A residential boiler would be defined in 40 CFR 63.11237 as: "* * * a boiler used to provide heat and/or  hot water used by the owner or occupant of  a dwelling designed for and used for not  more than four family units. This definition  includes boilers used primarily to provide  heat and/or hot water for a dwelling  containing four or fewer families located at  an institutional facility (e.g., university  campus, military base, church grounds) or  commercial/industrial facility (e.g., farm)."[7]
This is similar but not the same as the related provision offered for comment in the Major Source proposals for reconsideration.[8] We introduce it to promote harmony and make the same recommendation for both rulemakings.
Congress encouraged exploration of the use of small-scale combined heat and power in residential heating appliances in Energy Policy Act (EPAct) 2005, Section 923.[9]
[7] 76 FR 80539
[8] Residential boiler means a boiler, used in a dwelling containing four or fewer family units, to provide heat and/ or hot water. This definition includes boilers used primarily to provide heat and/or hot water for a dwelling containing four or fewer families located at an institutional facility (e.g., university campus, military base, church grounds) or commercial/industrial facility (e.g., farm). Major Source Proposed Rule 76 FR 80616
 [9] 42 USC §16213 - MICRO-COGENERATION ENERGY TECHNOLOGY
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2451-A1, excerpt 10.
Commenter Name: Arthur Marin
Commenter Affiliation: Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2454-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 9
Comment: NESCAUM believes that almost all residential units will be exempted under the proposed reconsidered boiler definition, which specifies that units with heat inputs of 1.6 MMBtu/hr and larger are subject to the rule (these units are much larger than a typical residential boiler). Hot water heaters below that threshold will be exempt. Therefore, by creating a duplicative exemption for residential units does not achieve additional environmental benefits, but does exempt some ICI sources that should be subject to control. This change in definition would allow some significant sources to circumvent the rules. NESCAUM believes that sources should be regulated based on the size and emission potential of the unit, not the type of facility in which it resides.
Response: We disagree that the exclusion for residential boilers is duplicative of the exclusion for hot water heaters. The source categories covered by the Area Source Boiler Rule are industrial boilers located at area source facilities and institutional and commercial boilers located at area source facilities. Residential boilers are, thus, not covered by the rule. We added the exclusion for residential boilers to clarify that they are not subject to Subpart JJJJJJ since applicability questions were raised by regulatory agencies and regulated facilities regarding boilers located at residences at institutional (military bases, universities) and commercial (farms) facilities. The exclusion for hot water heaters pertains to boilers generating hot water. The exclusion does not cover boilers generating steam for heating. The final rule retains both exclusions.
Commenter Name: Andrea Grant
Commenter Affiliation: Castle Oil Corporation
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2462-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 6
Comment: The proposed rule would list "residential boilers" as boilers not subject to the NESHAP regulations of Subpart JJJJJJ. "Residential boilers" are described as boilers used in single and multi-family residences duplexes, townhouses) where each dwelling typically has its own heating and hot water system, rather than a shared central system as in an apartment building or dormitory. These boilers are usually small and are not included in a facility's operating permits. The EPA recognized that they should not be subject to the NESHAP regulations because they are not part of the ICI source category. Castle agrees with the EPA analysis and strongly supports the specific exclusion from NESHAP for residential boilers.
Response: The EPA thanks the commenter for their support.
Commenter Name: Andrea Grant
Commenter Affiliation: Castle Oil Corporation
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2462-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 12
Comment: Based on the foregoing, Castle Oil Corporation urges the EPA to adopt the following provision:
Specify that residential boilers are exempt from the NESHAP for Area Source Boilers
Response: The final rule maintains the proposed exclusion from Subpart JJJJJJ for residential boilers.
Commenter Name: Jessica Bridges
Commenter Affiliation: U.S. Clean Heat & Power Association (USCHPA)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2451-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 10
Comment: USCHPA is cognizant that advances in residential micro-combined heat and power technology have led since 2005 to the installation more than 120,000 systems in residences globally. These systems function with the heat/or hot water system. The description above aptly applies to these installations. We recommend that the definition be modified by the insertion of the words "and/or as part of a residential combined heat and power system" after the words "hot water". This is similar to the change to related provisions 76 FR 80616 that we proposed in our Major Source comments of February 21, 2012.[10]
A residential boiler would be defined in 40 CFR 63.11237 as:
      "* * * a boiler used to provide heat and/or hot water and/or as part of a residential combined heat and power system used by the owner or occupant of dwelling designed for and used for not more than four family units. This definition includes boilers used primarily to provide heat and/or hot water for a dwelling containing four or fewer families located at an institutional facility (e.g., university campus, military base, church grounds) or commercial/industrial facility (e.g., farm)."[11]
40 CFR 63.11195 Add new definition of "residential boiler"
USCHPA -  See our recommendations above at the discussion on 4. Residential Unit Exemption (75 FR 80539). Insert the clause "and/or as part of a residential combined heat and power system" after the first appearance of the words "hot water."
[10] Residential boiler means a boiler, used in a dwelling containing four or fewer family units, to provide heat and/ or hot water and/or as part of a residential combined heat and power system. This definition includes boilers used primarily to provide heat and/or hot water for a dwelling containing four or fewer families located at an institutional facility (e.g., university campus, military base, church grounds) or commercial/ industrial facility (e.g., farm). Major Source Proposed Rule 76 FR 80616. See comment filed by the USCHPA.
[11] 76 FR 80539
Response: The EPA acknowledges the advances in and installation of residential combined heat and power systems. We agree with the USCHPA's suggested modifications to the definition of residential boiler and have revised the definition of residential boiler in 40 CFR 63.11237.
Rule Language Corrections: Other Definitions
Commenter Name: Bob Machaver
Commenter Affiliation: Public Citizen
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2416
Comment Excerpt Number: 4
Comment: Startup/Shutdown: while it is probably useful to more clearly delineate the meaning of startup and shutdown, in practice these processes are not as regular, repeatable and consistent across boiler operating scenarios, as other aspects of boiler operation, and therefore their definition and scope should be crafted with care. With regard to the particular definition proposed in the revised Subpart JJJJJJ rule, while the criteria adopted for delineating the startup interval (i.e. < 25% load) seems generally reasonable, it should be recognized that backup or standby boilers may be kept in stable operation at minimum load for extended periods, and this load may could be< 25% of full load. For this type of operation, the specification in Table 2 that startup periods be minimized could result in such boilers having to raise their loads, and increase their emissions, just to move out of the lower 25% of load range, which does not seem appropriate. The definition of startup therefore should include some flexibility or allowance for situations when the "25% of load" criteria does not apply.

Response: The EPA received a number of comments indicating that the proposed load specifications (i.e., 25% load) within the definitions of "startup" and "shutdown" were inconsistent with either safe or normal (proper) operation of the various types of boilers encountered within the source category. As the basis for defining periods of startup and shutdown, a number of commenters suggested alternative load specifications based on the specific considerations of their boilers; other commenters suggested the achievement of various steady-state conditions.
We have reviewed these comments and believe adjustments are appropriate in the definitions of "startup" and "shutdown." These adjustments are tailored for industrial boilers and are consistent with the definitions of "startup" and "shutdown" contained in the 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A General Provisions. We believe these revised definitions address the comments and are rational based on the fact that industrial boilers function to provide steam or, in the case of cogeneration units, electricity. The definitions of "startup" and "shutdown" have been revised in the final rule as follows:

      Startup means either the first-ever firing of fuel in a boiler for the purpose of supplying steam or heat for heating and/or producing electricity, or for any other purpose, or the firing of fuel in a boiler after a shutdown event for any purpose. Startup ends when any of the steam or heat from the boiler is supplied for heating and/or producing electricity, or for any other purpose.

      Shutdown means the cessation of operation of a boiler for any purpose. Shutdown begins either when none of the steam or heat from the boiler is supplied for heating and/or producing electricity, or for any other purpose, or at the point of no fuel being fired in the boiler, whichever is earlier. Shutdown ends when there is no steam and heat being supplied and no fuel being fired in the boiler.
Commenter Name: Donald R. Schregardus
Commenter Affiliation: Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Clean Air Act Services Steering Committee, Department of Defense (DOD)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2418
Comment Excerpt Number: 5
Comment: Revise the definition of "boiler system" in §63.11237 so that it only includes the boilers and those components directly connected and serving "energy consuming systems." Boiler system means the boiler and associated components, such as, the feed water system, the combustion air system, the boiler fuel system (including burners), blowdown system, and combustion control systems directly connected and serving the and energy consuming use systems.
Response: The EPA has reviewed and agrees with the commenter's suggested revisions to the definition of boiler system in 40 CFR 63.11237. See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2418, excerpt 7, for additional revisions to the definition of boiler system.
Commenter Name: Jason A Schwartz
Commenter Affiliation: Institute for Policy Integrity
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2419-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 2
Comment: For some existing major and area sources, the EPA has proposed requiring an "energy assessment" to identify "a list of energy conservation measures." While the regulations do not require implementation of any of the energy conservation measures identified, they do define "cost effective energy conservation measures" as any measure with "a payback (return of investment) period of 2 years."
The definition of "cost‐effective measures" in the rule is fatally flawed statutorily and unjustified economically. If implementation of these measures is not required, there is arguably no need to define "cost‐effective,"and thus no definition should be issued. But since implementation of these measures is cost‐benefit justified and should be required (see infra, section III of these comments), properly defining "cost‐effective energy conservation measures" becomes important. The proper definition for that term should be: any energy conservation measure whose net present benefits are greater than zero.
Response: The commenter is mistaken in stating that the regulations for area source boilers include a definition for "cost effective energy conservation measures." The December 2011 proposed regulations do not include definitions for "cost effective energy conservation measures," "cost-effective measures," or "cost-effective." The final rule also does not include these definitions.
Commenter Name: Paul Noe
Commenter Affiliation: American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA) et al.
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2426-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 22
Comment: The EPA has proposed definitions of startup and shutdown that include a 25% load threshold as the end of startup and the beginning of shutdown. See 76 FR 80541. Some units have a minimum stable operating load that is higher than 25% (e.g., stable operation for a stoker or fluidized bed boiler may not be reached until 60% load).  Likewise, liquid units may reach their minimum safe and stable operating load prior to reaching 25% of their maximum load.  Therefore, the EPA should revise the startup and shutdown definitions to allow facilities to determine the minimum stable operating load on a unit-specific basis. Startup should end when combustion conditions are stable for a particular unit, which is not always at 25% load. In some cases, this may be when the unit begins sending steam to the process. Facilities could include a site specific definition of startup and shutdown and the proper procedures to follow during startup and shutdown in a site-specific plan.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2416, excerpt 4.
Commenter Name: Barry Christensen
Commenter Affiliation: Occidental Chemical Corporation (OCC)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2435-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 7
Comment: OCC supports the clarification that emission limitations and operating limits do not apply during periods of startup or shutdown. However, further clarification of these provisions is needed.
OCC supports the clarification that emission limitations and operating practices do not apply during periods of startup or shutdown, but further clarification allowances are needed with respect boilers that operate in standby mode. Industrial boilers operate over a wide range of range of load conditions and must be highly reliable in order to avoid upsets resulting in the loss of production, damage to equipment and the associated expenses and loss of revenue. To address these risks, many operators maintain back-up boilers in standby mode with significantly reduce load demand. Some boilers in standby mode are stable at operating loads of less than 25%, while others may not be. Consequently, an allowance must be made clear in the final rule for boilers and process heaters that operate in standby mode at low firing rates for extended periods of time. The currently proposed definition of startup uses a cold startup example in the definition, but does not expressly exclude boilers operating in standby mode. However, boilers operating in standby mode simply do not perform in the same manner as boilers sequencing through cold startups and shutdowns. Therefore, it is not practical or reasonable to impose the time limits and capacity minimums applicable to boiler startups and shutdowns on boilers in standby mode.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2416, excerpt 4.
Commenter Name: Robert D. Bessette
Commenter Affiliation: Council of Industrial Boiler Owners (CIBO)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2443-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 59
Comment: In the reconsidered Area Source Boiler Rule, the EPA is proposing definitions for "startup" and "shutdown."...  The EPA indicates that the definitions should provide "clarity regarding which periods of operation are subject to the work practice standards rather than numeric emission limits and the associated requirements." (76 FR 80615.) (reconsidered Boiler MACT Rule.) The EPA is soliciting comment on the proposed definitions.
The proposed revision attempts to place all boilers into the same basket in specifying a 25% load threshold. This is not technically correct or practical on many fronts. How boilers "behave" is a function of fuel type, furnace and boiler design (combustion method), and operating methodologies.... The EPA should revise the startup definition to allow facilities to determine the minimum stable operating load on a unit-specific basis and include the minimum stable operating load that defines startup and shutdown and the proper procedures to follow during startup and shutdown in a site-specific plan. Establishment of the minimum stable operating load on a site-specific basis is analogous to setting other boiler and control device operating parameter limits on a site-specific basis.
We believe the following types of concepts could be used as being indicative of a boiler reaching the end of a startup period (the beginning of a startup would occur with first introduction of fuel with combustion in the furnace):
   * Boiler firing its primary fuel for a period of time adequate to provide stable and non-interrupted fuel flow, stable and controlled air flows, and adequate operating temperatures to allow proper fuel drying and air preheat as applicable.

   * Emissions controls in service with operating parameters such as flow rates and temperatures being controlled and stable.

   * Boiler supplying steam to a common header system or energy user(s) at normal operating conditions including pressure, temperature, and above minimum operational output flow rate, as applicable to the unit.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2416, excerpt 4.
Commenter Name: Robert D. Bessette
Commenter Affiliation: Council of Industrial Boiler Owners (CIBO)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2443-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 60
Comment: In the reconsidered Area Source Boiler Rule, the EPA is proposing definitions for "startup" and "shutdown."... We believe the following types of concepts could be used as being indicative of a boiler beginning a shutdown period (the end of a shutdown would occur with the cessation of combustion of any fuel in the furnace):
   * Cessation of introduction of the last remaining primary fuel to the furnace, whether or not a supplemental support fuel is being used.

   * Cessation of emissions control system sorbent or other reagent injection.

   * Lowering the fuel firing rate to the point that automatic control is no longer effective or possible.

   * Lowering of operating rates to the point that emissions control systems no longer can be controlled or be effective due to low flow rates, low temperatures, or other issues.

   * Lowering boiler output to the point that steam no longer meets operational required conditions of pressure, temperature, or flow.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2416, excerpt 4.
Commenter Name: Lorraine Gershman
Commenter Affiliation: American Chemistry Council (ACC)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2444-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 47
Comment: Startup and Shutdown Definitions
The EPA has proposed definitions for startup and shutdown that include a 25% load threshold for defining when startup ends and when shutdown begins. See 76 FR 80541. Some units have a minimum stable operating load that is higher than 25% (e.g., stable operation for a stoker boiler may not be reached until 60% load). Therefore, the EPA should revise the startup definition to allow facilities to determine the minimum stable operating load on a unit-specific basis and include the minimum stable operating load that defines startup and shutdown and the proper procedures to follow during startup and shutdown in a site-specific plan. Establishment of the minimum stable operating load on a site-specific basis is analogous to setting other boiler and control device operating parameter limits on a site-specific basis.
We believe that the following types of concepts could be used as being indicative of a boiler reaching the end of a startup period (the beginning of a startup would occur with first introduction of fuel with combustion in the furnace):
   * Boiler firing its primary fuel for a period of time adequate to provide stable and non-interrupted fuel flow, stable and controlled air flows, and adequate operating temperatures to allow proper fuel drying and air preheat as applicable.

   * Emissions controls in service with operating parameters such as flow rates and temperatures being controlled and stable.

   * Boiler supplying steam to a common header system or energy user(s) at normal operating conditions including pressure, temperature, and above minimum operational output flow rate, as applicable to the unit.
Similarly, we believe that the following types of concepts could be used as being indicative of a boiler beginning a shutdown period (the end of a shutdown would occur with the cessation of combustion of any fuel in the furnace):
   * Cessation of introduction of the last remaining primary fuel to the furnace, whether or not a supplemental support fuel is being used.

   * Cessation of emissions control system sorbent or other reagent injection.

   * Lowering the fuel firing rate to the point that automatic control is no longer effective or possible.

   * Lowering of operating rates to the point that emissions control systems no longer can be controlled or be effective due to low flow rates, low temperatures, or other issues.

   * Lowering boiler output to the point that steam no longer meets operational required conditions of pressure, temperature, or flow.
Boiler owners/operators should establish specific operating conditions and parameters defining startup and shutdown in standard operating procedures for each affected unit so that it is clear when each unit is in either startup or shutdown mode. Procedures should also be used to guide operations purposely through startup or shutdown periods so that protracted periods in startup or shutdown mode beyond that envisioned in the procedures are avoided. Each startup and shutdown should be documented relative to elapsed time and timing of actions prescribed in the procedure so that problems are effectively identified and corrected in a timely manner.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2416, excerpt 4.
Commenter Name: Stephen E. Woock
Commenter Affiliation: Weyerhaeuser
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2452-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 8
Comment: The current re-proposal would create untenable and infeasible requirements by defining these periods with a single threshold of 25% operating load. As detailed in our trade group comments, this single threshold approach fails to account for the variety of equipment and circumstances that make startup and shutdown procedures unique to a facility and combustion unit. Site-specific plans and approaches must be allowed for safety, process and operational reasons.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2416, excerpt 4.
Commenter Name: Neil Gormley
Commenter Affiliation: Earthjustice et al.
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2473-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 9
Comment: If it is lawful for the EPA to promulgate work practice standards in lieu of emissions limits for periods of startup and shutdown, it is arbitrary for the EPA to define these periods so broadly. The EPA proposes to define startup as ending when the unit operates at 25% capacity, and shutdown as beginning when the unit drops below 25%. By this definition, a unit that consistently operated below 25% capacity would evade emissions standards. The EPA must close this loophole.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2416, excerpt 4.
Commenter Name: Samuel Denisco
Commenter Affiliation: Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2478-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 7
Comment: In response to EPA solicitation, we oppose any time limitation on shutdowns and startups. The duration of shutdowns and startups should be determined solely by the time required to complete in a safe and effective manner the scope of the work to be performed. Imposing time limitations will be disruptive to the already complex shutdown and startup procedures, and could even create unsafe conditions.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2416, excerpt 4.
Commenter Name: Robert D. Bessette
Commenter Affiliation: Council of Industrial Boiler Owners (CIBO)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2443-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 61
Comment: Boiler owners/operators should establish specific operating conditions and parameters defining startup and shutdown in standard operating procedures for each affected unit so that it is clear when each unit is in either startup or shutdown mode. Procedures should also be used to guide operations purposely through startup or shutdown periods so that protracted periods in startup or shutdown mode beyond that envisioned in the procedures are avoided. Each startup and shutdown should be documented relative to elapsed time and timing of actions prescribed in the procedure so that problems are effectively identified and corrected in a timely manner.
The EPA should not include a maximum time in the startup and shutdown definitions. Sources covered by the rule are highly variable and the amount of time needed for startup and shutdown are different depending on the specific unit. The EPA has adopted a source-specific approach in other programs, such as Part 75 (40 CFR Part 75 Appendix A <IP_ADDRESS>). If the EPA does include definitions for startup and shutdown based on a load threshold, it would be appropriate to institute a source specific approach much like in Part 75.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2416, excerpt 4.
Commenter Name: S. William Becker
Commenter Affiliation: National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2455-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 36
Comment: NACAA agrees that a definition limiting the period of "startup" is appropriate. We recommend that such a definition be based on a percentage of the normal operating load of the unit as some sources may operate for extended periods of time at far less than the full rated capacity of the unit.
Response: The EPA is revising the definitions of "startup" and "shutdown" such that they are tailored for industrial boilers and are consistent with the definitions of "startup" and "shutdown" in the 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A General Provisions. The revised definitions reflect the fact that industrial boilers function to provide steam or, in the case of cogeneration units, electricity, and, thus, should be considered to be operating normally at all times steam of the proper pressure, temperature, and flow rate is being provided for use as process steam or for the cogeneration of electricity.
Commenter Name: Paul J. Allen
Commenter Affiliation: Constellation Energy
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2477-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 2
Comment: In lieu of creating new Startup and Shutdown definitions for the rule, the definitions for Startup and Shutdown currently defined in air quality operating permits should be utilized.
It is recommended that the EPA not create new startup and shutdown definitions for the rule but use the definitions that already are incorporated into a facility's air quality operating permit. Typically, these definitions are jointly established by the responsible air permitting authorities and individual facilities. Startup and shutdown periods are somewhat unique to each boiler design. It should be noted that for many categories of boilers, it is not possible to achieve "normal operating mode" (during which normal emissions are generated) at 25% boiler capacity as proposed, and thus the emissions might exceed normal operation limits. The pollution control equipment is designed to function efficiently after the boiler reaches approximately 100% capacity and steady state/complete combustion conditions exist. Additionally, approximately 100% capacity is when normal operation limits apply and can be met. Below this "normal operating mode" is when the startup and shutdown permit limits should apply.
For the facilities that do not have startup and shutdown defined in their air quality operation permits, the facility and their state and/or local permitting agencies can work together to develop site specific startup and shutdown definitions, based on manufacturers' specifications and operating procedures, for insertion into in their permits. Unfortunately, there is not a "one size fits all" for these definitions, so we recommend that the EPA not define startup and shutdown in the rule, but defer to the definitions contained in air quality operating permits issued by local and/or state air permitting agencies.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2416, excerpt 4.
Commenter Name: Michael J. Bradley
Commenter Affiliation: The Clean Energy Group
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2448-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 1
Comment: The Clean Energy Group agrees with the need for a definition of startup and shutdown in light of the final rule's use of work practices for these periods. However, rather than 25% load, which may be inappropriate for many units, we recommend the EPA alter the definition of startup to reflect unit-specific considerations, such as defining the end of startup as when the unit reaches the minimum safe operating load or when compliance with Title V emission limits is reached.
Response: The EPA recognizes that the 25% load specification may not be appropriate for all units, and thus has altered the definitions of startup and shutdown to be consistent with the definitions in 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A General Provisions. We believe these revised definitions are rational based on the fact that industrial boilers function to provide steam or, in the case of cogeneration units, electricity; therefore, industrial boilers should be considered to be operating normally at all times steam of the proper pressure, temperature, and flow rate is being provided to a common header system or energy user(s) for use as either process steam or for the cogeneration of electricity.
Commenter Name: Michael J. Bradley
Commenter Affiliation: The Clean Energy Group
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2448-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 2
Comment: The EPA could define shutdown as the period of time from when a unit reduces load with the intent to shut down and ends with the cessation of combustion of fuel. This would avoid defining as "shutdown" those circumstances where units may need to operate at a level below 25%, but above the minimum safe operating load.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2448-A1, excerpt 1.
Commenter Name: Michael J. Bradley
Commenter Affiliation: The Clean Energy Group
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2448-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 3
Comment: Below the unit-specific "normal operating mode" is when startup and shutdown requirements should apply. We recommend that the EPA not numerically define startup and shutdown in the final rule, and instead defer to the definitions contained in currently active air quality operating permits issued by local and/or state air permitting agencies.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2448-A1, excerpt 1.
Commenter Name: Michael J. Bradley
Commenter Affiliation: The Clean Energy Group
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2448-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 4
Comment: The EPA proposed to require that new boilers with heat input capacity greater than 10 MMBtu/hr that are biomass-fired or oil-fired must comply with work practice standards to minimize the boiler's startup and shutdown periods following the manufacturer's recommendations, or the manufacturer's recommendations for a unit of similar design. As noted above, we recommend revising the definition of startup and shutdown to allow for individual unit variation.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2448, excerpt 1.
Commenter Name: Russell A. Wozniak
Commenter Affiliation: Dow Chemical Company
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2423-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 8
Comment: The EPA should revise the definitions of "Startup" and "Shutdown".
In 63.11237, the EPA provides the following definitions:
      Shutdown means the period that begins when the boiler last operates at 25 percent load and ending with a state of no fuel combustion in the boiler.
      Startup means the period between the state of no combustion in the boiler to the period where the boiler first achieves 25 percent load (i.e., a cold start).
Dow suggests the following revisions to the proposed regulatory text and provides supporting rationale for these revisions below. New text is shown on the next page in bold underline text. Change/revised text is shown in strike-through font.
      Shutdown means the period that begins when the boiler last operates under stable low load conditions defined by the owner/operator (typically between 5 percent and 25 percent load) 25 percent load and ending with a state of no fuel combustion in the boiler.
      Startup means the period between the state of no combustion in the boiler to the period where the boiler first achieves stable load conditions defined by the owner/operator (typically between 5 percent and 25 percent load). 25 percent load (i.e., a cold start).
Dow requests that the EPA consider revising the startup/shutdown proposed rule definitions to address variability in combustion unit operational use. Dow operates some combustion units in a standby (operational readiness) mode for extended periods of time at less than 25% load. Operating some boilers in stand-by mode is necessary at petrochemical facilities and allows for expeditious ramping up of combustion units to provide process operating continuity. When standby mode is reached, combustion unit operating characteristics are stable (e.g. combustion zone flame/O2 level) and the emissions are insignificant. Dow believes that a startup load criteria of 5% of maximum design heat input for these types of combustion units is practical and achievable, but that the criteria should be defined within a range of 5 to 25% load by the owner/operator.
Shutdown time of a combustion unit (e.g. the time between providing heat output and cutoff of fuel feeds) is typically short. Dow believes that it would be appropriate to set the shutdown load criteria at a range from 5% to 25% load as defined by the owner/operator.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2448-A1, excerpt 1.
Commenter Name: Mark R. Vickery
Commenter Affiliation: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2464-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 3
Comment: The definitions of startup and shutdown should be clarified to specify that the 25% load threshold refers to a percentage of normal operating load.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2448-A1, excerpt 1.
Commenter Name: Tangela Niemann
Commenter Affiliation: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2464-A3
Comment Excerpt Number: 14
Comment: The definitions of startup and shutdown should be clarified to specify that the 25% load threshold refers to a percentage of normal operating load.
Based on the EPA's proposed definition of shutdown, a shutdown period begins when a boiler last operates at 25% load. Similarly, the proposed definition of startup states that a startup period ends when the boiler first achieves 25% load. The 25% load threshold used in both definitions might be interpreted as a percentage of the operating load or as a percentage of the design capacity load of the boiler. In some cases, particularly in smaller area sources, the boiler may be oversized for the demand and the boiler may rarely operate at or near full capacity. In some instances the normal operating load of a boiler may rarely or never exceed 25% of the design capacity. The EPA should revise the definitions of startup and shutdown to specify that the 25% threshold is based on the percentage of normal operating load of the boiler and provide a definition of what is considered normal operating load.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2448-A1, excerpt 1.
Commenter Name: Allison Watkins, Baker Botts
Commenter Affiliation: Class of '85 Regulatory Response Group
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2458-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 7
Comment: The Class of `85 recommends that the EPA revise the proposed definitions for "startup" and "shutdown" to provide for an "offline" period. The EPA proposes to define "startup" as the period between the state of no combustion in the boiler to the period where the boiler first achieves 25% load (i.e., a cold start) and "shutdown" as the period that begins when a boiler last operates at 25% load and ending with a state of no fuel combustion in the boiler.[5] Thus, under the proposed definitions, facilities are either operating in startup or in shutdown. The Group is very concerned that the proposed definitions could be construed as requiring sources to comply with work practice standards while the unit is not operating and lead to frivolous litigation because compliance would not be feasible. Such a result is nonsensical and technically inappropriate. The EPA should modify the definitions to provide for an offline period in between shutdown and startup, to make clear that sources will not be in technical violation of regulations when they are offline.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter and is clarifying that the startup period begins either with the first-ever firing of fuel in a boiler or with the firing of fuel in a boiler after a shutdown event for any purpose. Shutdown ends when there is no steam and heat being supplied and no fuel being fired in the boiler.
Commenter Name: Randal G. Oswald
Commenter Affiliation: Integrys Energy Group
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2472-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 7
Comment: Integrys recommends that the EPA revise the proposed definitions for "startup" and "shutdown" to provide for an "offline" period. The EPA proposes to define "startup" as the period between the state of no combustion in the boiler to the period where the boiler first achieves 25% load (i.e., a cold start) and "shutdown" as the period that begins when a boiler last operates at 25% load and ending with a state of no fuel combustion in the boiler. (76 FR at 80541.) Thus, under the proposed definitions, facilities are either operating in startup or in shutdown. We are very concerned that the proposed definitions could be construed as requiring sources to comply with work practice standards while the unit is not operating and lead to frivolous litigation because compliance would not be feasible. Such a result is nonsensical and technically inappropriate. The EPA should modify the definitions to provide for an offline period in between shutdown and startup, to make clear that sources will not be in technical violation of regulations when they are offline.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2458-A1, excerpt 7.
Commenter Name: Donald R. Schregardus
Commenter Affiliation: Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Clean Air Act Services Steering Committee, Department of Defense (DOD)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2418
Comment Excerpt Number: 6
Comment:  Several definitions in the Area Source Boiler Rule differ from the definitions in the Major Source Boiler Rule.
Some differences are appropriate due to the differences in the scope of the rules and the subcategories used. However, in many cases the definitions could and should be identical. The following are some definitions in the Area Source Boiler Rule that could be changed as shown to match the Major Source Boiler Rule. In many cases these differences were caused by making corrections to definitions in one rule and not making conforming changes in the other rule.
      Bag leak detection system means a group of instruments that is are capable of monitoring particulate matter loadings in the exhaust of a fabric filter ( i.e., baghouse) in order to detect bag failures. A bag leak detection system includes, but is not limited to, an instrument that operates on electrodynamic, triboelectric, light scattering, light transmittance, or other principle to monitor relative particulate matter loadings.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested change to the definition of "bag leak detection system" and has revised the definition in the final rule.
Commenter Name: Donald R. Schregardus
Commenter Affiliation: Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Clean Air Act Services Steering Committee, Department of Defense (DOD)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2418
Comment Excerpt Number: 7
Comment: The following are some definitions in the Area Source Boiler Rule that could be changed as shown to match the Major Source Boiler Rule.
      Boiler system means the boiler and associated components, such as, the feedwater system, the combustion air system, the boiler fuel system (including burners), blowdown system, combustion control system, steam system, and condensate return system.
Response: In addition to agreeing with the commenter's suggested revision to the definition of "boiler system" as described in the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2418 excerpt 5, the EPA also agrees with the commenter's suggested revision to make the area source definition match the major source definition. The definition of "boiler system" has been amended in the final rule to read:
      Boiler system means the boiler and associated components, such as, feedwater systems, combustion air systems, fuel systems (including burners), blowdown systems, combustion control systems, steam systems, and condensate return systems, directly connected to and serving the energy use systems.
Commenter Name: Donald R. Schregardus
Commenter Affiliation: Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Clean Air Act Services Steering Committee, Department of Defense (DOD)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2418
Comment Excerpt Number: 8
Comment: The following are some definitions in the Area Source Boiler Rule that could be changed as shown to match the Major Source Boiler Rule.
      Deviation.(1) Deviation Mmeans any instance in which an affected source subject to this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source: (i) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this subpart including, but not limited to, any emission limit, operating limit, or work practice standard; or (ii) 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. (2) A deviation is not always a violation. The determination of whether a deviation constitutes a violation of the standard is up to the discretion of the entity responsible for enforcement of the standards.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested changes to the definition of "deviation" such that it matches the Major Source Boiler Rule's definition and is revising the definition in the final rule.
Commenter Name: Donald R. Schregardus
Commenter Affiliation: Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Clean Air Act Services Steering Committee, Department of Defense (DOD)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2418
Comment Excerpt Number: 9
Comment: The following are some definitions in the Area Source Boiler Rule that could be changed as shown to match the Major Source Boiler Rule.
      Electrostatic precipitator (ESP) means an add-on air pollution control device used to capture particulate matter by charging the particles using an electrostatic field, collecting the particles using a grounded collecting surface, and transporting the particles into a hopper. An electrostatic precipitator is usually a dry control system, except when it is operated with a wet scrubber.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested changes to the definition of "electrostatic precipitator" such that it matches the Major Source Boiler Rule's definition and is revising the definition in the final rule.
Commenter Name: Donald R. Schregardus
Commenter Affiliation: Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Clean Air Act Services Steering Committee, Department of Defense (DOD)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2418
Comment Excerpt Number: 10
Comment: The following are some definitions in the Area Source Boiler Rule that could be changed as shown to match the Major Source Boiler Rule.
      Energy use system includes, but is not limited to, process heating; compressed air systems; machine drive (motors, pumps, fans); process cooling; facility heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems; hot heaterwater systems,; building envelop; and lighting.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested changes to the definition of "energy use system" such that it matches the Major Source Boiler Rule's definition and is revising the definition in the final rule. See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2443-A2, excerpt 12, for the full definition.
Commenter Name: Donald R. Schregardus
Commenter Affiliation: Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Clean Air Act Services Steering Committee, Department of Defense (DOD)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2418
Comment Excerpt Number: 11
Comment: The following are some definitions in the Area Source Boiler Rule that could be changed as shown to match the Major Source Boiler Rule.
      Oxygen analyzer system means all equipment required to determine the oxygen content of a gas stream and used to monitor oxygen in the boiler flue gas or firebox. This definition includes oxygen trim systems. The source owner or operator is responsible tomust install, calibrate, maintain, and operate the oxygen analyzer system in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations.
Response: We are amending the oxygen monitoring requirements to allow for the use of oxygen trim systems and have included oxygen trim systems in the definition of "oxygen analyzer system." We agree with the commenter's suggested text change but rather than including it in the definition, have included it in paragraph (a) of §63.11224 "What are my monitoring, installation, operation, and maintenance requirements?."
Commenter Name: Donald R. Schregardus
Commenter Affiliation: Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Clean Air Act Services Steering Committee, Department of Defense (DOD)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2418
Comment Excerpt Number: 12
Comment: The following are some definitions in the Area Source Boiler Rule that could be changed as shown to match the Major Source Boiler Rule.
      Oxygen trim system means a system of monitors that is used to maintain excess air at the desired level in a combustion device. A typical system consists of a flue gas oxygen and/or carbon monoxide monitor that automatically provides a feedback signal to the combustion air controller.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested changes to the definition of "oxygen trim system" such that it matches the Major Source Boiler Rule's definition and is revising the definition in the final rule.
Commenter Name: Donald R. Schregardus
Commenter Affiliation: Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Clean Air Act Services Steering Committee, Department of Defense (DOD)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2418
Comment Excerpt Number: 14
Comment: The following are some definitions in the Area Source Boiler Rule that could be changed as shown to match the Major Source Boiler Rule.
      Solid fossil fuel includes, but is not limited to, coal, coke, petroleum coke, and tire derived fuel.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested changes to the definition of "solid fossil fuel" such that it matches the Major Source Boiler Rule's definition and is revising the definition in the final rule.
Commenter Name: Donald R. Schregardus
Commenter Affiliation: Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Clean Air Act Services Steering Committee, Department of Defense (DOD)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2418
Comment Excerpt Number: 16
Comment: The Area Source Boiler Rule has separate definitions for commercial boiler and institutional boiler. The Major Source Boiler Rule has a single definition for commercial/institutional boiler. It does not matter which approach is used, but these definitions could be the same in both rules. Currently the definitions in the Area Source Boiler Rule contain more examples of commercial and institutional establishments. At a minimum, the examples should be consistent and the combined definition in the Major Source Boiler Rule could be revised as follows.
      Commercial/institutional boiler means a boiler used in commercial establishments or institutional establishments such as medical centers, nursing homes, research centers, institutions of higher education, elementary and secondary schools, libraries, religious establishments, and governmental buildings, hotels, restaurants, and laundries to provide steam and/or hot water.
The EPA should consider a) replacing the combined definition in the Major Source Boiler Rule with the separate definitions used in the Area Source Boiler Rule, or b) replacing the separate definitions in the Area Source Boiler Rule with the revised version of the combined definition shown above. Other terms that differ with the potential to be made consistent include "gaseous fuel," "hot water heater," "industrial boiler," "liquid fuel," and "natural gas." Recommended changes are not shown here as it is possible that some of the differences were made to address stakeholder concerns that are relevant to one rule but not the other.
Recommendation: Change the definitions identified in the discussion as appropriate.
Response: The final Area Source Boiler Rule retains the separate definitions for commercial boiler and institutional boiler. Any revisions to these definitions in the final Major Source Boiler Rule are discussed in that rule's response to this comment.
The EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested changes to the definition of "hot water heater", "industrial boiler" and "natural gas" such that they match the Major Source Boiler Rule's definitions and are revising the definitions in the final rule.
We believe that for purposes of clarity and/or applicability, the definitions of "gaseous fuel" and "liquid fuel" should not be revised to match the Major Source Boiler Rule's definition. Thus, the definitions have not been revised in the final rule.
Commenter Name: Renee Lesjak Bashel
Commenter Affiliation: National Steering Committee, Small Business Ombudsman and Small Business Environmental Assistance Programs (SBO/SBEAP)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2459-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 1
Comment: Recommendation: Modify several definitions.
Clarify the definition of seasonal boiler to clearly state that units used for heating purposes meet the definition. Removing the "due to seasonal market conditions" language may accomplish this.
Response: The EPA is not removing the "due to seasonal market conditions" language as suggested by the commenter but is revising the language to "due to seasonal conditions." In the final rule, "seasonal boiler" is defined as a boiler that undergoes a shutdown for a period of at least 7 consecutive months (or 210 consecutive days) each 12-month period due to seasonal conditions, except for periodic testing. Periodic testing shall not exceed a combined total of 15 days during the 7-month shutdown. This definition only applies to boilers that would otherwise be included in the biomass subcategory or the oil subcategory.
We believe that the definition makes clear that any biomass- or oil-fired boiler, including one used for heating purposes, that meets the definitional requirements of "seasonal boiler" will be considered a seasonal boiler.
Commenter Name: Renee Lesjak Bashel
Commenter Affiliation: National Steering Committee, Small Business Ombudsman and Small Business Environmental Assistance Programs (SBO/SBEAP)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2459-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 2
Comment: The proposed definition for seasonally operated boilers does not adequately address the different sources which are not in regular seasonal use through the year. One example, especially in northern climates, is space heating boilers (non-residential) which operate less than half of the year.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2459-A2, excerpt 1.
Commenter Name: Matthew Todd
Commenter Affiliation: American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) and the American Petroleum Institute (API)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2482-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 11
Comment:  There are at least two major problems with this definition of qualified energy assessor. First, as written, this definition requires a single person to have all of the capabilities and experience listed. Such a person likely does not exist. For instance, people who specialize in boiler combustion management will likely have no experience with condensate recovery or industry specific steam end use systems. If instead of a single person, the definition is meant to apply to a team (as most energy assessments require) that is not reflected in the time, burden or cost estimates used for this rule. Secondly, the definition requires expertise and experience that will not be needed. For instance, the definition requires process heater and process heat expertise, even though the area source proposal only applies to boilers and, therefore, only steam use. Similarly, most facilities do not have boiler-steam turbine cogeneration systems, yet they cannot employ an assessor who lacks that experience.
We recommend the definition be revised to the following: Qualified Energy Assessor or Assessors means a person or persons who have demonstrated capabilities to evaluate energy savings opportunities for steam generation and major steam using systems, as applicable to the facility.
Response: We disagree that the definition of "Qualified energy assessor" is unclear and needs clarification. The definition that was proposed in December 2011 and is included in the final rule provides a minimum level of energy assessor expertise which will assure that facilities subject to the energy assessment requirement will receive similarly conducted assessments, which we consider appropriate.
We realize that every facility is different and that it is impractical to require a single person to have all of the capabilities and experience listed to conduct an assessment of a simple heating boiler system. The term "Someone" is not intent to mean a single person. For more complicated boiler/energy use systems or facilities with multiple boilers, a group, such as a consulting firm or a company's engineering staff, with the needed expertise could perform the required engineering assessment. The definition is intended to indicate that the "someone" a facility employs (or contracts with) to conduct the energy assessment should have the background, experience, and expertise to evaluate energy savings opportunities for the types of boiler/energy use systems located at the particular facility. The definition is not intended to imply that the any energy assessment, no matter how simple, can only be conducted by a person with expertise in all the issues listed in the definition. Basically, the definition is stating that a person (or combination of individuals) is qualified to conduct an energy assessment if they have the needed experience and background in conducting an energy assessment for a particular situation. For a particular boiler/energy system, a company employee may have the background, experience, and abilities to perform the assessment and prepare the report.
Commenter Name: Tangela Niemann
Commenter Affiliation: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2464-A3
Comment Excerpt Number: 17
Comment: The definition of qualified energy assessor should be substantially stream-lined and made more general. Some of the qualification criteria in the definition are more applicable to large industrial facilities, and the inclusion of these criteria in the definition may force small businesses to contract over-qualified and more expensive energy assessors to evaluate simple boiler applications.
The criteria that the EPA is proposing for a person to be considered a qualified energy assessor are overly specific and may force small businesses to incur additional costs to conduct the energy assessment. The EPA is attempting to create a definition of qualified energy assessor that encompasses a broad range of industrial and commercial applications by establishing specific criteria for capabilities and knowledge. However, the effect is that owners and operators of sources will be required to contract a person meeting all the criteria in the EPA's definition to perform an energy assessment regardless of the application, rather than have the assessment performed by a person with the most specific knowledge for the application. For example, a person does not require specific capability and knowledge of boiler-steam turbine cogeneration systems in order to perform an assessment of a small commercial boiler application. If the energy assessment is retained in the final rule, the definition of qualified energy assessor should be made more general or revised such that the assessor is only required to have knowledge and capabilities specific to the processes at the site.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2482-A2, excerpt number 11.
Commenter Name: Heather Parent
Commenter Affiliation: State of Maine Department of Environmental Protection (Maine DEP)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2470-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 3
Comment: Portions of the EPA's tune up procedure as proposed in the regulation are not applicable to biomass boilers. The EPA should use the boiler tune up definition provided in the Major Source Boiler MACT for biomass units. "Tune-up", as defined in the proposed Major Source Boiler MACT rule, means "adjustments made to a boiler in accordance with procedures supplied by the manufacturer (or an approved specialist) to optimize the combustion efficiency."
Response: The EPA is adding a definition of "tune-up" to the final rule. The definition references 40 CFR 63.11223 (How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the work practice and management practice standards?) and reads as follows:
      Tune-up means adjustments made to a boiler in accordance with the procedures outlined in §63.11223(b).
Commenter Name: Monica Lopes
Commenter Affiliation: NAES Corporation
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2469-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 2
Comment: The revised definitions of boiler and waste heat boiler provided in 40 CFR 63.1237 seem to indicate that all waste heat boilers are excluded from the definition of boiler and therefore exempt from the rule whether they are fired or unfired. Please confirm it is the EPA's intention to exclude duct burners installed in combined cycle gas turbines from the Area Source Boiler Rule regardless of the type of fuel fired in the duct burners.
Response: The definition of "Waste heat boiler" in the final rule has been revised to be consistent with the major source definition. Duct burners, which are mounted in a duct or discharging into a duct, are sometimes used to increase the temperature of the hot exhaust gas from a combustion turbine to increase electricity output from a combined cycle gas turbine system. Duct burners typically use natural gas or other clean fuel, and provide a small fraction of the overall heat for the boiler system. Waste heat boilers, whether or not they have duct burners, are not considered to be boilers as defined in Subpart JJJJJJ. The final rule clarifies that waste heat boilers are excluded from the definition of "Boiler."
Commenter Name: Michael L. Krancer
Commenter Affiliation: Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2449-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 12
Comment: PA DEP agrees with the clarifying revisions to the "Energy assessment" definition.
Response: The EPA thanks the commenter for their support.
Commenter Name: Matthew Todd
Commenter Affiliation: American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) and the American Petroleum Institute (API)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2482-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 10
Comment: Each of the three paragraphs in the energy assessment definition call for evaluating "the boiler system and any energy use system" accounting for at least a specified percentage of the energy output. "Output" is a meaningless term related to consumers and that word should be changed to "production or consumption."
For example, to be clearer Paragraph 3 of the energy assessment definition should read as follows.
      (3) In the Energy assessment for facilities with affected boilers and process heaters using greater than 1.0 trillion Btu per year, the boiler system and any energysteam use system accounting for at least 20 percent of the energysteam outputproduction or consumption will be evaluated to identify energysteam savings opportunities.
Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the proposed definition should [also] be changed accordingly.
Response: In the final rule, we are making a series of changes to the energy assessment provisions and related definitions, including "energy assessment," to clarify terms used and better set the scope of the assessment. We are not omitting the word "energy" as suggested by the commenter but are instead providing examples of energy "(e.g., steam, hot water, or electricity)." We are replacing the word "output" with "production".
Commenter Name: Matthew Todd
Commenter Affiliation: American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) and the American Petroleum Institute (API)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2482-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 17
Comment: Item 3 of the energy assessment definition should be revised to read as follows.
      (3) Energy assessment for facilities with affected boilers using greater than 1.0 TBtu per year, the boiler system(s) and any onsite energysteam use system accounting for at least 20 percent of the affected boiler(s) energysteam outputproduction or consumption, as applicable, at the facility will be evaluated to identify energysteam savings opportunities.
Similar revisions to Items 1 and 2 of the energy assessment definition are also needed.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2482-A2, excerpt 10.
Commenter Name: Matthew Todd
Commenter Affiliation: American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) and the American Petroleum Institute (API)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2482-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 15
Comment: The definition of energy assessment has three categories based on facility heat input, but then requires that the assessment address "energy use systems." There is no basis for expanding the assessment beyond producers and users of steam or heat provided by boilers and process heaters subject to this rule (e.g., electricity users, imported steam users) and therefore the term "energy system" should be replaced with "steam and process heat consumers."
Response: The EPA received a number of comments regarding the energy assessment requirements and in the final rule is making a series of changes to the energy assessment provisions and related definitions that clarify terms used and better set the scope of the assessment. We are amending the definition of "energy assessment" to clarify that the scope of the energy assessment does not encompass energy use systems located off-site or energy use systems using electricity purchased from an off-site source. The energy assessment is limited to only those energy use systems, located on-site, associated with the affected boilers. We are also clarifying that the scope of the assessment is based on energy use by discrete segments of a facility and not by a total aggregation of all individual energy using segments of a facility. In addition, we are amending the definition of "energy use system" to clarify that energy use systems are only those systems using energy clearly produced by affected boilers.
Commenter Name: Matthew Todd
Commenter Affiliation: American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) and the American Petroleum Institute (API)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2482-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 16
Comment: Each of the three paragraphs in the energy assessment definition call for evaluating "the boiler system and any energy use system" accounting for at least a specified percentage of the energy output. As in the previous item, the term "energy" is unclear and should be changed to "steam." Additionally "output" is a meaningless term related to consumers and that word should be changed to "production or consumption." Finally, it should be clarified the percent is the percent of the facility total steam production or consumption, as applicable.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2482-A2, excerpt 10.
Commenter Name: Donald R. Schregardus
Commenter Affiliation: Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Clean Air Act Services Steering Committee, Department of Defense (DOD)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2418
Comment Excerpt Number: 15
Comment: The definition of energy assessment will be different in the Major and Area Source Boiler Rules if the terms "boilers" and "process heaters" are used and if the rule table references are included. The following shows how the definition in the area source rule should be changed for consistency.
This also reflects our conclusion that it is not necessary to limit the term to a table in the rule because the term is used throughout the rule.
Energy assessment means the following only as this term is used in Table 2 tofor the emission  units covered by this subpart:
      (1) Energy assessment for facilities with affected boilers using less than 0.3 trillion Btu (TBtu) per year heat input will be 8 technical labor hours in length maximum, but may be longer at the discretion of the owner or operator of the affected source. The boiler system(s) and any on-site energy use system(s) accounting for at least 50 percent of the affected boiler(s) energy output will be evaluated to identify energy savings opportunities, within the limit of performing an 8-hour energy assessment.
      (2) Energy assessment for facilities with affected boilers using 0.3 to 1.0 TBtu/year will be 24 technical labor hours in length maximum, but may be longer at the discretion of the owner or operator of the affected source. The boiler system(s) and any on-site energy use system(s) accounting for at least 33 percent of the affected boiler(s) energy output will be evaluated to identify energy savings opportunities, within the limit of performing a 24-hour energy assessment.
      (3) Energy assessment for facilities with affected boilers using greater than 1.0 TBtu/year, the boiler system(s) and any on-site energy use system(s) accounting for at least 20 percent of the affected boiler(s) energy output will be evaluated to identify energy savings opportunities.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested changes to the definition of "energy assessment" and has revised the definition in the final rule. Note that the final rule's definition also includes revisions resulting from other public comments.
Commenter Name: Arthur Marin
Commenter Affiliation: Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2454-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 1
Comment:  The following definitions for liquid fuel are inconsistent between the three rules:
1. In the proposed Area Source Boiler Rule, liquid fuel is defined as follows: Liquid fuel includes, but is not limited to, distillate oil, residual oil, any form of liquid fuel derived from petroleum, on-spec used oil, liquid biofuels, biodiesel, and vegetable oil.
2. In the proposed Major Source Boiler Rule, liquid fuel is defined as follows: Liquid fuel includes, but is not limited to, distillate oil, residual oil, onspec used oil, biodiesel and vegetable oil.
3. Under the CISWI and NHSM Rules, liquid fuel is classified under "traditional fuel" as follows (excerpted as noted): Traditional fuels means materials that are produced as fuels and are unused products that have not been discarded and therefore, are not solid wastes, including: (1) ... fossil fuels (e.g., coal, oil and natural gas)...; and (2) alternative fuels developed from virgin materials that can now be used as fuel products, including used oil which meets the specifications outlined in 40 CFR 279.11.... NESCAUM understands that all of these definitions are intended to encompass all non-waste liquid fuels that the EPA has deemed to be traditional fuels when burned in a combustion device and should be regulated under Section 112. NESCAUM recommends that the definitions be harmonized to all say the same thing (i.e., reference 40 CFR 279.11 for defining used oil).
Response: For purposes of clarity and applicability, the EPA is retaining the proposed area source boiler definition for "liquid fuel" in the final rule with two modifications. Those modifications include omitting "on-spec" prior to "used oil" and adding "and comparable fuels as defined under 40 CFR 261.38."
Any revisions to the definition of "liquid fuel" in the Major Source Boiler Rule or the CISWI and NHSM Rules are discussed in those respective response to comment documents.
Commenter Name: Russell A. Wozniak
Commenter Affiliation: Dow Chemical Company
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2423-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 7
Comment: The EPA should remove the addition of the term "on-spec" to used oil in the definition of "Liquid fuel".
In §63.11237, the EPA provides the following definition: "Liquid fuel includes, but is not limited to, distillate oil, residual oil, any form of liquid fuel derived from petroleum, on-spec used oil, liquid biofuels, biodiesel, and vegetable oil."
Dow suggests the following revisions to the proposed regulatory text and provides supporting rationale for these revisions below. New text is shown in bold underline text. Change/revised text is shown in strike-through font.
      "Liquid fuel includes, but is not limited to, distillate oil, residual oil, any form of liquid fuel derived from petroleum, on-spec used oil meeting the specification in 40 CFR 279.11, liquid biofuels, biodiesel, and vegetable oil."
The EPA added the term "on-spec" before "used oil" in this version of the rule without any justification for why the term was added. Additionally, no definition of the term "on-spec" is found in the Boiler GACT rule while a used oil specification exists in RCRA. Provisions for this kind of duplication are provided, for example, in §112(n)(7) of the CAA and §1006(b) of RCRA. In order to eliminate confusion, the EPA should delete the term "on-specification used oil" and use the term "used oil" under the terms of the "specification in RCRA at 40 CFR 279.11".
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested changes to the definition of "liquid fuel" such that it deletes "on-spec" and references RCRA (40 CFR 279.11) with respect to the RCRA defined term "used oil," which is part of the definition of "liquid fuel," and is revising the definition in the final rule.
Commenter Name: Lorraine Gershman
Commenter Affiliation: American Chemistry Council (ACC)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2444-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 48
Comment: The EPA should clarify the definition of liquid fuel.
The definition of "liquid fuel" at §63.11237 currently includes the words "on-spec used oil," but "on-spec used oil" is not defined in the Final Rule. Congress recognized that in establishing air standards to meet requirements in the CAA and RCRA, there may be regulatory overlaps between the two statutes. Congress therefore intended for the EPA to minimize, if not eliminate regulatory overlap to the maximum extent practicable and to harmonize requirements so that they are consistent. See, for example, §112(n)(7) of the CAA and §1006(b) of RCRA. Based on these Congressional directives, ACC believes that the EPA should delete the term "on-spec" used oil and replace it with the term "used oil" which is a defined term in RCRA at 40 CFR 279.11.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2423-A1, excerpt 7.
Commenter Name: David L. Meeker
Commenter Affiliation: National Renderers Association (NRA)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2427-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 3
Comment: The NRA agrees with the EPA determination that processed fats are not solid waste, and are not considered to be included in the solid fuel (biomass) category under Subpart JJJJJJ.
The addition of liquid biofuels was included in NESHAP Subpart JJJJJJ liquid fuel definition previous to this reconsideration, per the comment submitted by Darling International Inc. (NRA member). However, the EPA clearly took an "easy way" out by throwing processed fats in with the liquid fuel definition in NESHAP Subpart JJJJJJ that was unexpected and unintended by the NRA, without fully vetting the impact on the liquid fuel regulations, or the impact on processed fat-fired units. The EPA has acknowledged acting in haste to finalize these regulations by the Court-imposed deadline.
By grouping processed fats as a liquid biofuel in the definition of liquid fuels, any boiler located at an area HAP source is grouped in the oil subcategory defined in §63.11237... The NRA requests that the EPA evaluate the impact of this "grouping" and consider the pertinent information presented in this letter that demonstrates that it is both reasonable and technically necessary for the EPA to consider processed fats as a separate defined fuel that is wholly distinct from traditional petroleum-based oils and liquid biofuels. The NRA did not have an opportunity to provide comments to the EPA concerning the liquid biofuels addition to the definition of liquid fuel under §63.11237, as this change was incorporated directly into the final version of NESHAP Subpart JJJJJJ, and was not in the proposal. Since the rule in now being reconsidered by the EPA, the NRA is submitting the requested addition of the processed fats fired boiler definition.
Response: As stated in the preamble for the proposed reconsideration of final rule, dated December 23, 2011, we are not obligated to respond on the merits to any comments addressing aspects of the final rule beyond the topics for which comments were requested. This comment is not on an issue reopened by the December 23, 2011 FR notice and is outside the scope of the current reconsideration. We note the proposal for exclusion from the category is incomplete in many respects. The commenter does not provide a basis for distinguishing a boiler capable of burning processed fats-derived fuel from a boiler that otherwise burns petroleum-based liquid fuels. The contemplated subcategory would only be distinguishable based on what fuel is sold to the liquid-fueled boiler. Sources would be capable of switching between subcategories with relative ease, thereby posing compliance assurance difficulties. The EPA is not in a position to adopt the suggested subcategorization as a logical outgrowth of the proposed reconsideration. We also note that the commenter provided comments on the 2010 proposed rule, which belies its claim that it was not on notice of processed fat fuels being potentially subject to the provisions of this rule. In addition, Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) provided comments on the 2010 proposed rule regarding boilers that combust tallow, white/yellow grease, and vegetable oils. Specifically, Nebraska DEQ commented that because those fuels have similar emission characteristics as biodiesel fuels, and are cleaner than diesel in most respects, they should be included within the liquid fuel definition and regulated similarly to boilers combusting biodiesel fuels. Thus, Nebraska DEQ understood that boilers combusting processed fats based fuel would be subject to Subpart JJJJJJ and supported those boilers' inclusion in the oil subcategory.
Commenter Name: David L. Meeker
Commenter Affiliation: National Renderers Association (NRA)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2427-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 5
Comment: Processed fats are obtained from the recycling of animal (livestock) and plant (crop) related byproducts from the food processing industry. Processed fats fuels are utilized in the same liquid fuel-fired boilers that burn petroleum-based liquid fuels. No special designed burners are required for the burning of processed fats in liquid fuel-fired boilers. As identified in this letter, the urban HAPs content of processed fats are insignificant and similar to gaseous fuels and not petroleum-based liquid fuels. The NRA requests that the following two definitions be added to §63.11237 for NESHAP Subpart JJJJJJ.
      Processed fats fuel means, but is not limited to, yellow grease, poultry grease, brown grease, tallow oil, and any form of liquid fuel derived from animal and vegetable fats, with less than 0.2% by volume petroleum-based fuel content added for alternative fuel blending requirements.
      Processed fats-fired boiler includes any boiler that burns any processed fats fuel and is not in the oil, biomass, or coal subcategories, and burns traditional liquid fuel only during periods not to exceed 48 hours during any calendar year
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2427-A1, excerpt 3.
Commenter Name: Allison Watkins, Baker Botts
Commenter Affiliation: Class of '85 Regulatory Response Group
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2458-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 6
Comment: The Class of '85 supports the EPA's proposed clarification of the definition of biomass in the proposed reconsideration of the NSPS and emission guidelines for CISWI units,[4] which would establish how bio-based fuels are treated under Area Source Boiler Rule. The clarification will remove a barrier to expanding the use of several promising biomass fuel sources.
[4] 76 FR 89452, 80474 (Dec. 23, 2011).
Response: The EPA thanks the commenter for their support.
Commenter Name: Robert E Hunzinger, General Manager
Commenter Affiliation: Gainesville Regional Utilities (GRU)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2425-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 3
Comment: Clarification of Criteria for Biomass or Bio-based Fuels and Non-hazardous Solid Waste
The treatment of biomass found in the three final NESHAP rules created uncertainty whether urban biomass would be treated as a biomass fuel or a solid waste subject to the CISWI Rule. While this clarification is found in the CISWI reconsideration rule, the applicability to the Area Source and Major Source Boiler Reconsideration Rules are understood. GRU supports the clarification and believes that the clarification will remove a barrier to expanding the use of several promising biomass fuel sources.[1]
[1] FR Vol. 76. No. 247, p. 80474 December 23, 20 II "Specifically, we are proposing to make the following revisions and additions to the definition: (I) Explicitly acknowledge that the list of biomass materials is not exclusive by adding the phrase, "including. but not limited to''; (2) revise the category "forest-derived biomass" to include "agricultural biomass", (3) add hogged fuel, wood pellets, and untreated wood pallets as examples of forest-derived biomass; (4) add tile category of "urban wood" and provide examples, including tree trimmings, stumps, a11d related forest-derived biomass from urban settings ....)
Response: The definition of "biomass" in the Area Source Boiler Rule includes biomass-based solid fuels that are not solid waste, but does not attempt to define solid waste. The definition of solid waste is addressed in the NHSM Rule. The EPA thanks the commenter for their support of the changes made to the NHSM definition of solid waste.
Commenter Name: Alicia Meads
Commenter Affiliation: National Association of Manufacturers (NAM)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2446-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 3
Comment: Important biomass materials such as paper recycling residuals, pulping sludge, wood construction debris and railway ties are still not listed as fuels, which creates great uncertainty for the businesses that rely on them. The failure to list such materials as fuels means that the boilers burning such fuels could be regulated under the onerous and stigmatizing incinerator standards. Alternatively, those materials could end up being sent to landfills, rather than being used to produce energy -- a bad result for jobs and the environment.
Response: The definition of "biomass" in the Area Source Boiler Rule includes biomass-based solid fuels that are not solid waste, but does not attempt to define solid waste. The definition of solid waste is addressed in the NHSM Rule.
Commenter Name: James Pew
Commenter Affiliation: Earthjustice, Clean Air Council, Partnership for Policy Integrity
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2480; 2480--A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 4
Comment: We note that the Area Source Boiler Rule and the definition of biomass (which will now encompass a great deal of material that would ordinarily be considered "waste) are interlinked in an important way. As the EPA loosens restrictions on what can be defined as "biomass" instead of "waste", there will be an increasing number of large facilities burning potentially contaminated material, but since many are considered "area" sources, they will only be regulated for PM, not other pollutants that are regulated under the major source MACT rule.
Response: As an initial matter, our requirements for biomass boilers at area sources represent GACT controls. It is incorrect to suggest that emissions of these pollutants are unregulated. The GACT controls will reduce HAP emissions by limiting the amount of fuel that needs to be combusted (thus reducing fuel-bound HAP) and by ensuring good combustion (thus reducing HAP produced by incomplete combustion).

Additionally, we note that the determination of what material is "waste" and what material is a product fuel is set forth in the NHSM Rule and outside the scope of this rulemaking. "Clean biomass" may be burned under §112 as a "traditional" fuel. Clean biomass consists of residuals that are "akin to traditional cellulosic biomass." It would include materials such as forest thinnings, corn stover energy cane, bagasse, peanut shells, and various other wood materials.  See 40 CFR 241.2; 76 FR 15477-78, 15532, 15550. Moreover, clean biomass is material with contaminants that would not exceed those normally associated with virgin biomass materials. Id.  Therefore, even an increase in the burning of biomass under the NHSM Rule will not impact the HAP emitted by area source boilers.

The commenter expresses concern that large biomass-fired boilers at area sources will only be subject to PM controls. The commenter provides information on controls at facilities in the biomass-combusting energy sector (See comment EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2480; 2480--A2, excerpts 5, 6 and 7), principally HCl and CO, which we use as a surrogate for control of POM for the coal-fired portion of this category. These pollutants are not required to be subject to MACT because HCl is not on the CAA §112(c)(6) list and the biomass subcategory is not subject to the CAA §112(c)(6) MACT requirement for POM.
The information provided by the commenter on recent permits for new construction in the biomass-combusting energy sector facilities does not establish that these controls are generally available for portions of the biomass subcategory that are not in the energy production business.  A review of recent permits such as that performed by the commenter will only capture sources that have been required to obtain permits, such as these energy producing facilities, and not other types of area sources. The commenter notes that the new facilities now being permitted around the country are mostly large, standalone electricity-producing plants (see comment EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2480; 2480--A2, excerpt 2). Regulation of only PM for new large biomass combusting boilers at area sources would be GACT for the subcategory taken as a whole.
Commenter Name: Grif Bond
Commenter Affiliation: Environmental, Health & Safety Communications Panel (EHSCP)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2432-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 6
Comment: The EPA has proposed an amendment to the definition of hot water heater in order to clarify that hot water boilers are included in the definition and are therefore not subject to Subpart JJJJJJ. The EHSCP supports this clarification and would like to raise a related issue. Since this clarification has been made after area sources covered by the rule were required to submit initial notifications (by September 2011), notifications may have been submitted for sources that will not be covered by the rule if this clarification is finalized. Therefore, the EHSCP recommends that the EPA provide guidance regarding the process to follow to rescind notifications for sources that are no longer required due to the change in definition.
Response: The EPA does not typically require owners or operators to rescind notifications that no longer apply. As far as a process for those owners or operators that want to rescind, they could send a letter to the same delegated authority that they sent the notice to, but the EPA does not require or encourage them to do that. From an enforcement standpoint, they would not be out of compliance since they have been exempted by the definition. Also, it's likely the Agency would be able to tell from the information submitted in the notice that they would be exempted by the definitional change.
Commenter Name: Arthur Marin
Commenter Affiliation: Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2454-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 2
Comment: Heat Input Threshold Included in the Definition of Hot Water Heater
Under the reconsidered Area Source Boiler Rule, the EPA proposes to change the definition of hot water heaters (76 FR 80547), which are exempted from the area source rule requirements. The proposal creates a clear line to define hot water heaters exempt from the rule as units with heat input capacity below 1.6 MMBtu/hr. NESCAUM supports the change in definition with regard to the 1.6 MMBtu/hr heat input threshold.
Response:  The EPA thanks the commenter for their support.
Commenter Name: John Huber
Commenter Affiliation: National Oilheat Research Alliance (NORA)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2417
Comment Excerpt Number: 1
Comment: We would like to draw the EPA's attention to the exclusion of steam from the small boiler/water heating exemption. Steam boilers have a limited market in the small residential market, but are still utilized. Additionally, they are also used to provide domestic hot water for the home. First, in evaluating the small residential exemption, we feel it may not cover many small properties in the northeast and in urban areas. For example, many houses have been subdivided into multiple unit buildings, and may easily exceed the four units described in the rule. Many of these are older buildings, and thus may use steam for heating. Thus, we would encourage the EPA to reexamine the exclusion of steam from the definition of hot water heaters.

Response: The EPA intended to omit steam from the definition of "hot water heater." If steam were included in the definition of "hot water heater," the term would no longer truly define a hot water heater.  Thus, the definition of "hot water heater" in the final rule has not been revised to include steam. See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2454-A1, excerpt 10, regarding single unit residence buildings that have been converted or subdivided into multiple units. We also note that the residential boiler exclusion should address the concerns of the small residential market that uses steam boilers discussed in the comment.
Commenter Name: John Huber
Commenter Affiliation: National Oilheat Research Alliance (NORA)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2417
Comment Excerpt Number: 2
Comment: We would encourage the EPA to reexamine the exclusion of steam from the definition of hot water heaters. While a conversion to a hot water boiler that meets the exception to the rule may be an option, it may not always be an appropriate option. The piping system and the radiators may need to be reconfigured to allow the use of hot water. This may because there is inadequate radiation if there is a conversion from steam to hot water. Additionally, the steam system is designed with two pipes, and where it connects to the radiator may be different than with a hot water system. Further, when steam travels through a radiation system it has very low volumes of water, it is being done under low pressure, and it is not fully charged in the system at all times. Thus, if water is substituted, there is a potential that a leak will be discovered. First, a small leak under low pressure with very little water content is unlikely to cause serious water damage. However, if the leak is under pressure, and is water instead of steam, there may be actual damage. Therefore we would encourage the EPA in its reexamination to consider eliminating the parenthetical "i.e. generating steam"
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2417, excerpt 1.
Commenter Name: Renee Lesjak Bashel
Commenter Affiliation: National Steering Committee, Small Business Ombudsman and Small Business Environmental Assistance Programs (SBO/SBEAP)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2459-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 3
Comment: The nature of the hot water heater definition seems to be sufficient in its scope without limiting the fuel to gas or liquid. For this reason, we would support the addition of biomass or more simply the deletion of the specific fuels, since coal is highly unlikely to be prevalent in such small hot water heaters.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter that the definition should include firing of biomass fuels and is amending the definition accordingly.
Commenter Name: Arthur Marin
Commenter Affiliation: Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2454-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 18
Comment:  In the proposed definition of hot water heaters, the EPA lists "gaseous or liquid fuel" but not biomass. NESCAUM suggests that the definition also include biomass-fueled units. Without that exclusion, some very small units in the Northeast will fail to be exempted from the rule despite their negligible impact on HAP emissions. NESCAUM recommends the following revision to the definition:
      Hot water heater means a closed vessel with a capacity of no more than 120 U.S. gallons in which water is heated by combustion of gaseous, liquid, or biomass fuel and hot water is withdrawn for use external to the vessel. Hot water boilers (i.e., not generating steam) combusting gaseous, liquid, or biomass fuel with a heat input capacity of less than 1.6 million Btu per hour are included in this definition.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2459-A2, excerpt 3.
Commenter Name: Heather Parent
Commenter Affiliation: State of Maine Department of Environmental Protection (Maine DEP)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2470-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 7
Comment: If the EPA retains the hot water heater exemption, the EPA should include biomass in the definition as follows, "hot water heater means a closed vessel with a capacity of no more than 120 U.S. gallons in which water is heated by combustion of gaseous, liquid, or biomass fuel and hot water is withdrawn for use external to the vessel. Hot water boilers (i.e. not generating steam) combustion gaseous, liquid fuel, or biomass with a heat input capacity of less than 1.6 million Btu per hour are included in this definition."
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2459-A2, excerpt 3.
Commenter Name: Tangela Niemann
Commenter Affiliation: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2464-A3
Comment Excerpt Number: 15
Comment: The definition of hot water heater should be expanded to include tankless water heaters and needs to be clarified regarding the 1.6 MMBtu/hr heat input threshold and 120 gallon capacity threshold.
Tankless water heaters should be included in the proposed revised definition of hot water heater in §63.11237. The EPA included tankless water heaters in the definition of hot water heater in 40 CFR 63, Subpart DDDDD, §63.7575, for the NESHAP rule for ICI boilers and process heaters at major sources (76 FR 80652), which expands the exemption for hot water heaters to tankless units. Tankless water heaters used at areas sources should also be provided the same exemption.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter that the proposed definition of "hot water heater" should be revised to include tankless water heaters and is revising the definition accordingly in the final rule.
Commenter Name: Mark R. Vickery
Commenter Affiliation: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2464-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 4
Comment: The definition of hot water heater should be expanded to include tankless water heaters  and needs to be clarified regarding the 1.6 MMBtu/hr heat input threshold  and 120 gallon capacity threshold.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2464-A3, excerpt 15.
Commenter Name: Tangela Niemann
Commenter Affiliation: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2464-A3
Comment Excerpt Number: 16
Comment: The EPA needs to clarify whether the requirement that hot water boilers must be less than 1.6 MMBtu/hr heat input capacity threshold to qualify as a hot water heater is considered independent of the 120 gallon capacity threshold.
Response: The EPA is clarifying in the final rule definition of "hot water heater": that the 120 U.S. gallon capacity threshold to be considered a hot water heater is independent of the 1.6 MMBtu/hr heat input capacity threshold for hot water boilers.
Rule Language Corrections: Tables 1 through 7
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commenter Name: Marcie Kimball
Commenter Affiliation: Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2414-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 3
Comment: In Table 3, Item 6 should refer to 40 CFR 63.11211(c), not (b).
Response: The EPA appreciates the commenter pointing out the error and the final rule incorporates this revision.
Commenter Name: Paul Noe
Commenter Affiliation: American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA) et al.
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2426-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 18
Comment: Section 63.11224(a)(7) states the following: "(7) You must operate the oxygen analyzer system with the oxygen level set at the minimum percent oxygen by volume that is established as the operating limit for oxygen according to Table 4 to this subpart."
The above paragraph references Table 4, but we believe the correct reference is Table 6, since this table contains requirements for establishing operating limits, including O2 as the operating limit for CO (#3 in Table 6). The wording of §63.11224(a)(7) is more restrictive than the wording of the requirement for "continuous oxygen monitoring" in Table 3, #8, which is as follows:
      "8. Continuous Oxygen Monitor ... Maintain the 30-day rolling average oxygen level at or above the lowest 1-hour average oxygen level measured during the most recent CO performance stack test."
The Table 3 requirement allows operation with the 30-day rolling average O2 level at or above the lowest 1-hour average O2 level measured in the most recent performance test, whereas §63.11224(a)(7) requires operation at the minimum O2 percent established during the prior test. Inherent boiler operating characteristics require operation with higher excess air (higher O2) at lower operating rates simply due to their lower fuel and air velocities, degraded mixing of fuel and air as those flow rates decrease, and lower furnace temperatures. Therefore, it is necessary for the actual O2 trim system set point to vary with load level, with the lowest set point typically occurring at or near full load operation. The Table 3, #8 requirements account for the variability of actual boiler operations; therefore, §63.11224(a)(7) should be revised to account for this variability as well.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter that 40 CFR 63.11224(a)(7) should reference to Table 6 rather than Table 4. We also agree that 40 CFR 63.11224(a)(7) should be revised to allow operation with the 30-day rolling average O2 level at or above the lowest 1-hour average O2 level measured in the most recent performance test. The final rule incorporates these revisions to 40 CFR 63.11224(a)(7).
Commenter Name: Robert D. Bessette
Commenter Affiliation: Council of Industrial Boiler Owners (CIBO)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2443-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 23
Comment: The wording of §63.11224(a)(7) is more restrictive than the wording of the requirement for "continuous oxygen monitoring" in Table 3, #8, which is as follows:
      "8. Continuous Oxygen Monitor ... Maintain the 30-day rolling average oxygen level at or above the lowest 1-hour average oxygen level measured during the most recent CO performance stack test."
The Table 3 requirement allows operation with the 30-day rolling average O2 level at or above the lowest 1-hour average O2 level measured in the most recent performance test, whereas §63.11224(a)(7) requires operation at the minimum O2 percent established during the prior test. Inherent boiler operating characteristics require operation with higher excess air (higher O2) at lower operating rates simply due to their lower fuel and air velocities, degraded mixing of fuel and air as those flow rates decrease, and lower furnace temperatures. Therefore, it is necessary for the actual O2 trim system set point to vary with load level, with the lowest set point typically occurring at or near full load operation. The Table 3, #8 requirements account for the variability of actual boiler operations; therefore, §63.11224(a)(7) should be revised to account for this variability as well.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2426-A1, excerpt 18.
Commenter Name: Robert D. Bessette
Commenter Affiliation: Council of Industrial Boiler Owners (CIBO)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2443-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 22
Comment: Section 63.11224(a)(7) states the following:
      "(7) You must operate the oxygen analyzer system with the oxygen level set at the minimum percent oxygen by volume that is established as the operating limit for oxygen according to Table 4 to this subpart."
The above paragraph references Table 4, but we believe the correct reference is Table 6, since this table contains requirements for establishing operating limits, including O2 as the operating limit for CO (#3 in Table 6).
Response:  See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2426-A1, excerpt 18.
Commenter Name: Lorraine Gershman
Commenter Affiliation: American Chemistry Council (ACC)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2444-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 9
Comment: Oxygen trim system set point
Paragraph 7 of the Reconsideration Proposal §63.11224(a) states the following:
     You must operate the oxygen analyzer system with the oxygen level set at the minimum percent oxygen by volume that is established as the operating limit for oxygen according to Table 4 to this subpart.
The above paragraph references Table 4, but ACC believes that the correct reference is Table 6, as that is the table containing requirements for establishing operating limits, including O2 as the operating limit for CO (#3 in Table 6).
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2426-A1, excerpt 18.
Commenter Name: Lorraine Gershman
Commenter Affiliation: American Chemistry Council (ACC)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2444-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 10
Comment: The wording of §63.11224(a)(7) is more restrictive than the wording of the requirement for "continuous oxygen monitoring" in Table 3, #8, which is as follows:
     "Maintain the 30-day rolling average oxygen level at or above the lowest 1-hour average oxygen level measured during the most recent CO performance stack test."
The requirement in Table 3 allows operation with the 30-day rolling average O2 level at or above (no lower than) the lowest 1-hour average O2 level measured in the most recent performance test, whereas §63.11224(a)(7) requires operation at the minimum O2 percent established during the prior test. Inherent boiler operating characteristics require operation with higher excess air (higher O2) at lower operating rates simply due to their lower fuel and air velocities, degraded mixing of fuel and air as those flow rates decrease, and lower furnace temperatures. Therefore, it is necessary for the actual O2 trim system set point to vary with load level, with the lowest set point typically occurring at or near full load operation. The Table 3, #8 requirements account for the variability of actual boiler operations; therefore, §63.11224(a)(7) should be revised to account for this variability as well.

Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2426-A1, excerpt 18.
Commenter Name: Paul Noe
Commenter Affiliation: American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA) et al.
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2426-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 24
Comment: The EPA has clarified that the emission limits in Table 1 do not apply during periods of startup and shutdown. The EPA should clarify that the operating limits set forth in Table 3 do not apply during startup and shutdown. The right column header of Table 3 currently reads "You must meet these operating limits..." Please revise this to read "You must meet these operating limits, except during startup and shutdown..."
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter that Table 3 should be revised to clarify that the operating limits do not apply during startup and shutdown. The final rule includes the clarification.
Commenter Name: Timothy Serie
Commenter Affiliation: American Coatings Association (ACA)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2437-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 8
Comment: ACA generally supports the following proposed changes in the Area Source Boiler Rule:
Clarification that the emission limits in Table 1 do not apply during periods of startup and shutdown; the EPA should, however, clarify that the operating limits set forth in Table 3 do not apply during startup and shutdown as well.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2426-A1, excerpt 24.
Commenter Name: Lorraine Gershman
Commenter Affiliation: American Chemistry Council (ACC)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2444-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 46
Comment: The EPA has clarified that the emission limits in Table 1 do not apply during periods of startup and shutdown. The EPA also should clarify that the operating limits set forth in Table 3 do not apply during startup and shutdown. The right column header of Table 3 currently reads "You must meet these operating limits..." Please revise this to read "You must meet these operating limits, except during startup and shutdown..."
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2426-A1, excerpt 24.
Commenter Name: Paul Noe
Commenter Affiliation: American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA) et al.
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2426-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 25
Comment: For 40 CFR 63.11224, the preamble Table 1 shows that there will be changes to paragraph (b), but these are not in the rule language. The rule language also included changes to paragraph (a), which was not discussed in the preamble Table 1.
Response: Table 1 in the preamble to the proposed rule at 76 FR 80539 incorrectly listed 40 CFR 63.11224(b) as one of the technical corrections. The reference for the listed change is 40 CFR 63.11225(b) which was included in Table 1 of the preamble to the December 2011 proposal as a technical correction. Specifically, 40 CFR 63.11225(b) of the final rule specifies when compliance certification reports are required to be submitted and what certifications of compliance must be submitted.
Commenter Name: Lorraine Gershman
Commenter Affiliation: American Chemistry Council (ACC)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2444-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 50
Comment: There are discrepancies between preamble Table 1 and the rule.
For 40 CFR 63.11224, the preamble Table 1 at 76 FR 80539 shows that there will be changes to paragraph (b), but these are not in the reconsideration proposal language. The reconsideration proposal language also included changes to paragraph (a), which were not discussed in the preamble for Table 1.
Response: Table 1 in the preamble to the proposed rule at 76 FR 80539 incorrectly listed 40 CFR 63.11224(b) as one of the technical corrections. See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2426-A1, excerpt 25. The revisions to 40 CFR 63.11224(a) were described in a separate preamble section IV.E. "Monitoring Carbon Monoxide Emissions" at 76 FR 80536. The revisions to paragraph (a) allow sources subject to a CO emission limit the option to install, operate, and maintain CO and O2 CEMS.
Commenter Name: Matthew Todd
Commenter Affiliation: American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) and the American Petroleum Institute (API)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2482-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 12
Comment: If the energy assessment requirement is finalized, the Table 2 Item 10 allowance for use of past energy assessments, must be amended to waive energy assessor approval and qualifications requirements.
Proposed Item 10 of Table 2 lists the elements that must be addressed in the energy assessment. In the introductory paragraph it states "An energy assessment completed on or after January 1, 2008, that meets or is amended to meet the energy assessment requirements in this table, satisfies the energy assessment requirement." However, to be acceptable an energy assessment must have been performed by an assessor approved by the Administrator and that assessor or team of assessors must have met all of the requirements in the proposed qualified energy assessor definition. As discussed in the previous comment, the energy assessor definition is unreasonably restrictive and it is virtually impossible that an existing assessment was done by a team that met all those specific requirements. Further, the assessor or assessors for a past assessment certainly were not approved by the Administrator. Thus, the allowance to use existing assessments, which we requested and fully support, is not usable in practice. A sentence needs to be added to Table 2 Item 10 that waives the energy assessor definition and approval where an existing assessment is being used to meet the energy assessment requirement.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested clarification regarding waiving energy assessor approval and qualification requirements in instances where past energy assessments that meet or have been amended to meet the energy assessment requirements are used to comply with those requirements. Item 16 of Table 2 in the final rule (proposed Item 10 of Table 2), which specifies the energy assessment requirements, includes this revision.
Commenter Name: Donald R. Schregardus
Commenter Affiliation: Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, Clean Air Act Services Steering Committee, Department of Defense (DOD)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2418
Comment Excerpt Number: 3
Comment: Some of the wording differs in the Major and Area Source Boiler Rules. Some differences are intentional due to the different scope of the rules but other differences that are not necessary should be more consistent. In addition, the numbering format should be the same in both rules to help readers realize that energy assessments on area sources have one fewer requirement than major HAP sources.
Recommendation: Revise the energy assessment requirement in the "You must meet the following..." column of Table 2 to Subpart JJJJJJ as follows. Most of the changes shown in strikeout are to make the requirements more consistent with the Major Source Boiler Rule. The changes shown in bold strikeout will further clarify the intended scope of the energy assessments since the term "facility" could be interpreted much broader than the affected units.
Must have a one-time energy assessment performed by a qualified energy assessor. An energy assessment completed on or after January 1, 2008, that meets or is amended to meet the energy assessment requirements in this table satisfies the energy assessment requirement. The energy assessment must include:
      (1) A visual inspection of the boiler system.,
      (2) An evaluation of operating characteristics of the facility boiler systems, specifications of energy using systems, operating and maintenance procedures, and unusual operating constraints.,
      (3) An Iinventory of major energy use systems consuming energy from affected boiler(s) and which are under the control of the boiler owner/operator.,
      (4) A review of available architectural and engineering plans, facility operation and maintenance procedures and logs, and fuel usage.,
      (5) A list of major energy conservation measures that are within the facility's control.,
      (6) A list of the energy savings potential of the energy conservation measures identified., and
      (7) A comprehensive report detailing the ways to improve efficiency, the cost of specific improvements, benefits, and the time frame for recouping those investments.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter's suggested clarifications to the energy assessment requirements, which are now Item 16 of Table 2, and the final rule includes these revisions.
Rule Language Corrections: Rule language
Commenter Name: Renee Lesjak Bashel
Commenter Affiliation: National Steering Committee, Small Business Ombudsman and Small Business Environmental Assistance Programs (SBO/SBEAP)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2459-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 9
Comment: The rule appears to be silent regarding the compliance deadline to complete tune-ups and energy assessments for existing dual fuel (gas/oil) capable boilers. Ideally, these dual fuel boilers would not be required to do anything as long as they fire gas only except under the three exemption criteria for burning oil. If economic or other conditions change such that the facility chooses to fire oil outside of the exemption criteria, they would have to file an initial notification as an existing source and comply with the requirements as if the boiler were an existing source that had been shutdown.
If that is not possible, then the facilities should at least be allowed to file their initial notifications as oil-fired boilers but without having to follow the tune-up and energy assessment (if applicable) requirements until and unless they begin to fire oil outside the exemption criteria. Tune-ups should be completed within one week after this, in keeping with the requirement for units that are not operating. Energy assessments should be completed within 180 days after switching, in keeping with §63.7 (a). This would essentially grandfather the boiler in as an existing source and provide the flexibility to use a fuel for which the boiler was designed to operate.
Response: As explained in the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2474-A2, excerpt 8, the final rule amends the provisions regarding boilers that fuel switch after June 4, 2010, in 40 CFR 63.11194. In the final rule, an existing dual-fuel fired boiler meeting the definition of gas-fired boiler, as defined in 40 CFR 63.11237, that meets the applicability requirements of Subpart JJJJJJ after June 4, 2010, due to a fuel switch from gaseous fuel to solid fossil fuel, biomass, or liquid fuel is considered to be an existing source under the subpart as long as the boiler was designed to accommodate the alternate fuel.
The final rule also amends 40 CFR 63.11210 to clarify that affected boilers that switch fuels or make a physical change to the boiler that results in the applicability of a different subcategory within subpart JJJJJJ or the boiler becoming subject to subpart JJJJJJ, or that take a permit limit that results in the boiler being subject to subpart JJJJJJ, the owner or operator must demonstrate compliance within 180 days of the effective date of the fuel switch, the physical change, or the permit limit.
Commenter Name: Marcie Kimball
Commenter Affiliation: Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2414-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 1
Comment: 40 CFR 63.11224(f)(7) should read "do not duct all compartments or cells", instead of "do not duct all compartments of cells".
Response: The EPA appreciates the commenter pointing out the error and 40 CFR 63.11224(f)(7) of the final rule includes this revision.
Commenter Name: Marcie Kimball
Commenter Affiliation: Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2414-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 2
Comment: For 40 CFR 63.11225(e), I think the correct URL for the Electronic Reporting Tool is http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/index.html, not http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/erttool.html/
Response: The EPA appreciates the commenter pointing out the error in the URL for the electronic reporting tool. The final rule references the correct URL.
Commenter Name: Marcie Kimball
Commenter Affiliation: Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2415-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 4
Comment: The revised regulation for 40 CFR 63.11210(e) states that new and reconstructed boilers that only have applicable work practice standards (i.e. boilers with a heat input capacity <10 MMBtu/hr) do not have to complete initial performance tune‐ups. 40 CFR 63.11210(e) does not state, but implies, a reference to the initial performance tune‐ups that are in 40 CFR 63.11214. The revised Table 2 has new references to 40 CFR 63.11214. Specifically, it states that existing boilers must comply with the initial tune‐ups specified in 40 CFR 63.11214. New boilers, however, are not shown as needing to comply with the initial tune‐ups in 40 CFR 63.11214. 40 CFR 63.11214, itself, has not been revised in reference to these changes. 40 CFR 63.11214 still mentions both existing and new boilers as needing to perform initial tune‐ups. Should 40 CFR 63.11214 be updated to reflect the other changes, i.e. should the references to new boilers needing initial tune‐ups be removed? Or maybe Table 2 should show that new biomass‐fired and oil‐fired boilers with a heat input capacity =>10 MMBtu/hr need to comply with 40 CFR 63.11214 (in addition to other changes to correct the apparent contradictions)?
Response: The EPA has ensured that the final rule is clear with respect to the tune-up requirements for existing versus new and reconstructed boilers.
Commenter Name: Bob Machaver
Commenter Affiliation: Public Citizen
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2416
Comment Excerpt Number: 1
Comment: Initial Tune-Up Exemption: New and Reconstructed Boilers  -  Section 63.11196(e)
The language in §63.11196(e) that exempts new and reconstructed boilers from having to conduct an initial tune-up is confusing. The first sentence in §63.11196(e) discusses compliance dates that "are applicable to boilers that are "only subject to work practice standards". By placing the initial tune-up exemption in this same provision, the rule seems to suggest that this exemption is limited to boilers that are "only subject to work practice standards". However the preamble indicates that this initial tune-up exemption should be applicable to all new and reconstructed boilers, including both those that are: (a) subject to emission limits and work practice standards; and (b) those that are only subject to work practice standards
To avoid confusion, it is suggested that this initial tune-up exemption for new and reconstructed boilers be placed in a separate dedicated provision (say 63.11196(f)), in which it is indicated that "not withstanding provisions (d) and (e) above, "You are not required to complete an initial performance tune-up for a new or reconstructed affected source, but you are required to complete the applicable biennial or five-year tune-up as specified in §63.11223(b), (c), and (d) no later than 25 months or 61 months, respectively, after the initial startup of the new or reconstructed affected source. "
Response: The EPA has ensured that the final rule is clear with respect to the tune-up requirements for existing versus new and reconstructed boilers. Regulatory text regarding initial compliance and continuous compliance with the tune-up requirements has been clarified.
Commenter Name: Russell A. Wozniak
Commenter Affiliation: Dow Chemical Company
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2423-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 6
Comment: The EPA should clarify fuel requirements for tune-ups.
In §63.11223(b)(5), the EPA states "...You must conduct the tune-up while burning the type of fuel that provided the majority of the heat input to the boiler over the 12 months prior to the tune-up."
Dow suggests the following revisions to the proposed regulatory text and provides supporting rationale for these revisions below. New text is shown in bold underline text. Change/revised text is shown in strike-through font.
You must conduct the tune-up while burning the type of fuel (or fuels in the case of units that routinely burn two types of fuels at the same time) that provided the majority of the heat input to the boiler over the 12 months prior to the tune-up.
There are sources that burn a liquid fuel and natural gas support fuel at a nearly 1:1 ratio making it difficult to determine which fuel provides the majority of the heat input. Additionally, burning just one of the fuels, even if that fuel is barely in the majority, does not represent the conditions the unit normally operates under defeating the purpose of the tune-up. Therefore, the rule text should be revised to allow the tune-up to proceed during times when the boiler is combusting two types of fuels at the same time such as a mixture of natural gas and liquid fuel.
Response: We agree with the commenter and 40 CFR 63.11223(a) of the final rule includes the suggested revision.
Commenter Name: Paul Noe
Commenter Affiliation: American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA) et al.
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2426-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 26
Comment: A startup and shutdown period exception must be added to the definitions of "30-day average" and "daily block average" added to §63.11237 because sources are exempt from meeting emission standards and operating parameter limits during startup and shutdown.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter and in the final rule includes revised definitions of "30-day rolling average" and "daily block average" that clarify that periods of startup and shutdown are excluded from the calculations. The newly added definition of "10-day rolling average" also clarifies that periods of startup and shutdown are excluded from the calculations.
Commenter Name: Grif Bond
Commenter Affiliation: Environmental, Health & Safety Communications Panel (EHSCP)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2432-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 3
Comment: The EPA is proposing to amend 40 CFR 63.11223(b)(6)(iii) to specify that the type and amount of fuel need only be included on the biennial report if the unit was physically and legally capable of using more than one type of fuel during that period. This clarification serves to resolve some of the confusion posed by the 2011 final rule. Therefore, the EHSCP supports this proposed clarification.
Response: The EPA thanks the commenter for their support.
Commenter Name: Grif Bond
Commenter Affiliation: Environmental, Health & Safety Communications Panel (EHSCP)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2432-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 7
Comment: The EPA has proposed defining seasonal boilers as a new subcategory of boiler. The EHSCP supports this proposal, but does request clarification on one issue. In TABLE 1-MISCELLANEOUS TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPART JJJJJJ[1] the description for the proposed change to 40 CFR 63.11223(c) mentions a triennial tune-up for seasonal boilers. Elsewhere in the preamble and in the proposed amendments to the regulatory text, the timeframe mentioned is every 5 years after the initial tune-up. We presume that the preamble reference to triennial was made in error. Please ensure all references to the requirement for tune-ups for seasonal boilers specify the 5-year timeframe .
 [1] 76 FR 80539

Response: The commenter is correct in that the reference to triennial tune-ups for seasonal boilers in Table 1 of the preamble to the proposed amendments is an error. The EPA appreciates the commenter pointing out this error and the final rule correctly references the 5-year tune-up requirement for seasonal boilers.
Commenter Name: Barbara Patton
Commenter Affiliation: AT&T Services, Inc.
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2436-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 8
Comment: The EPA has proposed defining seasonal boilers as a new subcategory of boiler. The EHSCP supports this proposal, but does request clarification on one issue. In TABLE1-MISCELLANEOUS TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO 40 CFR PART 63, SUBPARTJJJJJ the description for the proposed change to 40 CFR 63.11223(c) mentions a triennial tune-up for seasonal boilers. Elsewhere in the preamble and in the proposed amendments to the regulatory text, the time frame mentioned is every 5 years after the initial tune-up. We presume that the preamble reference to triennial was made in error. Please ensure all references to the requirement for tune-ups for seasonal boilers specify the 5-year timeframe.
Response: See the response to EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2432-A1, excerpt 7.
Commenter Name: Michael G. Dowd
Commenter Affiliation: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2434-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 4
Comment: VADEQ requests that the EPA clarify the tune-up requirements for units that fall into the oil-fired category but burn natural gas as their primary fuel. 40 CFR 63.11223(b)(5) specifies that boiler tune-ups must be conducted while burning the type of fuel that provided the majority of the heat input to the boiler over the previous 12 months. Would a boiler classified as an oil-fired boiler that primarily burns natural gas during the previous 12 month period conduct the tune-up while firing natural gas?
Response: The commenter is correct that a boiler classified as an oil-fired boiler but that primarily burns natural gas during the previous 12-month period would be required to conduct their tune-up while firing natural gas.
Commenter Name: Robert D. Bessette
Commenter Affiliation: Council of Industrial Boiler Owners (CIBO)
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2443-A2
Comment Excerpt Number: 12
Comment: Furthermore, it is noted that Table 2, Subcategory 4, item (3) is worded differently than in the DDDD- "Inventory of major systems consuming energy from affected boiler(s)," so that the inventory is limited to boiler energy output.  But item (2) of that section requires an evaluation of specifications of energy using systems. (76 FR 15602.)  Therefore, there are inconsistencies within various provisions of JJJJJ.  Because the Energy use system definition was changed in the final rule relative to the proposed rule, the EPA should reconsider these issues.
Response: The energy assessment requirements in Table 2 to subpart JJJJJJ of the final rule are consistent with the definition of "energy use system." The definition of "energy use system" is as follows:
Energy use system includes the following systems located on the site of the affected boiler that use energy provided by the boiler: (i) process heating; compressed air systems; machine drive (motors, pumps, fans); process cooling; facility heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems; hot water systems; building envelop; and lighting; or (ii) other systems that use steam, hot water, process heat, or electricity, provided by the affected boiler.
Commenter Name: Michael J. Bradley
Commenter Affiliation: The Clean Energy Group
Document Control Number: EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0790-2448-A1
Comment Excerpt Number: 6
Comment: If §63.11210(g) is intended to include synthetic area sources, we recommend the EPA revise the language of §63.11210(g) to clarify (1) that permit limits are included, and (2) the 180 days to demonstrate compliance includes units that switch from the major source rule to the area source rule. For example, the text could read (bold denotes additions and strikethroughs deletions):
      (g) For affected boilers that switch fuels, or-make a physical modification to the boiler, or take a permit limit that results in the applicability of a different subcategory or boiler NESHAP(e.g., a boiler that was  previously subject to the major source rule at Subpart DDDDD), you must demonstrate compliance within 180 days of the effective date of the fuel switch, OF physical modification, or permit limit consistent with §63.11225(g).
However, if §63.11210(g) is not intended to include area sources created through permit conditions, we recommend that §63.11210(g) clarify that the shorter timeline in §63.9(b)(2) governs these sources. For example,