) In the case of carcinogenic pollutants, that `` no source in the category * * * emits [ carcinogenic] air pollutants in quantities which may cause a lifetime risk of cancer greater than one in 1 million to the individual in the population who is most exposed to emissions of such pollutants from the source''; ( 2) in the case of pollutants that cause adverse noncancer health effects, that `` emissions from no source in the category or subcategory * * * exceed a level which is adequate to protect public health with an ample margin of safety''; and ( 3) in the case of pollutants that cause adverse environmental effects, that `` no adverse environmental effect will result from emissions from any source.'' One way in which the Agency could use these authorities would be to define a subcategory of facilities within the source category based upon technological differences, such as differences in turbine design characteristics, fuel type, production rate, emission vent flow rates, overall facility size, emissions characteristics, processes, or air pollution control device viability. The EPA requests comment on how we might establish subcategories based on these, or other, source characteristics. If it could then be determined that each source in this technologically defined subcategory presents a low risk to the surrounding community, the subcategory could then be delisted in accordance with CAA section 112( c)( 9). The GTA letter discussed above provides two examples of technological differences that may allow us to create subcategories of stationary combustion turbines. Those subcategories could be delisted if it were demonstrated that they met the requirements of CAA section 112( c)( 9). The GTA letter includes information on the risks created by emissions from lean premix turbines. We are already proposing a subcategory for lean premix turbines and in that discussion describe how these turbines are clearly technologically different from other types of stationary combustion turbines. While the GTA letter did not provide sufficient information for us to delist lean premix turbines at this time, leanpremix turbines are a subcategory that could be delisted if GTA or other commenters provide sufficient information for us to determine that this subcategory satisfies the requirements of CAA section 112( c)( 9). Natural gas fired turbines are another example of a subcategory that might be delisted under this approach. We have created subcategories based on fuel type in other MACT rules and believe that fuel type could be an appropriate way of subcategorizing stationary combustion turbines or of creating further subdivisions within the subcategories contained in the proposed rule. We are not proposing a subcategory for natural gas fired turbines at this time, although we could create such a subcategory in the future, if appropriate. While the information presented in GTA's letter is not sufficient for us to make this determination at this time, additional information on the emissions and risks from natural gas fired turbines could lead us to delist natural gas fired turbines under this approach. The EPA requests comment on the concept of identifying technologicallybased subcategories that may include only low risk facilities within the combustion turbine source category and on the specific examples presented above. Another approach to using the authority granted in CAA section 112( c)( 9) is presented in the white paper prepared by representatives of the plywood and composite wood products industry ( see docket OAR 2002   0060). The EPA is considering whether it would be possible to establish a subcategory of facilities within the larger source category that would meet the risk based criteria for delisting. Such criteria would likely include the same requirements as described previously for the second scenario under the CAA section 112( d)( 4) approach, whereby a facility would be in the low risk subcategory if its emissions of threshold pollutants do not result in exposures which exceed the HI limits and if its emissions of nonthreshold pollutants do not exceed a cancer risk level of 10 ¥ 6. The EPA requests comment on what an appropriate HI limit would be for a determination that a facility be included in the low risk subcategory. Since each facility in such a subcategory would be a low risk facility ( i. e., if each met these criteria), the subcategory could be delisted in accordance with CAA section 112( c)( 9), thereby limiting the costs and impacts of the proposed MACT rule to only those facilities that do not qualify for subcategorization and delisting. Facilities seeking to be included in the delisted subcategory would be responsible for providing all data required to determine whether they are eligible for inclusion. Facilities that could not demonstrate that they are eligible to be included in the low risk subcategory would be subject to MACT and possible future residual risk standards. The EPA solicits comment on VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1909 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules implementing a risk based approach for establishing subcategories of stationary combustion turbines. Since each facility in such a subcategory would be a low risk facility ( i. e., if each met these criteria), the subcategory could be delisted in accordance with CAA section 112( c)( 9), thereby limiting the costs and impacts of the proposed MACT rule to only those facilities that do not qualify for subcategorization and delisting. Establishing that a facility qualifies for the low risk subcategory under CAA section 112( c)( 9) will necessarily involve combining estimates of pollutant emissions with air dispersion modeling to predict exposures. The EPA envisions that we would employ the same tiered analysis described earlier in the CAA section 112 ( d)( 4) discussion for these determinations. One concern that EPA has with respect to the CAA section 112( c)( 9) approach is the effect that it could have on the MACT floors. If many of the facilities in the low risk subcategory are well controlled, that could make the MACT floor less stringent for the remaining facilities. One approach that has been suggested to mitigate this effect would be to establish the MACT floor now based on controls in place for the entire category and to allow facilities to become part of the low risk subcategory in the future, after the MACT standards are established. This would allow lowrisk facilities to use the CAA section 112( c)( 9) exemption without affecting the MACT floor calculation. The EPA requests comment on this suggested approach. If a CAA section 112( c)( 9) approach were adopted, the requirements of the rule as proposed would not apply to any source that demonstrates that it belongs in a subcategory which has been delisted under CAA section 112( c)( 9).

C. Limited Use Subcategory We are soliciting comments on creating a subcategory of limited use stationary combustion turbines with capacity utilization of 10 percent or less ( 876 or fewer hours of annual operation). Units in this subcategory would include combustion turbines used for electric power peak shaving that are called upon to operate fewer than 876 hours per year. These units operate only during peak energy use periods, typically in the summer months. We believe that these infrequently operated units typically operate 10 percent of the year or less. While these are potential sources of emissions, and it is appropriate for EPA to address them in the proposed rule, the Agency believes that their use and operation are different compared to typical combustion turbines. We believe that it may be appropriate for such limited use units to have their own subcategory. Therefore, we are soliciting comment on subcategorizing combustion turbines having a capacity utilization of less than 10 percent. We are interested in comments on creating a subcategory for limited use peak shaving ( less than 10 percent capacity utilization) combustion turbines. We are interested in comments on the validity and appropriateness under the CAA for a subcategory for limited use peak shaving combustion turbines, data on the levels of control currently achieved by such combustion turbines, and any technical limitations that might make it impossible to achieve control of emissions from limited use peak shaving combustion turbines.

VI. Administrative Requirements A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning Review Under Executive Order 12866 ( 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), we must determine whether a regulatory action is `` significant'' and, therefore, subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order defines `` significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a rule that may: ( 1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $ 100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities; ( 2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; ( 3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligation of recipients thereof; or ( 4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order. Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, we have determined that the proposed rule is a `` significant regulatory action'' within the meaning of the Executive Order. As such, this action was submitted to OMB for review. Changes made in response to OMB suggestions or recommendations are included in the docket.

B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism Executive Order 13132 ( 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) requires us to develop an accountable process to ensure `` meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' `` Policies that have federalism implications'' are defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have `` substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' The proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. We are required by section 112 of the CAA, 42 U. S. C. § 7412, to establish the standards in the proposed rule. The proposed rule primarily affects private industry, and does not impose significant economic costs on State or local governments. The proposed rule does not include an express provision preempting State or local regulations. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to the proposed rule. Although section 6 of Executive Order 13132 does not apply to the proposed rule, we consulted with representatives of State and local governments to enable them to provide meaningful and timely input into the development of the proposed rule. This consultation took place during the ICCR FACA committee meetings where members representing State and local governments participated in developing recommendations for EPA's combustion related rulemakings, including the proposed rule. The concerns raised by representatives of State and local governments were considered during the development of the proposed rule. In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on the proposed rule from State and local officials.

C. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments Executive Order 13175 ( 65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure `` meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1910 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules implications.'' `` Policies that have tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have `` substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes.'' The proposed rule does not have tribal implications. 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. We do not know of any stationary combustion turbines owned or operated by Indian tribal governments. However, if there are any, the effect of these rules 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 the proposed rule.

D. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks Executive Order 13045 ( 62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that: ( 1) Is determined to be `` economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866, and ( 2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that we have reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, we must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives. We interpret Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5   501 of the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. The proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is based on technology performance and not on health or safety risks.

E. Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use Executive Order 13211 ( 66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), provides that agencies shall prepare and submit to the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, a Statement of Energy Effects for certain actions identified as `` significant energy actions.'' Section 4( b) of Executive Order 13211 defines `` significant energy actions'' as `` any action by an agency ( normally published in the Federal Register) that promulgates or is expected to lead to the promulgation of a final rule or regulation, including notices of inquiry, advance notices of proposed rulemaking, and notices of proposed rulemaking: ( 1) ( i) That is a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 or any successor order, and ( ii) is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy; or ( 2) that is designated by the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action.'' The proposed rule is a significant regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866. We have, therefore, prepared a Statement of Energy Effects for this action as follows. The increase in petroleum product output, which includes increases in fuel production, is estimated at 0.003 percent, or about 475 barrels per day based on 2000 U. S. fuel production nationwide. The reduction in coal production is estimated at 0.006 percent, or about 700,000 short tons per year based on 2000 U. S. coal production nationwide. The reduction in electricity output is estimated at 0.02 percent, or about 4.9 billion kilowatt hours per year based on 2000 U. S. electricity production nationwide. Production of natural gas is expected to increase by 3.0 million cubic feet ( ft3) per day. The maximum of all energy price increases, which include increases in natural gas prices as well as those for petroleum products, coal, and electricity, is estimated to be the 0.18 percent increase in peak load electricity rates nationwide. Energy distribution costs may increase by roughly no more than the same amount as electricity rates. We expect that there will be no discernable impact on the import of foreign energy supplies, and no other adverse outcomes are expected to occur with regards to energy supplies. Also, the increase in cost of energy production should be minimal given the very small increase in fuel consumption resulting from back pressure related to operation of oxidation catalyst emission control devices. All of the estimates presented above account for some passthrough of costs to consumers as well as the direct cost impact to producers. For more information on these estimated energy effects, please refer to the economic impact analysis for the proposed rule. This analysis is available in the public docket. No new combustion turbines with a capacity of less than 1.0 MW will be affected. Also, the control level applied to affected new combustion turbines is the minimum that can be applied consistent with the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Therefore, we conclude that the proposed rule when implemented will not have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.

F. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 ( UMRA), Public Law 104   4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, we generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with `` Federal mandates'' that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $ 100 million or more in any 1 year. Before promulgating a rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires us to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows us to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost effective or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before we establish any regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, we must develop a small government agency plan under section 203 of the UMRA. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements. We have determined that the proposed rule contains a Federal mandate that will not result in expenditures of $ 100 million or more VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1911 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules for State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any 1 year. Accordingly, we have not prepared a written statement under section 202 of the UMRA.

1. Statutory Authority As discussed in previously in this preamble, the statutory authority for the proposed rulemaking is section 112 of the CAA. Title III of the CAA was enacted to reduce nationwide air toxic emissions. Section 112( b) of the CAA lists the 188 chemicals, compounds, or groups of chemicals deemed by Congress to be HAP. These toxic air pollutants are to be regulated by NESHAP. Section 112( d) of the CAA directs us to develop NESHAP which require existing and new major sources to control emissions of HAP using MACT. The NESHAP apply to all stationary combustion turbines located at major sources of HAP emissions, however, only new or reconstructed stationary combustion turbines have substantive regulatory requirements. In compliance with section 205( a) we identified and considered a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives. Additional information on the costs and environmental impacts of the regulatory alternatives is presented in the `` Stationary Combustion Turbines Control Options Cost Information Summary'' in the docket. The regulatory alternative upon which the proposed rule is based represents the MACT floor for stationary combustion turbines and, as a result, it is the least costly and least burdensome alternative. In addition, we have conducted an economic impact analysis of today's proposed rule that includes the impacts on State and local government entities in order to provide information on the effects of the proposed rule on such entities. The analysis is available in the docket for the proposed rule.

2. Consultation With Government Officials The Unfunded Mandates Act requires that we describe the extent of the Agency's prior consultation with affected State, local, and tribal officials, summarize the officials' comments or concerns, and summarize our response to those comments or concerns. In addition, section 203 of the UMRA requires that we develop a plan for informing and advising small governments that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by a proposal. Although the proposed rule does not significantly affect any State, local, or tribal governments, we have consulted with State and local air pollution control officials. We also have held meetings on the proposed rule with many of the stakeholders from numerous individual companies, environmental groups, consultants and vendors, labor unions, and other interested parties. We have added materials to the Air docket to document those meetings. In addition, we have determined that the proposed rule contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, today's proposed rule is not subject to the requirements of section 203 of the UMRA.

G. Regulatory Flexibility Act ( RFA), as Amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 ( SBREFA), 5 U. S. C. 601 et seq. The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's proposed rule on small entities, small entity is defined as: ( 1) A small business whose parent company has fewer than 100 or 1,000 employees, depending on size definition for the affected North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) code, or fewer than 4 billion kW hr per year of electricity usage; ( 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 forprofit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field. It should be noted that small entities in 6 NAICS codes are affected by the proposed rule, and the small business definition applied to each industry by NAICS code is that listed in the Small Business Administration ( SBA) size standards ( 13 CFR 121). After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This certification is based upon ( 1) examining the impacts to small entities based on the existing combustion turbines inventory, and presuming that the existing mix of combustion turbines among industries is a good approximation of the mix of turbines that will be installed and affected by the proposed rule up to 2005, and ( 2) considering influences on the decision by small entities to install new turbines. We have determined, based on the existing combustion turbines inventory, that 29 small entities out of 300 in the industries impacted by the proposed rule may be affected. None of these small entities will incur control costs associated with the proposed rule, but will incur monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting costs and the costs of performance testing. These 29 small entities own 51 affected turbines in the existing combustion turbines inventory, which represents only 2.5 percent of the existing turbines overall. Of these entities, 22 of these entities are small communities and 7 are affected small firms. None of the 29 affected small entities are estimated to have compliance costs that exceed onehalf of 1 percent of their revenues. The median compliance costs to affected small entities is only 0.07 percent of sales. In addition, the proposed rule is likely to also increase profits at the many small firms and increase revenues for the many small communities using combustion turbines that are not affected by the rule as a result of the very slight increase in market prices. Thus, we conclude that the proposed rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. It should be noted that it is likely that the ongoing deregulation of the electric power industry across the nation should minimize the proposed rule's impacts on small entities. Increased competition in the electric power industry is forecasted to decrease the market price for wholesale electric power. Open access to the grid and lower market prices for electricity will make it less attractive for local communities to purchase and operate new combustion turbines. For more information on the results of the analysis of small entity impacts, please refer to the economic impact analysis in the docket. Although the proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has tried to reduce the impact of the rule on small entities. In the proposed rule, the Agency is applying the minimum level of control and the minimum level of monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting to affected sources allowed by the Clean Air Act. In addition, as mentioned earlier in the preamble, new turbines with capacities under 1.0 MW are not covered by the VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1912 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules proposed rule. This provision should reduce the level of small entity impacts. We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the proposed rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues related to such impacts.

H. Paperwork Reduction Act The information collection requirements in the proposed rule will be submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq. An Information Collection Request ( ICR) document has been prepared ( ICR No. 1967.01) and a copy may be obtained from Susan Auby by mail at the Collection Strategies Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( 2822), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460, by e mail at auby. susan@ epa. gov, or by calling ( 202) 566   1672. A copy may also be downloaded off the internet at http:/ / www. epa. gov/ icr. The information requirements are based on notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the NESHAP General Provisions ( 40 CFR part 63, subpart A), which are mandatory for all operators subject to national emission standards. These recordkeeping and reporting requirements are specifically authorized by section 114 of the CAA ( 42 U. S. C. 7414). All information submitted to EPA pursuant to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for which a claim of confidentiality is made is safeguarded according to Agency policies set forth in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B. The proposed rule would require maintenance inspections of the control devices but would not require any notifications or reports beyond those required by the General Provisions. The recordkeeping requirements require only the specific information needed to determine compliance. The annual monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping burden for this collection ( averaged over the first 3 years after the effective date of the standards) is estimated to be 8,458 labor hours per year at a total annual cost of $ 2.4 million. This estimate includes a onetime performance test, semiannual excess emission reports, maintenance inspections, notifications, and recordkeeping. Total capital/ startup costs associated with the monitoring requirements over the 3 year period of the ICR are estimated at $ 515,262, with operation and maintenance costs of $ 21,047 per year. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for our regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. Comments are requested on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques. Send comments on the ICR to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( 2822), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20460; and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th St., NW, Washington, DC 20503, marked Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Include the ICR number in any correspondence. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 days after January 14, 2003, a comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it by February 13, 2003. The final rule will respond to any OMB or public comments on the information collection requirements contained in this proposal.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act Section 12( d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act ( NTTAA) of 1995 ( Public Law No. 104   113; 15 U. S. C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in their regulatory and procurement 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) developed or adopted by one or more voluntary consensus bodies. The NTTAA directs us to provide Congress, through annual reports to the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB), with explanations when an agency does not use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. The proposed rulemaking involves technical standards. We propose in the rule to use EPA Methods 1, 1A, 3A, 3B, 4 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A; Method 320 of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A; Method 323 of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A; Performance Specification ( PS) 3, PS 4A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix B; EPA SW   846 Method 0011; and ARB Method 430, California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board, 2020 L Street, Sacramento, CA 95812. Consistent with the NTTAA, we conducted searches to identify voluntary consensus standards in addition to these EPA methods. No applicable voluntary consensus standards were identified for EPA Methods 1A, 3B of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A; PS 3, PS 4 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix B; and ARB Method 430, California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board, 2020 L Street, Sacramento, CA 95812. The search and review results have been documented and are placed in the docket for the proposed rule. This search for emission measurement procedures identified nine voluntary consensus standards. We determined that six of these nine standards were impractical alternatives to EPA test methods for the purposes of the proposed rulemaking. Therefore, we do not propose to adopt these standards today. The reasons for this determination for the six methods are discussed below. Two of the six voluntary consensus standards are impractical alternatives to EPA test methods for the purposes of the proposed rulemaking because they are too general, too broad, or not sufficiently detailed to assure compliance with EPA regulatory requirements: ASTM E337   84 ( Reapproved 1996), `` Standard Test Method for Measuring Humidity with a Psychrometer ( the Measurement of Wet and Dry Bulb Temperatures),'' for EPA Method 4; and CAN/ CSA Z223.2   M86( 1986), `` Method for the Continuous Measurement of Oxygen, Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Monoxide, Sulphur Dioxide, and Oxides of Nitrogen in Enclosed Combustion Flue Gas Streams,'' for EPA Method 3A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A. Four of the six voluntary consensus standards are impractical alternatives to EPA test methods for the purposes of the proposed rulemaking because they VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1913 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules lacked sufficient quality assurance and quality control requirements necessary for EPA compliance assurance requirements: ASTM D3154   91, `` Standard Method for Average Velocity in a Duct ( Pitot Tube Method),'' for EPA Methods 1, 2, 2C, 3, 3B, and 4 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A; ASTM D5835   95, `` Standard Practice for Sampling Stationary Source Emissions for Automated Determination of Gas Concentration,'' for EPA Method 3A of 40 part 60, appendix A; ISO 10396: 1993, `` Stationary Source Emissions: Sampling for the Automated Determination of Gas Concentrations,'' for EPA Method 3A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A; and ISO 9096: 1992, `` Determination of Concentration and Mass Flow Rate of Particulate Matter in Gas Carrying Ducts   Manual Gravimetric Method,'' for EPA Method 5 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A. The following three of the nine voluntary consensus standards identified in this search were not available at the time the review was conducted for the purposes of the proposed rulemaking because they are under development by a voluntary consensus body: ASME/ BSR MFC 13M, `` Flow Measurement by Velocity Traverse,'' for EPA Method 1 ( and possibly 2) of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A; ISO/ DIS 12039, `` Stationary Source Emissions   Determination of Carbon Monoxide, Carbon Dioxide, and Oxygen   Automated Methods,'' for EPA Method 3A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A; and ASTM D6348   98, `` Determination of Gaseous Compounds by Extractive Direct Interface Fourier Transform ( FTIR) Spectroscopy,'' for EPA Method 320 of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A. While we are not proposing to include these three voluntary consensus standards in today's proposal, we will consider the standards when final. For the voluntary consensus standard, ASTM D6348   98, Determination of Gaseous Compounds by Extractive Direct Interface Fourier Transform ( FTIR) Spectroscopy, we have submitted comments to ASTM regarding EPA's technical evaluation of ASTM D6348   98. Currently, the ASTM Subcommittee D22   03 is undertaking a revision of the ASTM standard in part to address EPA's comments. Upon successful ASTM balloting and demonstration of technical equivalency with the EPA's FTIR methods, the revised ASTM standard could be incorporated by reference into the proposed rule at a later date. We are taking comment on the compliance demonstration requirements in the proposed rulemaking and specifically invite the public to identify potentially applicable voluntary consensus standards. Commenters should also explain why the proposed rule should adopt these voluntary consensus standards in lieu of or in addition to EPA's standards. Emission test methods and performance specifications submitted for evaluation should be accompanied with a basis for the recommendation, including method validation data and the procedure used to validate the candidate method ( if a method other than Method 301, 40 CFR part 63, Appendix A, was used). Tables 3 and 5 of proposed subpart YYYY list the EPA testing methods and performance standards included in the proposed rule. Under § 63.8 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, a source may apply to EPA for permission to use alternative monitoring in place of any of the EPA testing methods.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63 Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: November 26, 2002. Christine Todd Whitman, Administrator.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 of the Code of the Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 63   [ AMENDED]

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

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

2. Part 63 is proposed to be amended by adding subpart YYYY to read as follows:

Subpart YYYY   National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Stationary Combustion Turbines What This Subpart Covers Sec. 63.6080 What is the purpose of subpart YYYY? 63.6085 Am I subject to this subpart? 63.6090 What parts of my plant does this subpart cover? 63.6092 Are duct burners and waste heat recovery units covered by subpart YYYY? 63.6095 When do I have to comply with this subpart?

Emission and Operating Limitations 63.6100 Sea What emission and operating limitations must I meet?

General Compliance Requirements 63.6105 What are my general requirements for complying with this subpart? Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements 63.6110 By what date must I conduct the initial performance tests or other initial compliance demonstrations? 63.6115 When must I conduct subsequent performance tests? 63.6120 What performance tests and other procedures must I use? 63.6125 What are my monitor installation, operation, and maintenance requirements? 63.6130 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission and operating limitations?

Continuous Compliance Requirements 63.6135 How do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate continuous compliance? 63.6140 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission and operating limitations?

Notifications, Reports, and Records 63.6145 What notifications must I submit and when? 63.6150 What reports must I submit and when? 63.6155 What records must I keep? 63.6160 In what form and how long must I keep my records?

Other Requirements and Information 63.6165 What parts of the General Provisions apply to me? 63.6170 Who implements and enforces this subpart? 63.6175 What definitions apply to this subpart?

Tables to Subpart YYYY of Part 63 Table 1 to Subpart YYYY of Part 63.   Emission Limitations Table 2 to Subpart YYYY of Part 63.   Operating Limitations Table 3 to Subpart YYYY of Part 63.   Requirements for Performance Tests and Initial Compliance Demonstrations Table 4 to Subpart YYYY of Part 63.   Initial Compliance with Emission Limitations Table 5 to Subpart YYYY of Part 63.   Continuous Compliance with Emission Limitations Table 6 to Subpart YYYY of Part 63.   Continuous Compliance with Operating Limitations Table 7 to Subpart YYYY of Part 63.   Requirements for Reports Table 8 to Subpart YYYY of Part 63.   Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart YYYY What This Subpart Covers § 63.6080 What is the purpose of subpart YYYY?

Subpart YYYY establishes national emission limitations and operating limitations for hazardous air pollutants ( HAP) emissions from stationary combustion turbines located at major sources of HAP emissions and requirements to demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the emission and operating limitations.

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1914 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules § 63.6085 Am I Subject to This Subpart? You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a stationary combustion turbine located at a major source of HAP emissions. ( a) A stationary combustion turbine is one that is not self propelled or intended to be propelled while performing its function, although it may be mounted on a vehicle for portability or transportability. Stationary combustion turbines covered by this subpart include simple cycle stationary combustion turbines, regenerative/ recuperative cycle stationary combustion turbines, cogeneration cycle stationary combustion turbines, and combined cycle stationary combustion turbines. ( b) A major source of HAP emissions is a plant site that emits or has the potential to emit any single HAP at a rate of 10 tons ( 9.07 megagrams) or more per year or any combination of HAP at a rate of 25 tons ( 22.68 megagrams) or more per year, except that for oil and gas production facilities, a major source of HAP emissions is determined for each surface site.

§ 63.6090 What parts of my plant does this subpart cover? This subpart applies to each affected source. ( a) Affected source. An affected source is any existing, new, or reconstructed stationary combustion turbine located at a major source of HAP emissions. ( 1) Existing stationary combustion turbine. A stationary combustion turbine is existing if you commenced construction or reconstruction of the stationary combustion turbine on or before January 14, 2003. A change in ownership of an existing stationary combustion turbine does not make that stationary combustion turbine a new or reconstructed stationary combustion turbine. ( 2) New stationary turbine. A stationary combustion turbine is new if you commenced construction of the stationary combustion turbine after January 14, 2003. ( 3) Reconstructed stationary turbine. A stationary combustion turbine is reconstructed if you meet the definition of reconstruction in § 63.2 of subpart A of this part and reconstruction is commenced after January 14, 2003. ( b) Exceptions. ( 1) A new or reconstructed stationary combustion turbine located at a major source or an existing lean premix stationary combustion turbine located at a major source which meets any of the following criteria does not have to meet the requirements of this subpart and of subpart A of this part except for the initial notification requirements of § 63.6145( d): ( i) The stationary combustion turbine is an emergency stationary combustion turbine; ( ii) The stationary combustion turbine is a limited use stationary combustion turbine; or ( iii) The stationary combustion turbine burns landfill gas or digester gas as the primary fuel. ( 2) An existing, new, or reconstructed stationary combustion turbine with a rated peak power output of less than 1.0 megawatt ( MW) at International Organization for Standardization ( ISO) standard day conditions, which is located at a major source, does not have to meet the requirements of this subpart and of subpart A of this part. ( 3) Existing diffusion flame stationary combustion turbines do not have to meet the requirements of this subpart and of subpart A of this part. ( 4) Combustion turbine engine test cells/ stands do not have to meet the requirements of this subpart but may have to meet the requirements of subpart A of this part if subject to another subpart.

§ 63.6092 Are duct burners and waste heat recovery units covered by subpart YYYY?

No, duct burners and waste heat recovery units are considered steam generating units and are not covered under this subpart.

§ 63.6095 When do I have to comply with this subpart?

( a) Affected sources. ( 1) If you start up your new or reconstructed stationary combustion turbine before [ DATE THE FINAL RULE IS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER], you must comply with the emission limitations and operating limitations in this subpart no later than [ DATE THE FINAL RULE IS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. ( 2) If you start up your new or reconstructed stationary combustion turbine after [ DATE THE FINAL RULE IS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER], you must comply with the emission limitations and operating limitations in this subpart upon startup of your affected source. ( 3) If you have an existing stationary combustion turbine, you must comply with the emission limitations and operating limitations in this subpart no later than 3 years after [ DATE THE FINAL RULE IS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. ( b) Area sources that become major sources. If your new or reconstructed stationary combustion turbine is an area source that increases its emissions or its potential to emit such that it becomes a major source of HAP, it must be in compliance with this subpart when it becomes a major source. ( c) You must meet the notification requirements in § 63.6145 according to the schedule in § 63.6145 and in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A.

Emission and Operating Limitations § 63.6100 What emission and operating limitations must I meet?

For each stationary combustion turbine with a rated peak power output of 1.0 MW or greater at ISO standard day conditions located at a major source, which is not: ( a) An emergency stationary combustion turbine; ( b) A stationary combustion turbine burning landfill gas or digester gas as its primary fuel; ( c) A limited use stationary combustion turbine; or ( d) An existing diffusion flame stationary combustion turbine; you must comply with the emission limitations and operating limitations in Table 1 and Table 2 of this subpart.

General Compliance Requirements § 63.6105 What are my general requirements for complying with this subpart?

( a) You must be in compliance with the emission limitations and operating limitations which apply to you at all times except during startup, shutdown, and malfunctions. ( b) If you must comply with emission and operating limitations, you must operate and maintain your stationary combustion turbine, oxidation catalyst emission control device or other air pollution control equipment, and monitoring equipment in a manner consistent with good air pollution control practices for minimizing emissions at all times including during startup, shutdown, and malfunction.

Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements § 63.6110 By what date must I conduct the initial performance tests or other initial compliance demonstrations?

You must conduct the initial performance tests or other initial compliance demonstrations in Table 4 of this subpart that apply to you within 180 calendar days after the compliance date that is specified for your stationary combustion turbine in § 63.6095 and according to the provisions in § 63.7( a)( 2).

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1915 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules § 63.6115 When must I conduct subsequent performance tests? If you are complying with the formaldehyde emission concentration limitation and your stationary combustion turbine is lean premix, this section applies to you. If you are not attaining low NOX levels, as permitted by an enforcement agency, or if there are not permit levels and you are not attaining low NOX levels characteristic of lean premix combustion ( e. g., NOX levels guaranteed by the manufacturer), additional performance testing may be required by the enforcement agency.

§ 63.6120 What performance tests and other procedures must I use? ( a) You must conduct each performance test in Table 3 of this subpart that applies to you. ( b) For demonstrations of initial compliance with the emission limitation for carbon monoxide ( CO) reduction, you must complete the actions described in paragraphs b( 1) and ( 2) of this section. ( 1) Normalize the CO concentrations at the inlet and outlet of the oxidation catalyst emission control device to a dry basis and to 15 percent oxygen or an equivalent percent carbon dioxide ( CO2). ( 2) Calculate the percent reduction of CO using the following equation 1 of this section:

C C C R Eq i o i   × = 100 . 1 Where: Ci = CO concentration at inlet of the oxidation catalyst emission control device Co = CO concentration at the outlet of the oxidation catalyst emission control device R = percent reduction in CO emissions. ( 3) The initial demonstration of compliance consists of the first 4 hour average percent reduction in CO recorded after completion of the performance evaluation of the CEMS. ( c) Each performance test must be conducted according to the requirements of the General Provisions at § 63.7( e)( 1) and under the specific conditions in Table 2 of this subpart. ( d) Do not conduct performance tests or compliance evaluations during periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction. ( e) If you comply with the emission limit for formaldehyde emission concentration, you must conduct three separate test runs for each performance test, and each test run must last at least 1 hour. ( f) If you comply with the emission limitation for formaldehyde emission concentration and your stationary combustion turbine is not diffusion flame or lean premix, you must petition the Administrator for additional operating limitations to be established during the initial performance test and continuously monitored thereafter, or for approval of no additional operating limitations. You must not conduct the initial performance test until after the petition has been approved by the Administrator. ( g) If you comply with the emission limitation for formaldehyde emission concentration and your stationary combustion turbine is not diffusion flame or lean premix and you petition the Administrator for approval of additional operating limitations, your petition must include the following information described in paragraphs ( g)( 1) through ( 5) of this section. ( 1) Identification of the specific parameters you propose to use as additional operating limitations; ( 2) A discussion of the relationship between these parameters and HAP emissions, identifying how HAP emissions change with changes in these parameters and how limitations on these parameters will serve to limit HAP emissions; ( 3) A discussion of how you will establish the upper and/ or lower values for these parameters which will establish the limits on these parameters in the operating limitations; ( 4) A discussion identifying the methods you will use to measure and the instruments you will use to monitor these parameters, as well as the relative accuracy and precision of these methods and instruments; and ( 5) A discussion identifying the frequency and methods for recalibrating the instruments you will use for monitoring these parameters. ( h) If you comply with the emission limitation for formaldehyde emission concentration and you petition the Administrator for approval of no additional operating limitations, your petition must include the information described in paragraphs ( h)( 1) through ( 7) of this section. ( 1) Identification of the parameters associated with operation of the stationary combustion turbine and any emission control device which could change intentionally ( e. g, operator adjustment, automatic controller adjustment, etc.) or unintentionally ( e. g., wear and tear, error, etc.) on a routine basis or over time; ( 2) A discussion of the relationship, if any, between changes in the parameters and changes in HAP emissions; ( 3) For the parameters which could change in such a way as to increase HAP emissions, a discussion of whether establishing limitations on the parameters would serve to limit HAP emissions; ( 4) For the parameters which could change in such a way as to increase HAP emissions, a discussion of how you could establish upper and/ or lower values for the parameters which would establish limits on the parameters in operating limitations; ( 5) For the parameters, a discussion identifying the methods you could use to measure them and the instruments you could use to monitor them, as well as the relative accuracy and precision of the methods and instruments; ( 6) For the parameters, a discussion identifying the frequency and methods for recalibrating the instruments you could use to monitor them; and ( 7) A discussion of why, from your point of view, it is infeasible or unreasonable to adopt the parameters as operating limitations.

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

( a) If you comply with the emission limitation for CO reduction, you must install, operate, and maintain a CEMS to monitor CO and either oxygen or CO2 at both the inlet and outlet of the oxidation catalyst emission control device according to the requirements described in paragraphs ( a)( 1) through ( 4) of this section. ( 1) You must install, operate, and maintain each CEMS according to the applicable Performance Specification of 40 CFR part 60, appendix B ( PS   4A). ( 2) You must conduct a performance evaluation of each CEMS according to the requirements in 40 CFR 63.8 and according to the applicablePerformance Specification of 40 CFR part 60, appendix B. ( 3) As specified in § 63.8( c)( 4)( ii), each CEMS must complete a minimum of one cycle of operation ( sampling, analyzing, and data recording) for each consecutive 15 minute period. You must have at least two data points, each representing a different 15 minute period within the same hour to have a valid hour of data. ( 4) Continuous emission monitoring system data must be reduced as specified in § 63.8( g)( 2) and recorded in parts per million ( ppm) CO at 15 percent oxygen or equivalent CO2 concentration. ( b) If you have monitors that are subject to paragraph ( a) of this section, you must properly maintain and operate the monitors continuously according to the requirements described in paragraphs ( b)( 1) and ( 2) of this section.

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 EP14JA03.000</ MATH> 1916 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules ( 1) Proper maintenance. You must maintain the monitoring equipment at all times that the turbine is operating, including but not limited to, maintaining necessary parts for routine repairs of the monitoring equipment. ( 2) Continued operation. You must conduct all monitoring in continuous operation at all times that the combustion turbine is operating, except for, as applicable, monitoring malfunctions, associated repairs, and required quality assurance or control activities ( including, as applicable, calibration checks and required zero and span adjustments). Data recorded during monitoring malfunctions, associated repairs, out of control periods, and required quality assurance or control activities shall not be used for purposes of calculating data averages. You must use all of the data collected from all other periods in assessing compliance. A monitoring malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, not reasonably preventable failure of the monitoring equipment to provide valid data. Monitoring failures that are caused in part by poor maintenance or careless operation are not malfunctions. Any period for which the monitoring system is out of control and data are not available for required calculations constitutes a deviation from the monitoring requirements.

§ 63.6130 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission limitations? ( a) You must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission and operating limitation that applies to you according to Table 4 of this subpart. ( b) You must submit the Notification of Compliance Status containing results of the initial compliance demonstration according to the requirements in § 63.6145( f).

Continuous Compliance Requirements § 63.6135 How do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate continuous compliance? ( a) Except for monitor malfunctions, associated repairs, and required quality assurance or quality control activities ( including, as applicable, calibration checks and required zero and span adjustments of the monitoring system), you must conduct all monitoring in continuous operation at all times the stationary combustion turbine is operating. ( b) Do not use data recorded during monitor malfunctions, associated repairs, and required quality assurance or quality control activities for meeting the requirements of this subpart, including data averages and calculations. You must use all the data collected during all other periods in assessing the performance of the control device or in assessing emissions from the new or reconstructed stationary combustion turbine.

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

( a) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with each emission limitation and operating limitation in Table 1 and Table 2 of this subpart according to methods specified in Table 5 and Table 6 of this subpart. ( b) You must report each instance in which you did not meet each emission limitation or operating limitation. You must also report each instance in which you did not meet the requirements in Table 8 of this subpart that apply to you. These instances are deviations from the emission and operating limitations in this subpart. These deviations must be reported according to the requirements in § 63.6150. ( c) Consistent with § § 63.6( e) and 63.7( e)( 1), deviations that occur during a period of startup, shutdown, and malfunction are not violations.

Notifications, Reports, and Records § 63.6145 What notifications must I submit and when?

( a) You must submit all of the notifications in § § 63.7( b) and ( c), 63.8( e), 63.8( f)( 4) and ( 6), and 63.9( b) and ( h) that apply to you by the dates specified. ( b) As specified in § 63.9( b)( 2), if you start up your combustion turbine before [ DATE THE FINAL RULE IS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER], you must submit an Initial Notification not later than 120 calendar days after [ DATE THE FINAL RULE IS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. ( c) As specified in § 63.9( b), if you start up your new or reconstructed stationary combustion turbine on or after [ DATE THE FINAL RULE IS PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER], you must submit an Initial Notification not later than 120 calendar days after you become subject to this subpart. ( d) If you are required to submit an Initial Notification but are otherwise not affected by the requirements of this subpart, in accordance with § 63.6090( b), your notification should include the information in § 63.9( b)( 2)( i) through ( v) and a statement that your new or reconstructed stationary combustion turbine has no additional requirements and explain the basis of the exclusion ( for example, that it operates exclusively as an emergency stationary combustion turbine). ( e) If you are required to conduct an initial performance test, you must submit a notification of intent to conduct an initial performance test at least 60 calendar days before the initial performance test is scheduled to begin as required in § 63.7( b)( 1). ( f) If you are required to comply with either the emission limitation for CO reduction or the emission limitation for formaldehyde emission concentration, you must submit a Notification of Compliance Status according to § 63.9( h)( 2)( ii). ( 1) For each initial compliance demonstration with the emission limitation for CO reduction, you must submit the Notification of Compliance Status before the close of business on the 30th calendar day following the completion of the initial compliance demonstration. ( 2) For each performance test required to demonstrate compliance with the emission limitation for formaldehyde emission concentration, you must submit the Notification of Compliance Status, including the performance test results, before the close of business on the 60th calendar day following the completion of the performance test.

§ 63.6150 What reports must I submit and when? ( a) Any one who owns or operates a new or reconstructed stationary combustion turbine which must meet the emission limitation for CO reduction must submit a semiannual compliance report according to Table 7 of this subpart by the date specified in paragraphs ( a)( 1) through ( 5) of this section unless the Administrator has approved a different schedule, according to the information described in paragraphs ( a)( 1) through ( 5) of this section. ( 1) The first semiannual compliance report must cover the period beginning on the compliance date specified in § 63.6095 and ending on June 30 or December 31, whichever date is the first date following the end of the first calendar half after the compliance date specified in § 63.6095. ( 2) The first semiannual compliance report must be postmarked or delivered no later than July 31 or January 31, whichever date follows the end of the first calendar half after the compliance date that is specified in § 63.6095. ( 3) Each subsequent semiannual compliance report must cover the semiannual reporting period from January 1 through June 30 or the semiannual reporting period from July 1 through December 31.

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1917 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules ( 4) Each subsequent semiannual compliance report must be postmarked or delivered no later than July 31 or January 31, whichever date is the first date following the end of the semiannual reporting period. ( 5) For each new or reconstructed stationary combustion turbine that is subject to permitting regulations pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 71, and if the permitting authority has established the date for submitting semiannual reports pursuant to 40 CFR 70.6( a)( 3)( iii)( A) or 40 CFR 71.6( a)( 3)( iii)( A), you may submit the first and subsequent compliance reports according to the dates the permitting authority has established instead of according to the dates in paragraphs ( a)( 1) through ( 4) of this section. ( b) The semiannual compliance report must contain the information described in paragraphs ( b)( 1) through ( 4) of this section. ( 1) Company name and address. ( 2) Statement by a responsible official, with that official's name, title, and signature, certifying the accuracy of the content of the report. ( 3) Date of report and beginning and ending dates of the reporting period. ( 4) If there is no deviation from any emission limitation that applies to you, a statement that there was no deviation from the emission limitations during the reporting period and that no CEMS was inoperative, inactive, malfunctioning, out of control, repaired, or adjusted. ( c) For each deviation from an emission limitation that occurs where you are not using a CEMS to comply with the emission limitations in this subpart, the compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs ( b)( 1) through ( 3) of this section and the information contained in paragraphs ( c)( 1) through ( 3) of this section. ( 1) The total operating time of each new or reconstructed combustion turbine during the reporting period. ( 2) Information on the number, duration, and cause of deviations ( including unknown cause, if applicable), as applicable, and the corrective action taken. ( 3) Information on the number, duration, and cause for monitor downtime incidents ( including unknown cause, if applicable, other than downtime associated with zero and span and other daily calibration checks). ( d) For each deviation from an emission limitation occurring where you are using a CEMS to comply with an emission limitation, you must include the information in paragraphs ( c)( 1) through ( 3) of this section and the information included in paragraphs ( d)( 1) through ( 11) of this section. ( 1) The date and time that each deviation started and stopped. ( 2) The date and time that each CEMS was inoperative except for zero ( lowlevel and high level checks. ( 3) The date and time that each CEMS was out of control including the information in § 63.8( c)( 8). ( 4) The date and time that each deviation started and stopped, and whether each deviation occurred during a period of startup, shutdown or malfunction or during another period. ( 5) A summary of the total duration of the deviation during the reporting period ( recorded in 4 hour periods), and the total duration as a percent of the total operating time during that reporting period. ( 6) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations during the reporting period into those that are due to control equipment problems, process problems, other known causes, and other unknown causes. ( 7) A summary of the total duration of CEMS downtime during the reporting period ( reported in 4 hour periods), and the total duration of CEMS downtime as a percent of the total turbine operating time during that reporting period. ( 8) A breakdown of the total duration of CEMS downtime during the reporting period into periods that are due to monitoring equipment malfunctions, non monitoring equipment malfunctions, quality assurance/ quality control calibrations, other known causes and other unknown causes. ( 9) The monitoring equipment manufacturer( s) and model number( s) of each monitor. ( 10) The date of the latest CEMS certification or audit. ( 11) A description of any changes in CEMS or controls since the last reporting period.

§ 63.6155 What records must I keep?

( a) You must keep the records as described in paragraphs ( a)( 1) through ( 5) of this section. ( 1) A copy of each notification and report that you submitted to comply with this subpart, including all documentation supporting any Initial Notification or Notification of Compliance Status that you submitted, according to the requirements in § 63.10( b)( 2)( xiv). ( 2) Records of performance tests and performance evaluations as required in § 63.10( b)( 2)( viii). ( 3) Records of the occurrence and duration of each startup, shutdown, or malfunction as required in § 63.10( b)( 2)( i). ( 4) Records of the occurrence and duration of each malfunction of the air pollution control equipment, if applicable, as required in § 63.10( b)( 2)( ii). ( 5) Records of all maintenance on the air pollution control equipment as required in § 63.10( b)( iii). ( b) For each CEMS, you must keep the records as described in paragraphs ( b)( 1) through ( 3) of this section. ( 1) Records described in § 63.10( b)( 2)( vi) through ( xi). ( 2) Previous ( i. e., superceded) versions of the performance evaluation plan as required in § 63.8( d)( 3). ( 3) Request for alternatives to the relative accuracy test for CEMS as required in § 63.8( f)( 6)( i), if applicable. ( c) You must keep the records required in Tables 5 and 6 of this subpart to show continuous compliance with each emission limitation and operating limitation that applies to you.

§ 63.6160 In what form and how long must I keep my records?

( a) You must maintain all applicable records in such a manner that they can be readily accessed and are suitable for inspection according to § 63.10( b)( 1). ( b) As specified in § 63.10( b)( 1), you must keep each record for 5 years following the date of each occurrence, measurement, maintenance, corrective action, report, or record. ( c) You must retain your records of the most recent 2 years on site or your records must be accessible on site. Your records of the remaining 3 years may be retained off site.

Other Requirements and Information § 63.6165 What parts of the General Provisions apply to me?

Table 8 of this subpart shows which parts of the General Provisions in § 63.1 through 13 apply to you.

§ 63.6170 Who implements and enforces this subpart?

( a) This subpart is implemented and enforced by the U. S. EPA or a delegated authority such as your State, local, or tribal agency. If the EPA Administrator has delegated authority to your State, local, or tribal agency, then that agency ( as well as the U. S. EPA) has the authority to implement and enforce this subpart. You should contact your EPA Regional Office to find out whether this subpart is delegated to your State, local, or tribal agency. ( b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority of this subpart to a State, local, or tribal agency under section 40 CFR part 63, subpart E, the authorities contained in paragraph ( c) of this section are retained by the EPA Administrator and are not transferred to the State, local, or tribal agency.

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1918 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules ( c) The authorities that will not be delegated to State, local, or tribal agencies are: ( 1) Approval of alternatives to the emission limitations or operating limitations in § 63.6100 under § 63.6( g). ( 2) Approval of major alternatives to test methods under § 63.7( e)( 2)( ii) and ( f) and as defined in § 63.90. ( 3) Approval of major alternatives to monitoring under § 63.8( f) and as defined in § 63.90. ( 4) Approval of major alternatives to recordkeeping and reporting under § 63.10( f) and as defined in § 63.90.

§ 63.6175 What definitions apply to this subpart? Terms used in this subpart are defined in the CAA; in 40 CFR 63.2, the General Provisions of this part; and in this section: Area source means any stationary source of HAP that is not a major source as defined in this part. Associated equipment as used in this subpart and as referred to in section 112( n)( 4) of the CAA, means equipment associated with an oil or natural gas exploration or production well, and includes all equipment from the well bore to the point of custody transfer, except glycol dehydration units, storage vessels with potential for flash emissions, combustion turbines, and stationary reciprocating internal combustion engines. CAA means the Clean Air Act ( 42 U. S. C. 7401 et seq., as amended by Public Law 101   549, 104 Stat. 2399). Cogeneration cycle stationary combustion turbine means any stationary combustion turbine that recovers heat from the stationary combustion turbine exhaust gases using an exhaust heat exchanger, such as a heat recovery steam generator. Combined cycle stationary combustion turbine means any stationary combustion turbine that recovers heat from the stationary combustion turbine exhaust gases using an exhaust heat exchanger to generate steam for use in a steam turbine. Combustion turbine engine test cells/ stands means engine test cells/ stands, as defined in subpart PPPPP of this part, that test stationary combustion turbines. Custody transfer means the transfer of hydrocarbon liquids or natural gas: after processing and/ or treatment in the producing operations, or from storage vessels or automatic transfer facilities or other such equipment, including product loading racks, to pipelines or any other forms of transportation. For the purposes of this subpart, the point at which such liquids or natural gas enters a natural gas processing plant is a point of custody transfer. Deviation means any instance in which an affected source subject to this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source: ( 1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this subpart, including but not limited to any emission limitation or operating limitation; ( 2) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is included in the operating permit for any affected source required to obtain such a permit; or ( 3) Fails to meet any emission limitation or operating limitation in this subpart during malfunction, regardless or whether or not such failure is permitted by this subpart. Diffusion flame stationary combustion turbine means any stationary combustion turbine where fuel and air are injected at the combustor and are mixed only by diffusion prior to ignition. Digester gas means any gaseous byproduct of wastewater treatment formed through the anaerobic decomposition of organic waste materials and composed principally of methane and CO2. Emergency stationary combustion turbine means any stationary combustion turbine that operates as a mechanical or electrical power source when the primary source of power is interrupted by an emergency situation. Examples include stationary combustion turbines used to produce power for critical networks or equipment when electric power from the local utility is interrupted, or stationary combustion turbines used to pump water in the case of fire or flood, etc. Emergency stationary combustion turbines do not include stationary combustion turbines used as peaking units at electric utilities or stationary combustion turbines at industrial facilities that typically operate at low capacity factors. Hazardous air pollutant ( HAP) means any air pollutant listed in or pursuant to section 112( b) of the CAA. ISO standard day conditions means 288 degrees Kelvin ( 15 ° C), 60 percent relative humidity and 101.3 kilopascals pressure. Landfill gas means a gaseous byproduct of the land application of municipal refuse formed through the anaerobic decomposition of waste materials and composed principally of methane and CO2. Lean premix stationary combustion turbine means any stationary combustion turbine where the air and fuel are thoroughly mixed to form a lean mixture before delivery to the combustor. Limited use stationary combustion turbine means any stationary combustion turbine which is operated 50 hours or less per calendar year. Major Source, as used in this subpart, shall have the same meaning as in § 63.2, except that: ( 1) Emissions from any oil or gas exploration or production well ( with its associated equipment ( as defined in this section)) and emissions from any pipeline compressor station or pump station shall not be aggregated with emissions from other similar units, to determine whether such emission points or stations are major sources, even when emission points are in a contiguous area or under common control except when they are on the same surface site; ( 2) For oil and gas production facilities, emissions from processes, operations, or equipment that are not part of the same oil and gas production facility, as defined in this section, shall not be aggregated; and ( 3) For production field facilities, only HAP emissions from glycol dehydration units, storage tanks with flash emissions potential, combustion turbines and reciprocating internal combustion engines shall be aggregated for a major source determination. Malfunction means any sudden, infrequent, and not reasonably preventable failure of air pollution control equipment, process equipment, or a process to operate in a normal or usual manner. Failures that are caused in part by poor maintenance or careless operation are not malfunctions. Oil and gas production facility as used in this subpart means any grouping of equipment where hydrocarbon liquids are processed, upgraded ( i. e., remove impurities or other constituents to meet contract specifications), or stored prior to the point of custody transfer; or where natural gas is processed, upgraded, or stored prior to entering the natural gas transmission and storage source category. For purposes of a major source determination, facility ( including a building, structure, or installation) means oil and natural gas production and processing equipment that is located within the boundaries of an individual surface site as defined in this section. Equipment that is part of a facility will typically be located within close proximity to other equipment located at the same facility. Pieces of production equipment or groupings of equipment located on different oil and gas leases, mineral fee tracts, lease tracts, subsurface or surface unit areas,

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1919 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules surface fee tracts, surface lease tracts, or separate surface sites, whether or not connected by a road, waterway, power line or pipeline, shall not be considered part of the same facility. Examples of facilities in the oil and natural gas production source category include, but are not limited to, well sites, satellite tank batteries, central tank batteries, a compressor station that transports natural gas to a natural gas processing plant, and natural gas processing plants. Oxidation catalyst emission control device means an emission control device that incorporates catalytic oxidation to reduce CO emissions. Potential to emit means the maximum capacity of a stationary source to emit a pollutant under its physical and operational design. Any physical or operational limitation on the capacity of the stationary source to emit a pollutant, including air pollution control equipment and restrictions on hours of operation or on the type or amount of material combusted, stored, or processed, shall be treated as part of its design if the limitation or the effect it would have on emissions is federally enforceable. Production field facility means those oil and gas production facilities located prior to the point of custody transfer. Regenerative/ recuperative cycle stationary combustion turbine means any stationary combustion turbine that recovers heat from the stationary combustion turbine exhaust gases using an exhaust heat exchanger to preheat the combustion air entering the combustion chamber of the stationary combustion turbine. Simple cycle stationary combustion turbine means any stationary combustion turbine that does not recover heat from the stationary combustion turbine exhaust gases. Surface site means any combination of one or more graded pad sites, gravel pad sites, foundations, platforms, or the immediate physical location upon which equipment is physically affixed.

Tables to Subpart YYYY of Part 63 As stated in § § 63.6100 and 63.6140, you must comply with the following emission limitations:

TABLE 1 TO SUBPART YYYY OF PART 63.   EMISSION LIMITATIONS For . . . You must meet one of the following emission limitations . . .

1. each stationary combustion turbine described in § 63.6100 a. achieve a reduction in CO of 95 percent or greater, measured before and after an oxidation catalyst emission control device is installed to treat all of the stationary combustion turbine exhaust gases, if you install an oxidation catalyst emission control device or b. limit the concentration of formaldehyde to 43 ppbvd or less at 15 percent O2, if you do not install an oxidation catalyst emission control device.

As stated in § § 63.6100 and 63.6140, you must comply with the following operating limitations:

TABLE 2 TO SUBPART YYYY OF PART 63.   OPERATING LIMITATIONS For . . . You must . . .

1. Each stationary combustion turbine complying with the emission limitation for CO reduction. Meet no operating limitations.

2. Each stationary combustion turbine complying with the emission limitation for formaldehyde emission concentration that is diffusion flame or lean premix. Meet no operating limitations.

3. Each stationary combustion turbine complying with the emission limitation for formaldehyde emission concentration that is not diffusion flame or lean premix. You must comply with any additional operating limitations approved by the Administrator.

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

TABLE 3 OF SUBPART YYYY OF PART 63.   REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS AND INITIAL COMPLIANCE DEMONSTRATIONS For each stationary combustion turbine complying with . . . You must . . Using . . . According to the following requirements . . .

1. The emission limitation for CO reduction Demonstrate a reduction in CO of 95 percent or more. A CEMS for CO and either O2 or CO2 to monitor at both the inlet and outlet of the oxidation catalyst emission control device. This demonstration is conducted immediately following a successful performance evaluation of the CEMS as required in § 63.6125( a). The demonstration consists of the first 4 hour average of measurements. The reduction in CO is calculated using the equation in § 63.6120 and must be normalized to 15 percent O2 or equivalent percent CO2.

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1920 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules TABLE 3 OF SUBPART YYYY OF PART 63.   REQUIREMENTS FOR PERFORMANCE TESTS AND INITIAL COMPLIANCE DEMONSTRATIONS   Continued For each stationary combustion turbine complying with . . . You must . . Using . . . According to the following requirements . . .

2. The emission limitation for formaldehyde emission concentration. a. Demonstrate formaldehyde emissions are 43 ppbvd or less by a performance test and. i. Test Method 320 of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A; or EPA SW   846 Method 0011; or California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board, Method 430* formaldehyde and acetaldehyde in emissions from stationary sources, adopted Sept 12, 1989, amended December 13, 1991 ( ARB Method 430)*; or if your affected source fires natural gas, Test Method 323 of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A; or other methods approved by the Administrator. ( 1) Formaldehyde concentration must be corrected to 15 percent O2, dry basis. Results of this test consist of the average of the three 1 hour runs.

b. Select the sampling port location and the number of traverse points and. i. Method 1 or 1A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A § 63.7( d)( 1)( i). ( 1) If using an air pollution control device the sampling site must be located at the outlet of the air pollution control device. c. Determine the O2 concentration at the sampling port location. i. Method 3A or 3B of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A. ( 1) Measurements to determine O2 concentration must be made at the same time as the performance test.

* You may obtain a copy of ARB Method 430 from the California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board, 2020 L Street, Sacramento, CA 95812, or you may download a copy of ARB Method 430 from ARB's web site ( http:// www. arb. ca. gov/ testmeth/ vol3/ vol3. htm).

As stated in § § 63.6110 and 63.6130, you must comply with the following requirements to demonstrate initial compliance with emission limitations:

TABLE 4 TO SUBPART YYYY OF PART 63.   INITIAL COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS For the . . . You have demonstrated initial compliance if . . .

1. Emission limitation for CO reduction .................................................................... The average reduction of CO emissions is at least 95 percent dry basis.

2. Emission limitation for formaldehyde .................................................................... The average formaldehyde concentration is 43 ppbvd or less at 15 percent O2.

As stated in § § 63.6135 and 63.6140, you must comply with the following requirements to demonstrate continuing compliance with emissions limitations:

TABLE 5 OF SUBPART YYYY OF PART 63.   CONTINUOUS COMPLIANCE WITH EMISSION LIMITATIONS For the . . . You must demonstrate continous compliance by . . .

1. Emission limitation for CO reduction .............. a. Collecting the CEMS data according to § 63.6125( a), reducing the measurements to 1 hour averages, calculating the percent reduction in CO emissions according to § 63.6120; and b. Demonstrating a reduction in CO of 95 percent or more over each 4 hour averaging period; and c. Applying 40 CFR part 60 appendix F, procedure 1.

As stated in § § 63.6135 and 63.6140, you must comply with the following requirements to demonstrate continuing compliance with operating limitations:

TABLE 6 OF SUBPART YYYY OF PART 63.   CONTINUOUS COMPLIANCE WITH OPERATING LIMITATIONS For the emission limitation . . . For the operating limitation . . . You must demonstrate continuous compliance by . . .

For formaldehyde ............................................... To comply with operating limitations approved by the Administrator. Collect the data according to § 63.6120( g) and maintain the operating parameters within the operating limits.

As stated in § § 63.6145 and 63.6150, you must comply with the following requirements for reports:

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1921 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules TABLE 7 OF SUBPART YYYY OF PART 63.   REQUIREMENTS FOR REPORTS If you own or operate a stationary combustion turbine which must comply with the CO emission reduction limitation, you must submit a . . .

Semiannual compliance report If there is no deviation from any emission limitation or operating limitation, a statement that you have had no deviation from the emission limitation or operating limitation during the reporting period and that no CEMS or CPMS was inoperative, inactive, out of control, repaired, or adjusted. If you had a deviation from any emission limitation or operating limitation during the reporting period, the report must contain the information in § 63.6150( d) or ( e), as applicable. Semiannually, according to the requirements in $ 63,6150.

You must comply with the applicable General Provisions requirements:

TABLE 8 OF SUBPART YYYY OF PART 63.   APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART YYYY Citation Subject Applies to subpart YYYY Explanation § 63.1( a)( 1) .................. General applicability of the General Provisions Yes ............................. Additional terms defined in § 63.6175.

§ 63.1( a)( 2)   ( 4) ............ Yes..

§ 63.1( a)( 5) .................. [ Reserved].

§ 63.1( a)( 6)   ( 7) ............ Contact for source category information; extension of compliance through early reduction Yes.

§ 63.1( a)( 8) .................. ......................................................................... No ............................... Refers to State programs.

§ 63.1( a)( 9) .................. [ Reserved].

§ 63.1( a)( 10)   ( 14) ........ ......................................................................... Yes..

§ 63.1( b)( 1) .................. Initial applicability ............................................ Yes ............................. Subpart YYYY clarifies applicability at § 63.6085.

§ 63.1( b)( 2) .................. Title V operating permit reference to part 70 Yes ............................. All major affected sources are required to obtain a title V permit.

§ 63.1( b)( 3) .................. Record of applicability determination .............. Yes.

§ 63.1( c)( 1) .................. Applicability after standards are set ............... Yes ............................. Subpart YYYY clarifies the applicability of each paragraph of subpart A to sources subject to subpart YYYY.

§ 63.1( c)( 2) .................. Title V permit requirement for sources ........... No ............................... Area sources are not subject to area subpart YYYY.

§ 63.1( c)( 3) .................. [ Reserved].

§ 63.1( c)( 4) .................. Extension of compliance for existing sources Yes.

§ 63.1( c)( 5) .................. Notification requirements for an area source becoming a major source. Yes § 63.1( d) ....................... [ Reserved].

§ 63.1( e) ....................... Applicability of permit program before a relevant standard has been set. Yes.

§ 63.2 ........................... Definitions ....................................................... Yes ............................. Additional terms defined in § 63.6175.

§ 63.3 ........................... Units and abbreviations .................................. Yes.

§ 63.4 ........................... Prohibited activities ......................................... Yes.

§ 63.5( a) ....................... Construction and reconstruction applicability Yes.

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1922 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules TABLE 8 OF SUBPART YYYY OF PART 63.   APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART YYYY   Continued Citation Subject Applies to subpart YYYY Explanation § 63.5( b)( 1) .................. Requirements upon construction or reconstruction Yes.

§ 63.5( b)( 2) .................. [ Reserved].

§ 63.5( b)( 3) .................. Approval of construction ................................. Yes.

§ 63.5( b)( 4) .................. Notification of construction .............................. Yes.

§ 63.5( b)( 5) .................. Compliance ..................................................... Yes.

§ 63.5( b)( 6) .................. Addition of equipment ..................................... Yes.

§ 63.5( c) ....................... [ Reserved].

§ 63.5( d) ....................... Application for construction reconstruction ..... Yes.

§ 63.5( e) ....................... Approval of construction or reconstruction ..... Yes.

§ 63.5( f) ........................ Approval of construction or reconstruction based on prior State review. Yes.

§ 63.6( a) ....................... Applicability ..................................................... Yes.

§ 63.6( b)( 1)   ( 2) ............ Compliance dates for new and reconstructed sources. Yes.

§ 63.6( b)( 3) .................. Compliance dates for sources constructed or reconstructed before effective date. No ............................... Compliance is required by startup or effective date.

§ 63.6( b)( 4) .................. Compliance dates for sources also subject to § 112( f) standards. Yes.

§ 63.6( b)( 5) .................. Notification ...................................................... Yes.

§ 63.6( b)( 6) .................. [ Reserved].

§ 63.6( b)( 7) .................. Compliance dates for new and reconstructed area sources that become major. Yes.

§ 63.6( c)( 1)   ( 2) ............ Compliance dates for existing sources ........... Yes.

§ 63.6( c)( 3)   ( 4) ............ [ Reserved].

§ 63.6( c)( 5) .................. Compliance dates for existing area sources that become major. Yes.

§ 63.6( d) ....................... [ Reserved].

§ 63.6( e)( 1)   ( 2) ............ Operation and maintenance ........................... Yes ............................. Except that you are not required to have a startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan ( SSMP).

§ 63.6( e)( 3) .................. SSMP .............................................................. No.

§ 63.6( f)( 1) ................... Applicability of standards except during startup shutdown, or malfunction ( SSM). Yes.

§ 63.6( f)( 2) ................... Methods for determining compliance .............. Yes.

§ 63.6( f)( 3) ................... Finding of compliance ..................................... Yes.

§ 63.6( g)( 1)   ( 3) ............ Use of alternative standard ............................. Yes.

§ 63.6( h) ....................... Opacity and visible emission standards ......... No ............................... Subpart YYYY does not contain opacity or visible emission standards.

§ 63.6( i) ........................ Compliance extension procedures and criteria Yes.

§ 63.6( j) ........................ Presidential compliance exemption ................ Yes.

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1923 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules TABLE 8 OF SUBPART YYYY OF PART 63.   APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART YYYY   Continued Citation Subject Applies to subpart YYYY Explanation § 63.7( a)( 1)   ( 2) ............ Performance test dates ................................... Yes ............................. Subpart YYYY contains performance test dates at § 63.6110.

§ 63.7( a)( 3) .................. Section 114 authority ...................................... Yes.

§ 63.7( b)( 1) .................. Notification of performance test ...................... Yes.

§ 63.7( b)( 2) .................. Notification of rescheduling ............................. Yes.

§ 63.7( c) ....................... Quality assurance/ test plan ............................ Yes.

§ 63.7( d) ....................... Testing facilities .............................................. Yes.

§ 63.7( e)( 1) .................. Conditions for conducting performance tests Yes.

§ 63.7( e)( 2) .................. Conduct of performance tests and reduction of data. Yes ............................. Subpart YYYY specifies test methods at § 63.6120.

§ 63.7( e)( 3) .................. Test run duration ............................................. Yes.

§ 63.7( e)( 4) .................. Administrator may require other testing under section 114 of the CAA. Yes.

§ 63.7( f) ........................ Alternative test method provisions .................. Yes.

§ 63.7( g) ....................... Performance test data analysis, recordkeeping and reporting. Yes.

§ 63.7( h) ....................... Waiver of tests ................................................ Yes.

§ 63.8( a)( 1) .................. Applicability of monitoring requirements ......... Yes ............................. Subpart YYYY contains specific requirements for monitoring at § 63.6125.

§ 63.8( a)( 2) .................. Performance specifications ............................. Yes.

§ 63.8( a)( 3) .................. [ Reserved].

§ 63.8( a)( 4) .................. Monitoring with flares ...................................... No.

§ 63.8( b)( 1) .................. Monitoring ....................................................... Yes.

§ 63.8( b)( 2)   ( 3) ............ Multiple effluents and multiple monitoring systems Yes.

§ 63.8( c)( 1) .................. Monitoring system operation and maintenance

§ 63.8( c)( 1)( i) ............... Routine and predictable SSM ......................... No ............................... Subpart YYYY does not require SSMP.

§ 63.8( c)( 1)( ii) .............. SSM not in SSMP ........................................... No ............................... Subpart YYYY does not require SSMP.

§ 63.8( c)( 1)( iii) .............. Compliance with operation and maintenance requirements. Yes.

§ 63.8( c)( 2)   ( 3) ............ Monitoring system installation ......................... Yes.

§ 63.8( c)( 4) .................. Continuous monitoring system ( CMS) requirements Yes ............................. Except that subpart YYYY does not require continuous opacity monitoring systems ( COMS).

§ 63.8( c)( 5) .................. COMS minimum procedures .......................... No.

§ 63.8( c)( 6)   ( 8) ............ CMS requirements .......................................... Yes ............................. Except that subpart YYYY does not require COMS.

§ 63.8( d) ....................... CMS quality control ......................................... Yes.

§ 63.8( e) ....................... CMS performance evaluation ......................... Yes ............................. Except for § 63.8( e)( 5)( ii), which applies to COMS.

§ 63.8( f)( 1)   ( 5) ............. Alternative monitoring method ........................ Yes.

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1924 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules TABLE 8 OF SUBPART YYYY OF PART 63.   APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART YYYY   Continued Citation Subject Applies to subpart YYYY Explanation § 63.8( f)( 6) ................... Alternative to relative accuracy test ................ Yes.

§ 63.8( g) ....................... Data reduction ................................................. Yes ............................. Except that provisions for COMS are not applicable Averaging periods for demonstrating compliance are specified at § § 63.6135 and 63.6140.

§ 63.9( a) ....................... Applicability and State delegation of notification requirements. Yes.

§ 63.9( b)( 1)   ( 5) ............ Initial notifications ............................................ Yes.

§ 63.9( c) ....................... Request for compliance extension ................. No ............................... Compliance extensions do not apply to new or reconstructed sources.

§ 63.9( d) ....................... Notification of special compliance requirements for new sources. Yes.

§ 63.9( e) ....................... Notification of performance test ...................... Yes.

§ 63.9( f) ........................ Notification of visible emissions/ opacity test .. No.

§ 63.9( g)( 1) .................. Notification of performance evaluation ........... Yes.

§ 63.9( g)( 2) .................. Notification of use of COMS data ................... No ............................... Subpart YYYY does not contain opacity or VE standards.

§ 63.9( g)( 3) .................. Notification that criterion for alternative to relative accuracy test audit ( RATA) is exceeded Yes ............................. If alternative is in use.

§ 63.9( h)( 1)   ( 6) ............ Notification of compliance status .................... Yes ............................. Except that notifications for sources not conducting performance tests are due 30 days after completion of performance evaluations

§ 63.9( i) ........................ Adjustment of submittal deadlines .................. Yes.

§ 63.9( j) ........................ Change in previous information ...................... Yes.

§ 63.10( a) ..................... Administrative provisions for recordkeeping and reporting. Yes.

§ 63.10( b)( 1) ................ Record retention ............................................. Yes.

§ 63.10( b)( 2)( i)   ( iii) ...... Records related to SSM ................................. Yes.

§ 63.10( b)( 2)( iv)   ( v) ..... Records related to actions during SSM .......... No ............................... Subpart YYYY does not require SSMP so requirements to demonstrate conformance or nonconformance with SSMP are not applicable

§ 63.10( b)( 2)( vi)   ( xi) .... CMS records ................................................... Yes.

§ 63.10( b)( 2)( xii) .......... Record when under waiver ............................. Yes.

§ 63.10( b)( 2)( xiii) .......... Records when using alternative to RATA ...... Yes ............................. For CO standard if using RATA alternative.

§ 63.10( b)( 2)( xiv) ......... Records of supporting documentation ............ Yes.

§ 63.10( b)( 3) ................ Records of applicability determination ............ Yes.

§ 63.10( c)( 1) ................ Additional records for sources using CEMS ... Yes.

§ 63.10( d)( 1) ................ General reporting requirements ...................... Yes.

§ 63.10( d)( 2) ................ Report of performance test results ................. Yes.

§ 63.10( d)( 3) ................ Reporting opacity or VE observations ............ No ............................... Subpart YYYY does not contain opacity or VE standards.

VerDate Dec< 13> 2002 19: 47 Jan 13, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 14JAP2. SGM 14JAP2 1925 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2003 / Proposed Rules TABLE 8 OF SUBPART YYYY OF PART 63.   APPLICABILITY OF GENERAL PROVISIONS TO SUBPART YYYY   Continued Citation Subject Applies to subpart YYYY Explanation § 63.10( d)( 4) ................ Progress reports ............................................. No ............................... Compliance extensions do not apply to new or reconstructed sources.

§ 63.10( d)( 5) ................ Startup, shutdown, and malfunction reports ... No ............................... Subpart YYYY does not require reporting of startup, shutdowns, or malfunctions.

§ 63.10( e)( 1) and ( 2)( i) Additional CMS reports ................................... Yes.

§ 63.10( e)( 2)( ii) ............ COMS related report ....................................... No ............................... Subpart YYYY does not require COMS.

§ 63.10( e)( 3) ................ Excess emissions and parameter exceedances reports. Yes.

§ 63.10( e)( 4) ................ Reporting COMS data .................................... No ............................... Subpart YYYY does not require COMS.

§ 63.10( f) ...................... Waiver for recordkeeping and reporting ......... Yes.

§ 63.11 ......................... Flares .............................................................. No.