We disagree with the comment that minor releases will divert attention and resources away from critical safety tasks. These releases are associated with malfunction events that would require immediate corrective action and have the potential to emit large quantities of HAP. In addition, while the owner or operator must follow the PRD recordkeeping and reporting requirements for each release to the atmosphere, these tasks can be completed after the release has occurred and should not interfere with any actions needed to ensure process and system safety. Further, we note that the rule does not require PRDs to be vented to control devices, as suggested by a commenter; however, a facility owner or operator may choose to vent PRDs to control devices. We also note that the commenters did not provide data or information in support of their speculation that venting a PRD to a control device would reduce the effectiveness of the PRD or that a safety hazard would be created.
Regarding the comments that the PRD monitoring requirements will dictate the types of systems used at facilities, we note that, as discussed elsewhere in this preamble, the requirements for PRD monitoring provide a wide latitude in the type of monitoring system used, which may be chosen by the facility owner or operator, providing that the basic requirements for the system are met.
Comment: Several commenters state that the EPA added the PRD requirements without regard to the CAA section 112 MACT development process and without providing the legal justification, adequate record basis or technical justification. Two of these commenters add that they do not believe that the EPA has a legal obligation nor the discretion to promulgate the proposed PRD provisions because the PRD monitoring and reporting requirements were not derived from the technology reviews, in response to any residual risks detected, or the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit's invalidation of the SSM provisions in the 40 CFR part 63 General Provisions. Two commenters suggest that these revisions should be evaluated as part of the technology review, and the EPA should analyze the technical feasibility, potential emissions reductions and cost effectiveness of the revisions.
Several commenters argue that the EPA provided no data to support the claim that a large number of releases occur and may emit large quantities of HAP, or to support the contention that releases are not being identified. One commenter asserts that PRD releases are rare, and that the EPA's data from PRD episodes at California South Coast refineries, which resulted in large emissions, does not apply to chemical operations. Another commenter notes that at its facility, PRD releases are infrequent events that last for 1 or 2 seconds and states that the proposed PRD provisions are not warranted. One commenter states that the industry already quantifies and reports releases through the use of pressure monitoring and other types of process controls that are also implemented to maintain stable operation. The commenter asserts that the EPA is establishing a numeric standard of zero that is based on the premise that most relief devices do not release, which fails to acknowledge the differences between systems.
Response: Under CAA section 112(d)(2), the EPA must promulgate technology-based standards that reflect the maximum degree of emission reductions of HAP achievable (after considering cost, energy requirements, and non-air quality health and environmental impacts), and such standards must contain compliance assurance provisions to make sure that they are practicably enforceable. Nothing in the CAA or its legislative history suggests that the EPA is prohibited from reviewing and revising MACT standards and their compliance assurance provisions, except as part of the CAA section 112(d)(6) or CAA section 112(f) reviews or an action taken in response to a ruling by a Court. The amendments being finalized for PRD releases do not impose new emission standards for which a MACT analysis is required by the CAA. Instead, they prohibit releases to the atmosphere from PRDs in off-site material service that are not appropriate for exemption from emission standards following the 2008 Sierra Club v. EPA ruling, and impose additional monitoring requirements to address potential releases.
In light of, and consistent with, the Sierra Club v. EPA ruling, the EPA is eliminating the SSM exemption in the OSWRO MACT standards and requiring that the standards apply at all times, including during periods of SSM. In addition, in order for our treatment of malfunction-caused pressure releases to the atmosphere to conform with the reasoning of the Court's ruling, the final rule adds a provision stating that releases of HAP listed in Table 1 of subpart DD directly to the atmosphere from PRDs in off-site material service are prohibited. To prohibit these malfunction-caused releases, it is not necessary for us to set an emission standard that is based on a MACT floor or beyond-the-floor analysis; indeed, the EPA has consistently explained that we are not required to take malfunctions into account in setting standards or to devise standards that apply specifically to malfunction-caused emissions, such as PRD releases that cause HAP emissions only during malfunctions. The final rule requires that sources monitor PRDs using a system that is capable of detecting and recording the time and duration of each pressure release, and the final rule provides owners and operators flexibility to either install a monitor on the PRD or to use equipment and operations they already have in place if they are sufficient to detect and indicate pressure releases to the atmosphere. The rule also establishes requirements that these release indicators be capable of immediately notifying operators that a release is occurring, so that HAP emissions from these releases can be mitigated as soon as possible. Additionally, the final rule requires reporting of PRD releases to the atmosphere to ensure that these releases will be reported nationally.
Contrary to some commenters' assertions that the EPA did not provide data to support the claim that a large number of PRD releases occur and may emit large quantities of HAP, a report by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) containing such data was referenced and made available with the proposed rule in the memorandum, Cost Impacts of Pressure Relief Device Monitoring for the Off-site Waste and Recovery Operations Source Category, available in the docket for this action. The referenced report shows that releases from PRDs occur randomly and the emissions can only be approximated, but that large quantities of emissions may be released. Based on the SCAQMD analysis of refinery PRD reports of PRD releases from nine facilities in its district, there were eight PRD releases from 2003 to 2006 that were estimated to release greater than 2,000 lbs of emissions to the atmosphere, and eight PRD releases from 2003 to 2006 that were estimated to release between 500 and 2,000 lbs of emissions to the atmosphere. The SCAQMD analysis focuses on VOC emissions (which would include organic HAP emissions) from refineries and marine terminals, and information provided by the commenter also suggests the SCAQMD analysis results are similar to results from another analysis for PRDs at chemical production facilities. Additionally, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Emission Event Reporting Database is populated with Emission Event Reports from both the refinery and chemical sectors where the reason for the report was due to a PRD release. This database also shows that PRD releases do occur and that the quantity of emissions varies and can be large. While there may be differences in PRD systems and emissions, we continue to believe the requirements proposed and being finalized for the OSWRO NESHAP in this action are necessary to address the otherwise unregulated HAP emissions releases from PRDs.
Comment: Several commenters suggest certain types of PRDs should be excluded from the PRD requirements because they have a low potential to emit large quantities of HAP. These commenters specifically state that PRDs in liquid service should be excluded from these requirements. For PRDs with little potential for loss to the atmosphere, the commenters suggest that the EPA set a reporting threshold value equal to the reportable quantity (RQ) values in Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act (EPCRA) and/or Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). One commenter asserts that the PRD provisions should exclude PRDs in less than 5-percent VOHAP service. The commenter also suggests that the OSWRO MACT should refer to Table 9 of subpart G (VOHAPs) instead of Table 1 of subpart DD, should exclude ethylene glycol from Table 1 of subpart DD, or should exclude heavy liquids from the definition of a PRD.
This commenter states that the exclusion for PRDs discharged to a drain system that meets the requirements of 40 CFR 63.689 is not useful, and states that the EPA provides no cost justification or assessment of potential emission reductions of this alternative requirement. The commenter asserts that hard-piping discharge to a closed sewer system is neither feasible nor safe in many situations, and suggests that the EPA require only that liquids be sent for on-site or off-site treatment, which would be consistent with the Chemical Manufacturing Area Source standard (40 CFR part 63 subpart VVVVVV). This commenter and another commenter state that, to be consistent with the HON, PRDs that are routed to a fuel gas system should be exempted in 40 CFR 63.691(c)(4).
Response: We generally do not agree with the commenters' suggestions to add an exclusion from the PRD requirements for PRDs that emit smaller amounts of HAP. Regarding PRDs in liquid service, equipment is in liquid service when it contains or contacts off-site material that is liquid at operating conditions, and for processes that are under pressure, the liquid may escape as a gas or vapor when released to the atmosphere. For these reasons, we continue to believe PRDs in liquid service, as well as those in gas/vapor service, should be subject to the PRD requirements. We note that the OSWRO NESHAP provides that only PRDs that contain or contact off-site material having a total HAP concentration equal to or greater than 10 percent by weight and that are intended to operate for 300 hours or more during a calendar year in off-site material service are subject to these requirements (see 40 CFR 63.680(c)(3)). We also disagree with the suggestion that the OSWRO MACT refer to Table 9 of subpart G rather than Table 1 of subpart DD for HAPs regulated by the PRD provisions. All of the provisions of the OSWRO NESHAP apply to the chemicals listed in Table 1 of subpart DD, and we do not find that an exception should be made for PRDs to exclude any chemicals with relatively lower volatility from these requirements.
We disagree with the commenter that the provisions that exclude PRDs that are routed to a drain system meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 63.689 from the PRD release and monitoring requirements is an alternate requirement. This provision acknowledges that such equipment would not have uncontrolled HAP emission releases directly to the atmosphere, and therefore the PRD release management and monitoring provisions should not apply, but it does not require that any equipment be routed to such a drain system. We also note that the chemical manufacturing area source standard does not have pressure release management or monitoring requirements, and the standards in that rule are not applicable to the OSWRO NESHAP. The EPA agrees with commenters' suggestion to exclude PRDs that release to a fuel gas system from the PRD monitoring provisions, and we have revised the final rule to reflect this change.
Comment: One commenter requests that the EPA clarify the meaning of PRDs in light liquid versus gas/vapor service. The commenter notes that most facilities subject to the OSWRO MACT operate fixed roof storage tanks that must be operated with a void space at the top that consists of vapors from the tank and may also include a nitrogen blanket. The commenter asserts that the determination of the service type should be based on the contents of the tank (i.e., liquid) and not the location where the PRD is installed, which will always be at the top of the tank in contact with vapors in the void space. The commenter asserts that if these types of tanks are considered to be in gas/vapor service, then there can be no PRDs on fixed roof tanks that operate in liquid service.
Response: The OSWRO NESHAP directs facility owners/operators to comply with the equipment leak requirements of the HON, which contains different requirements for various components depending upon the type of fluid (whether gas or liquid) that flows through (e.g., contains or contacts) the components. The basis for these different requirements is data collected from petroleum refineries, which indicate that emission rates of equipment leak sources decrease as the vapor pressure (volatility) of the process fluid decreases. For the HON, three classes of volatility were established based on the petroleum refinery data and the potential for emissions through equipment leaks; these include gas/vapor service, light-liquid service and heavy-liquid service. The proposed OSWRO definition stated that "In gas/vapor service means that a piece of equipment in off-site material service contains a gas or vapor at operating conditions." To clarify our intent and avoid any confusion as to whether PRDs with a flow of gas or vapor through the device are "in gas/vapor service," we are revising the definition to state, "In gas/vapor service means that a piece of equipment in off-site material service contains or contacts a gas or vapor at operating conditions." With this revision, it should be clear that a PRD in off-site material service on the roof of a tank containing liquid, but which only contacts gas/vapor itself and does not contact liquid, would be in gas/vapor service. For consistency, we also are revising the definition of "in light liquid service" to include equipment that contains or contacts liquid.
Comment: One commenter states that the EPA revised the Tank Level 1 control requirements in 40 CFR 63.685(c)(2)(i) and (iii)(B) to preclude routine venting of PRD by excluding 40 CFR 63.902(c)(2) and (3); however, the commenter notes that this revision would also preclude the operation of conservation vents on Level 1 tanks. The commenter suggests that the EPA remove the exclusion or amend the provision to allow for the operation of conservation vents.
Response: We agree that conservation vents should be allowed to operate on Level 1 tanks, and, while we do not believe these would meet the definition of a PRD, we have revised the text of the final rule at 40 CFR 63.684(c)(2)(iii)(B)(1) to clarify that the use of these devices is permitted.
iv.	Other Comments
Comment: One commenter states that the EPA should provide an exemption in 40 CFR 63.693(b)(9) to the performance testing or design evaluation requirements for combustion devices if a unit has been issued a final or interim status RCRA permit, since performance tests are required to obtain such a permit.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter that the combustion units required to obtain a RCRA permit would have conducted performance tests under those provisions which satisfy the performance test requirements of the OSWRO NESHAP and that separate or additional performance testing would not be necessary. We have therefore added a provision to the final rule that excludes combustion devices that have been issued a RCRA permit from the OSWRO NESHAP performance test requirements.
Comment: One commenter states that the OSWRO provisions should more clearly indicate that facilities subject to onsite wastewater provisions under other CAA MACT regulations should not also be required to comply with the OSWRO NESHAP. The commenter references the applicability provisions that exclude certain types of waste subject to other MACT rules in 40 CFR 63.680(b)(2)(v), and states that the exclusion is limited to SOCMI. The commenter suggests removing paragraphs 40 CFR 63.680(b)(2)(v)(A) and (B) to broaden the exclusion to wastewater sources subject to any other subpart in 40 CFR part 63.
Response: The EPA agrees with the commenter that the exclusion of certain types of waste in 40 CFR 63.680(b)(2)(v) should not be limited to SOCMI and has revised the regulatory text to exempt waste that is transferred from a facility at which management of the waste has complied with the air emission control standards for process wastewater specified by another subpart in 40 CFR part 63.
4. What is the rationale for our final decisions regarding these other changes to the OSWRO NESHAP?
For the reasons provided above and in the preamble for the proposed rule, we are finalizing the proposed provisions regarding electronic reporting; routine maintenance; OELs; safety devices, pressure tanks, bypasses and PRDs; performance test method clarifications and alternative methods; and other clarifications and corrections.
For the reasons provided above, we are making the revisions, clarifications and corrections noted in section IV.D.2 in the final rule.
V. Summary of Cost, Environmental and Economic Impacts and Additional Analyses Conducted
A. What are the affected sources?
	We estimate that there are 56 major source OSWRO facilities. Based on available permit information, seven facilities are known to be exempt from most of the rule requirements due to the low HAP content of the off-site waste they receive or because they comply instead with 40 CFR part 61, subpart FF, as allowed by the OSWRO NESHAP, and they are not expected to be affected by the final rule revisions. These facilities are only required to document that the total annual quantity of the HAP contained in the off-site material received at the plant site is less than 1 megagram per year, and they are not subject to any other emissions limits or monitoring, reporting or recordkeeping requirements. We are not aware of any new OSWRO facilities that are expected to be constructed in the foreseeable future.
B. What are the air quality impacts?
      For equipment leaks, we are eliminating the option of complying with 40 CFR part 61, subpart V, and requiring facilities in the OSWRO source category to comply with 40 CFR part 63, subpart H, including connector monitoring. Our revised estimate of the HAP emission reduction for this change is approximately 185 tpy.
      For tanks, we are finalizing requirements for tanks of certain sizes and containing materials above certain vapor pressures to use Level 2 controls. Our revised estimate of the HAP emission reduction for this change is approximately 26 tpy.
      We do not anticipate any HAP emission reduction from our clarification of the rule provision "seal the open end" (in the context of OELs), clarification of the scope of the routine maintenance provisions, or requirement to electronically report the results of emissions testing.
      For the revisions to the MACT standards regarding SSM, including monitoring of PRDs in off-site material service, we were not able to quantify the possible emission reductions, so none are included in our assessment of air quality impacts.
      Therefore, the estimated total HAP emission reductions for the final standards for the OSWRO source category are estimated to be 211 tpy.
C. What are the cost impacts?
      For equipment leaks, we are eliminating the option of complying with 40 CFR part 61, subpart V, and requiring facilities in the OSWRO source category to comply with 40 CFR part 63, subpart H (including connector monitoring). We estimate the nationwide capital costs to be $2.1 million and the annualized costs to be $664,000.
      For tanks, we are requiring tanks of certain sizes and containing materials above certain vapor pressures to use Level 2 controls. We estimate the nationwide capital costs to be $139,000 and the annualized costs to be $192,000.
      We do not anticipate any quantifiable capital or annualized costs for our definition of "seal" (in the context of OELs), clarification of the scope of the routine maintenance provisions and requirement to electronically report the results of emissions testing.
      For the requirement to install and operate monitors on PRDs, we estimate the nationwide capital costs to be $1.9 million and the annualized costs to be $270,000. Therefore, the total capital costs for the final amendments for the OSWRO source category are approximately $4.1 million and the total annualized costs are approximately $1.1 million.
D. What are the economic impacts?
      Both the magnitude of control costs needed to comply with a regulation and the distribution of these costs among affected facilities can have a role in determining how the market will change in response to that regulation. Total annualized costs for the final amendments are estimated to be about $1.1 million. The average annualized cost per facility is estimated to be about $23,000. Without detailed industry data, it is not possible to conduct a complete quantitative analysis of economic impacts. However, prior analyses suggest the impacts of these final amendments will be minimal. The Economic Impact Analysis for the final OSWRO NESHAP found that demand for off-site waste services was highly inelastic. This means that suppliers are predominantly able to pass along cost increases to consumers through higher prices with little, if any, decrease in the quantity of service demanded. While we do not have specific information on prices charged or the quantity of services provided, company revenues are a function of both these factors. The cost-to-sales ratio is less than 1 quarter of 1 percent for all of the 27 firms included in this analysis, suggesting any increase in price will be minimal.
E. What are the benefits?
      We have estimated that this action will achieve HAP emissions reduction of 211 tpy. The final standards will result in significant reductions in the actual and MACT-allowable emissions of HAP and will reduce the actual and potential cancer risks and non-cancer health effects due to emissions of HAP from this source category, as discussed in the proposal preamble (79 FR 37869-37870). We have not quantified the monetary benefits associated with these reductions; however, these avoided emissions will result in improvements in air quality and reduced negative health effects associate with exposure to air pollution of these emissions.
F. What analysis of environmental justice did we conduct?
      The EPA is making environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the United States. The EPA has established policies regarding the integration of environmental justice into the agency's rulemaking efforts, including recommendations for the consideration and conduct of analyses to evaluate potential environmental justice concerns during the development of a rule.
Following these recommendations, to gain a better understanding of the source category and near source populations, the EPA conducted a proximity analysis for OSWRO facilities prior to proposal to identify any overrepresentation of minority, low income or indigenous populations. This analysis gives an indication of the prevalence of sub-populations that may be exposed to air pollution from the sources. We have revised this analysis to include four additional OSWRO facilities that the EPA learned about after proposal.
The EPA has determined that this final rule will not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low income or indigenous populations. Additionally, the final changes to the NESHAP increase the level of environmental protection for all affected populations by reducing emissions from equipment leaks and tanks and do not cause any disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on any population, including any minority, low income or indigenous populations.
Further details concerning this analysis are presented in the memorandum titled, Updated Environmental Justice Review: Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operations RTR, a copy of which is available in the docket for this action.
G. What analysis of children's environmental health did we conduct?
      As part of the health and risk assessments, as well as the proximity analysis conducted for this action, risks to infants and children were assessed. These analyses are documented in the Residual Risk Assessment for the Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operations Source Category in Support of the February 2015 Risk and Technology Review Final Rule and the Updated Environmental Justice Review: Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operations RTR documents and are available in the docket for this action.
      The results of the proximity analysis show that the average percentage of children 17 years and younger in close proximity to OSWRO is similar to the percentage of the national population in this age group. The difference in the absolute number of percentage points of the population 17 years old and younger from the national average indicates a 7-percent over-representation near OSWRO facilities. Consistent with the EPA's Policy on Evaluating Health Risks to Children, we conducted inhalation and multipathway risk assessments for the OSWRO source category considering risk to infants and children. [ ]Children are exposed to chemicals emitted to the atmosphere via two primary routes: either directly via inhalation, or indirectly via ingestion or dermal contact with various media that have been contaminated with the emitted chemicals. The EPA considers the possibility that children might be more sensitive than adults to toxic chemicals, including chemical carcinogens.
 	For our inhalation risk assessment, several carcinogens emitted by facilities in this source category have a mutagenic mode of action. For these compounds, we applied the age-dependent adjustment factors (ADAF) described in the EPA's Supplemental Guidance for Assessing Susceptibility from Early-Life Exposure to Carcinogens. This adjustment has the effect of increasing the estimated lifetime risks for these pollutants by a factor of 1.6. For one group of these chemicals with a mutagenic mode of action, POM, only a small fraction of the total emissions were reported as individual compounds. The EPA expresses carcinogenic potency of POM relative to the carcinogenic potency of benzo[a]pyrene, based on evidence that carcinogenic POM have the same mutagenic mode of action as does benzo[a]pyrene. The EPA's Science Policy Council recommends applying the ADAF to all carcinogenic compounds for which risk estimates are based on potency relative to benzo[a]pyrene. Accordingly, we have applied the ADAF to the benzo[a]pyrene-equivalent mass portion of all POM mixtures.
      For our multipathway screening assessment (i.e., ingestion), we assessed risks for adults and various age groups of children. Childrens' exposures are expected to differ from exposures of adults due to differences in body weights, ingestion rates, dietary preferences and other factors. It is important, therefore, to evaluate the contribution of exposures during childhood to total lifetime risk using appropriate exposure factor values, applying ADAF as appropriate. The EPA developed a health protective exposure scenario whereby the receptor, at various lifestages, receives ingestion exposure via both the farm food chain and the fish ingestion pathways. The analysis revealed that fish ingestion is the dominant exposure pathway across all age groups for several pollutants, including POM. For POM, the farm-food-chain also is a major route of exposure, with beef and dairy contributing significantly to the lifetime average daily dose. Preliminary calculations of estimated dermal exposure and risk from these pollutants showed that the dermal exposure route is not a significant risk pathway relative to ingestion exposures.
	Based on the analyses described above, the EPA has determined that the changes to this rule, which will reduce emissions of HAP by over 200 tpy, will lead to reduced risk to children and infants.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
      Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
      This action is not a significant regulatory action and was, therefore, not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
      The information collection activities in this rule have been submitted for approval to the OMB under the PRA. The Information Collection Request (ICR) document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number 1717.11. You can find a copy of the ICR in the docket for this rule, and it is briefly summarized here. The information collection requirements are not enforceable until OMB approves them.
      The information requirements in this rulemaking are based on the notification, recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), which are mandatory for all operators subject to national emission standards. These notifications, reports and records are essential in determining compliance, and are specifically authorized by CAA section 114 (42 U.S.C. 7414). All information submitted to the EPA pursuant to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for which a claim of confidentiality is made is safeguarded according to agency policies set forth in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
Respondents/affected entities: OSWRO facilities that store, treat, recycle, reprocess, or dispose of wastes containing organic chemical compounds.
Respondent's obligation to respond: mandatory (42 U.S.C. 7414)
Estimated number of respondents: 49
Frequency of response: semiannual
Total estimated burden: 49,118 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: $4.1 million (per year), includes $1.2 million annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
      An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When OMB approves this ICR, the agency will announce that approval in the Federal Register and publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to display the OMB control number for the approved information collection activities contained in this final rule.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
      I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. The small entities subject to the requirements of this action are businesses that can be classified as small firms using the SBA size standards for their respective industries. The agency has determined that of the 27 firms that own the 49 facilities in the OSWRO source category, four firms, or 15 percent, can be classified as small firms. Based on the sales test screening methodology, all four firms will experience minimal impact, or a cost-to-sales ratio of 1 percent or less. Details of this analysis are presented in the memo, Economic Impact Analysis for Risk and Technology Review: Off-site Waste and Recovery Operations Source Category, which is available in the docket for this action.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
      This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531 - 1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments, or on the private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
      This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments
      This action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. There are no OSWRO facilities that are owned or operated by tribal governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
      This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, and because the EPA does not believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children. This action's health and risk assessments are contained in the: Residual Risk Assessment for the Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operations Source Category in Support of the February 2015 Risk and Technology Review Final Rule document, which is available in the docket for this action, and are discussed in section V.G of this preamble.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
      This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
      This action involves technical standards. The EPA has decided to add EPA Methods 2F and 2G to the list of methods allowed to determine process vent stream gas volumetric flow rate. No applicable voluntary consensus standards (VCS) were identified for these methods. In addition, the EPA is finalizing provisions to allow EPA Method 3A as an alternative to EPA Method 3B for determining the oxygen concentration to use in oxygen correction equations. While the EPA identified several candidate VCS for this method (ANSI/ASME PTC 19-10-1981 Part 10, ASME B133.9-1994 (2001), ISO 10396:1993 (2007), ISO 12039:2001, ASTM D5835-95 (2013), ASTM D6522-00 (2011), and CAN/CSA Z223.2-M86 (1999)) as being potentially applicable, the agency decided not to use them. The use of these VCS would not be practical due to lack of equivalency, documentation, validation data and other important technical and policy considerations. The EPA also is finalizing requirements to use EPA Method 25A to determine compliance with the control device percent reduction requirement, if the owner or operator chooses to measure total organic content. While the EPA identified two candidate VCS (ISO 14965:2000(E), EN 12619 (1999)) as being potentially applicable, we are not including either standard in this final rule. The use of these VCS would not be practical due to the limited measurement ranges of these methods. (For more detail, see the document titled, Voluntary Consensus Standard Results for NESHAP: Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operations 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart DD in the docket for this final rule.) The EPA solicited comments on VCS and invited the public to identify potentially-applicable VCS, but no comments were received regarding this aspect of the rule.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
      The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or indigenous populations because it increases the level of protection provided to human health or the environment. The results of this evaluation are contained in the memorandum titled, Updated Environmental Justice Review: Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operations RTR, which is available in the docket for this action, and are discussed in section V.F of this preamble.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
      This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a "major rule" as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
      Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedures, Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated:
____________________________.

____________________________
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.

      For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending title 40, chapter I, of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) as follows:
PART 63 --  NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES
      1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
      Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart DD --  NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS FROM OFF-SITE WASTE AND RECOVERY OPERATIONS
	2. Section 63.680 is amended by:
      a. Revising paragraphs (b)(2)(v) introductory text, (e)(1) and (2); and
      b. Adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:
§ 63.680 Applicability and designation of affected sources.
*  *  *  *  *
      (b) * * *
      (2) * * *
      (v) Waste that is transferred from a chemical manufacturing plant or other facility for which the owner or operator of the facility from which the waste is transferred has complied with the provisions of the air emission control standards for process wastewater specified by another 40 CFR part 63 subpart. This exemption does not apply to a source which complies with another 40 CFR part 63 subpart by transferring its wastewater off-site for control.
* * * * *
	(e) * * *
	(1) Existing sources. The owner or operator of an affected source that commenced construction or reconstruction before October 13, 1994, must achieve compliance with the provisions of this subpart on or before the date specified in paragraph (e)(1)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this section as applicable to the affected source.
	(i) For an affected source that commenced construction or reconstruction before October 13, 1994 and receives off-site material for the first time before February 1, 2000, the owner or operator of this affected source must achieve compliance with the provisions of the subpart (except §§ 63.685(b)(1)(ii), 63.691(b)(2), and 63.691(c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this subpart) on or before February 1, 2000 unless an extension has been granted by the Administrator as provided in 40 CFR 63.6(i). These existing affected sources shall be in compliance with the tank requirements of § 63.685(b)(1)(ii) of this subpart 2 years after the publication date of the final amendments on [insert date of publication in the Federal Register], the equipment leak requirements of § 63.691(b)(2) of this subpart 1 year after the publication date of the final amendments on [insert date of publication in the Federal Register], and the pressure relief device monitoring requirements of § 63.691(c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this subpart 3 years after the publication date of the final amendments on [insert date of publication in the Federal Register].
      (ii) For an affected source that commenced construction or reconstruction before October 13, 1994, but receives off-site material for the first time on or after February 1, 2000, but before [insert date of publication in the Federal Register], the owner or operator of the affected source must achieve compliance with the provisions of this subpart (except §§ 63.685(b)(1)(ii), 63.691(b)(2), and 63.691(c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this subpart) upon the first date that the affected source begins to manage off-site material. These existing affected sources shall be in compliance with the tank requirements of § 63.685(b)(1)(ii) of this subpart 2 years after the publication date of the final amendments on [insert date of publication in the Federal Register], the equipment leak requirements of § 63.691(b)(2) of this subpart 1 year after the publication date of the final amendments on [insert date of publication in the Federal Register], and the pressure relief device monitoring requirements of § 63.691(c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this subpart 3 years after the publication date of the final amendments on [insert date of publication in the Federal Register].
      (iii) For an affected source that commenced construction or reconstruction before October 13, 1994, but receives off-site material for the first time on or after [insert date of publication in the Federal Register], the owner or operator of the affected source must achieve compliance with the provisions of this subpart (except §§ 63.685 (b)(1)(ii), 63.691(b)(2), and 63.691(c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this subpart) upon the first date that the affected source begins to manage off-site material. These existing affected sources shall be in compliance with the tank requirements of § 63.685(b)(1)(ii) of this subpart 2 years after the publication date of the final amendments on [insert date of publication in the Federal Register], the equipment leak requirements of § 63.691(b)(2) of this subpart 1 year after the publication date of the final amendments on [insert date of publication in the Federal Register], and the pressure relief device monitoring requirements of § 63.691(c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this subpart 3 years after the publication date of the final amendments on [insert date of publication in the Federal Register].
       (2) New sources. The owner or operator of an affected source for which construction or reconstruction commences on or after October 13, 1994, must achieve compliance with the provisions of this subpart (except §§ 63.685(b)(2), 63.691(b)(2), and 63.691(c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this subpart) on or before July 1, 1996, or upon initial startup of operations, whichever date is later as provided in 40 CFR 63.6(b). New affected sources that commenced construction or reconstruction after October 13, 1994, but on or before July 2, 2014, shall be in compliance with the tank requirements of § 63.685(b)(2) of this subpart 2 years after the publication date of the final amendments, the equipment leak requirements of § 63.691(b)(2) of this subpart 1 year after the publication date of the final amendments, and the pressure relief device monitoring requirements of § 63.691(c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this subpart 3 years after the effective date of the final amendments. New affected sources that commence construction or reconstruction after July 2, 2014, shall be in compliance with the tank requirements of § 63.685(b)(2) of this subpart, the equipment leak requirements of § 63.691(b)(2) of this subpart, and the pressure relief device monitoring requirements of
§ 63.691(c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this subpart upon initial startup or by the effective date of the final amendments, whichever is later.
* * * * *
      (g) Applicability of this subpart. (1) The emission limitations set forth in this subpart and the emission limitations referred to in this subpart shall apply at all times except during periods of non-operation of the affected source (or specific portion thereof) resulting in cessation of the emissions to which this subpart applies.
      (2) The owner or operator shall not shut down items of equipment that are required or utilized for compliance with this subpart during times when emissions are being routed to such items of equipment, if the shutdown would contravene requirements of this subpart applicable to such items of equipment.
      3. Section 63.681 is amended by:
      a. Adding, in alphabetical order, definitions for "Bypass", "In gas/vapor service", "In heavy liquid service", "In light liquid service", "In liquid service", "Pressure release", and "Pressure relief device or valve";
	b. Revising the definitions of "Point-of-treatment" and "Process vent"; and
      c. Removing the definition of "Safety device" to read as follows:
§ 63.681	Definitions.
*  *  *  *  *
Bypass means diverting a process vent or closed vent system stream to the atmosphere such that it does not first pass through an emission control device.
*  *  *  *  *
In gas/vapor service means that a piece of equipment in off-site material service contains or contacts a gas or vapor at operating conditions.
In heavy liquid service means that a piece of equipment in off-site material service is not in gas/vapor service or in light liquid service.
In light liquid service means that a piece of equipment in off-site material service contains or contacts a liquid that meets the following conditions:
      (1) The vapor pressure of one or more of the organic compounds is greater than 0.3 kilopascals at 20°C,
      (2) The total concentration of the pure organic compounds constituents having a vapor pressure greater than 0.3 kilopascals at 20°C is equal to or greater than 20 percent by weight of the total process stream, and
      (3) The fluid is a liquid at operating conditions.
Note: Vapor pressures may be determined by the methods described in 40 CFR 60.485(e)(1).
In liquid service means that a piece of equipment in off-site material service is not in gas/vapor service.
*  *  *  *  *
Point-of-treatment means a point after the treated material exits the treatment process but before the first point downstream of the treatment process exit where the organic constituents in the treated material have the potential to volatilize and be released to the atmosphere. For the purpose of applying this definition to this subpart, the first point downstream of the treatment process exit is not a fugitive emission point due to an equipment leak from any of the following equipment components: Pumps, compressors, valves, connectors, instrumentation systems, or pressure relief devices.
Pressure release means the emission of materials resulting from the system pressure being greater than the set pressure of the pressure relief device. This release can be one release or a series of releases over a short time period.
Pressure relief device or valve means a safety device used to prevent operating pressures from exceeding the maximum allowable working pressure of the process equipment. A common pressure relief device is a spring-loaded pressure relief valve. Devices that are actuated either by a pressure of less than or equal to 2.5 pounds per square inch gauge or by a vacuum are not pressure relief devices.
*  *  *  *  *
Process vent means an open-ended pipe, stack, or duct through which a gas stream containing HAP is continuously or intermittently discharged to the atmosphere from any of the processes listed in § 63.680(c)(2)(i) through (vi) of this subpart. For the purpose of this subpart, a process vent is none of the following: a pressure relief device; an open-ended line or other vent that is subject to the equipment leak control requirements under § 63.691 of this subpart; or a stack or other vent that is used to exhaust combustion products from a boiler, furnace, process heater, incinerator, or other combustion device.
*  *  *  *  *
	4. Section 63.683 is amended by:
      a. Revising the first sentence of paragraph (c)(1)(ii); and
      b. Adding paragraphs (e) and (f) to read as follows:
§ 63.683   Standards: General.
*  *  *  *  *
	(c) * * *
	(1) * * *
	(ii) The owner or operator determines before placing off-site material in the process equipment associated with the process vent that the average VOHAP concentration of the off-site material is less than 500 ppmw at the point-of-delivery. * * *
*  *  *  *  *
      (e) General Duty. At all times, the owner or operator must operate and maintain any affected source, including associated air pollution control equipment and monitoring equipment, in a manner consistent with safety and good air pollution control practices for minimizing emissions. The general duty to minimize emissions does not require the owner operator to make any further efforts to reduce emissions if levels required by the applicable standard have been achieved. Determination of whether a source is operating in compliance with operation and maintenance requirements will be based on information available to the Administrator, which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results, review of operation and maintenance procedures, review of operation and maintenance records, and inspection of the source.
       (f) In addition to the cases listed in § 63.695(e)(4) of this subpart, deviation means any of the cases listed in paragraphs (f)(1) through (6) of this section.
      (1) Any instance in which an affected source subject to this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source, 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.
      (2) When a performance test indicates that emissions of a pollutant in Table 1 to this subpart are exceeding the emission standard for the pollutant specified in Table 1 to this subpart.
      (3) When the average value of a monitored operating parameter, based on the data averaging period for compliance specified in § 63.695 of this subpart, does not meet the operating limit specified in § 63.693 of this subpart.
      (4) When an affected source discharges directly into the atmosphere from any of the sources specified in paragraphs (f)(4)(i) and (ii) of this section.
      (i) A pressure relief device, as defined in § 63.681 of this subpart.
      (ii) A bypass, as defined in § 63.681 of this subpart.
      (5) Any instance in which the affected source subject to this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source, fails to meet any term or condition specified in paragraph (f)(5)(i) or (ii) of this section.
      (i) Any term or condition that is adopted to implement an applicable requirement in this subpart.
      (ii) Any term or condition relating to compliance with this subpart that is included in the operating permit for an affected source to obtain such a permit.
      (6) Any failure to collect required data, except for periods of monitoring system malfunctions, repairs associated with monitoring system malfunctions, and required monitoring system quality assurance or quality control activities (including, as applicable, calibration checks and required zero and span adjustments).
      5. Section 63.684 is amended by:
      a. Revising paragraph (b)(5) introductory text;
      b. Adding paragraph (b)(5)(v); and
      c. Revising paragraph (h) to read as follows:
§ 63.684   Standards: Off-site Material Treatment.
* * * * *
      (b) * * *
      (5) Incineration. The treatment process must destroy the HAP contained in the off-site material stream using one of the combustion devices specified in paragraphs (b)(5)(i) through (v) of this section.
* * * * *
      (v) An incinerator, boiler, or industrial furnace for which the owner or operator has submitted a Notification of Compliance under 40 CFR 63.1207(j) and 63.1210(d) and complies with the requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEE at all times (including times when non-hazardous waste is being burned).
* * * * *
	(h) The Administrator may at any time conduct or require that the owner or operator conduct testing necessary to demonstrate that a treatment process is achieving the applicable performance requirements of this section. The testing shall be conducted in accordance with the applicable requirements of this section. The Administrator may elect to have an authorized representative observe testing conducted by the owner or operator.
      6. Section 63.685 is amended by:
      a. Revising paragraphs (b) introductory text, (b)(1), and (2);
      b. Removing paragraph (b)(4);
      c. Revising paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2)(i) and (iii)(B), (g)(2), (h)(3), (i) introductory text; and
      d. Removing paragraph (i)(3) and redesignating paragraph (i)(4) as paragraph (i)(3) to read as follows:
§ 63.685   Standards: Tanks.
* * * * *
      (b) According to the date an affected source commenced construction or reconstruction and the date an affected source receives off-site material for the first time as established in § 63.680(e)(i) through (iii) of this subpart, the owner or operator shall control air emissions from each tank subject to this section in accordance with either paragraph (b)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section.
      (1)(i) For a tank that is part of an existing affected source but the tank is not used for a waste stabilization process as defined in § 63.681 of this subpart, the owner or operator shall determine whether the tank is required to use either Tank Level 1 controls or Tank Level 2 controls as specified for the tank by Table 3 of this subpart based on the off-site material maximum HAP vapor pressure and the tank's design capacity. The owner or operator shall control air emissions from a tank required by Table 3 to use Tank Level 1 controls in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (c) of this section. The owner or operator shall control air emissions from a tank required by Table 3 to use Tank Level 2 controls in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (d) of this section.
      (ii) For a tank that is part of an existing affected source but the tank is not used for a waste stabilization process as defined in § 63.681 of this subpart, the owner or operator shall determine whether the tank is required to use either Tank Level 1 controls or Tank Level 2 controls as specified for the tank by Table 4 of this subpart based on the off-site material maximum HAP vapor pressure and the tank's design capacity. The owner or operator shall control air emissions from a tank required by Table 4 to use Tank Level 1 controls in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (c) of this section. The owner or operator shall control air emissions from a tank required by Table 4 to use Tank Level 2 controls in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (d) of this section.
      (2) For a tank that is part of a new affected source but the tank is not used for a waste stabilization process as defined in § 63.681 of this subpart, the owner or operator shall determine whether the tank is required to use either Tank Level 1 controls or Tank Level 2 controls as specified for the tank by Table 5 of this subpart based on the off-site material maximum HAP vapor pressure and the tank's design capacity. The owner or operator shall control air emissions from a tank required by Table 5 to use Tank Level 1 controls in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (c) of this section. The owner or operator shall control air emissions from a tank required by Table 5 to use Tank Level 2 controls in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (d) of this section.
* * * * *
      (c) * * *
      (1) The owner or operator shall determine the maximum HAP vapor pressure for an off-site material to be managed in the tank using Tank Level 1 controls before the first time the off-site material is placed in the tank. The maximum HAP vapor pressure shall be determined using the procedures specified in
§ 63.694(j) of this subpart. Thereafter, the owner or operator shall perform a new determination whenever changes to the off-site material managed in the tank could potentially cause the maximum HAP vapor pressure to increase to a level that is equal to or greater than the maximum HAP vapor pressure limit for the tank design capacity category specified in Table 3, Table 4, or Table 5 of this subpart, as applicable to the tank.
	(2) * * *
	(i) The owner or operator controls air emissions from the tank in accordance with the provisions specified in subpart OO of 40 CFR part 63 -- National Emission Standards for Tanks -- Level 1, except that 40 CFR 63.902(c)(2) and (3) shall not apply for the purposes of this subpart.
* * * * *
	(iii) * * *
	(B) At all other times, air emissions from the tank must be controlled in accordance with the provisions specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart OO -- National Emission Standards for Tanks -- Level 1, with the exceptions specified in paragraphs (c)(2)(iii)(B)(1) and (2) of this section.
      (1) Where 40 CFR 63.902(c)(2) provides an exception for a spring-loaded pressure-vacuum relief valve, conservation vent, or similar type of pressure relief device which vents to the atmosphere, only a conservation vent shall be eligible for the exception for the purposes of this subpart.
      (2) 40 CFR 63.902(c)(3) shall not apply for the purposes of this subpart.
* * * * *
	(g) * * *
	(2) Whenever an off-site material is in the tank, the fixed roof shall be installed with each closure device secured in the closed position and the vapor headspace underneath the fixed roof vented to the control device except that venting to the control device is not required, and opening of closure devices or removal of the fixed roof is allowed at the following times:
      (i) To provide access to the tank for performing routine inspection, maintenance, or other activities needed for normal operations. Examples of such activities include those times when a worker needs to open a port to sample liquid in the tank, or when a worker needs to open a hatch to maintain or repair equipment. Following completion of the activity, the owner or operator shall promptly secure the closure device in the closed position or reinstall the cover, as applicable, to the tank.
      (ii) To remove accumulated sludge or other residues from the bottom of the tank.
* * * * *
	(h) * * *
      (3) Whenever an off-site material is in the tank, the tank shall be operated as a closed system that does not vent to the atmosphere except at those times when purging of inerts from the tank is required and the purge stream is routed to a closed-vent system and control device designed and operated in accordance with the requirements of § 63.693 of this subpart.
      (i) The owner or operator who elects to control air emissions by using an enclosure vented through a closed-vent system to an enclosed combustion control device shall meet the requirements specified in paragraphs (i)(1) through (3) of this section.
* * * * *
      (3) The owner or operator shall inspect and monitor the closed-vent system and control device as specified in § 63.693.
	7. Section 63.686 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) to read as follows:
§ 63.686   Standards: Oil-water and organic water separators.
* * * * *
	(b) * * *
	(1) A floating roof in accordance with all applicable provisions specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart VV -- National Emission Standards for Oil-Water Separators and Organic-Water Separators, except that §§ 63.1043(c)(2), 63.1044(c)(2), and 63.1045(b)(3)(i) shall not apply for the purposes of this subpart. For portions of the separator where it is infeasible to install and operate a floating roof, such as over a weir mechanism, the owner or operator shall comply with the requirements specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
      (2) A fixed-roof that is vented through a closed-vent system to a control device in accordance with all applicable provisions specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart VV -- National Emission Standards for Oil-Water Separators and Organic-Water Separators, except that §§ 63.1043(c)(2), 63.1044(c)(2), and 63.1045(b)(3)(i) shall not apply for the purposes of this subpart.
      (3) A pressurized separator that operates as a closed system in accordance with all applicable provisions specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart VV -- National Emission Standards for Oil-Water Separators and Organic-Water Separators, except that
§§ 63.1043(c)(2), 63.1044(c)(2), and 63.1045(b)(3)(i) shall not apply for the purposes of this subpart.
	8. Section 63.687 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) to read as follows:
§ 63.687   Standards: Surface impoundments.
* * * * *
	(b) * * *
      (1) A floating membrane cover in accordance with the applicable provisions specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart QQ -- National Emission Standards for Surface Impoundments, except that §§ 63.942(c)(2) and (3) and 63.943(c)(2) shall not apply for the purposes of this subpart; or
      (2) A cover that is vented through a closed-vent system to a control device in accordance with all applicable provisions specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart QQ -- National Emission Standards for Surface Impoundments, except that §§ 63.942(c)(2) and (3) and 63.943(c)(2) shall not apply for the purposes of this subpart.
	9. Section 63.688 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1)(i), (ii), and (3)(i) to read as follows:
§ 63.688   Standards: Containers.
* * * * *
	(b) * * *
	(1) * * *
      (i) The owner or operator controls air emissions from the container in accordance with the standards for Container Level 1 controls as specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart PP -- National Emission Standards for Containers, except that §§ 63.922(d)(4) and (5) and 63.923(d)(4) and (5) shall not apply for the purposes of this subpart.
      (ii) As an alternative to meeting the requirements in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section, an owner or operator may choose to control air emissions from the container in accordance with the standards for either Container Level 2 controls or Container Level 3 controls as specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart PP -- National Emission Standards for Containers, except that §§ 63.922(d)(4) and (5) and 63.923(d)(4) and (5) shall not apply for the purposes of this subpart.
* * * * *
	(3) * * *
      (i) The owner or operator controls air emissions from the container in accordance with the standards for Container Level 2 controls as specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart PP -- National Emission Standards for Containers, except that §§ 63.922(d)(4) and (5) and 63.923(d)(4) and (5) shall not apply for the purposes of this subpart.
*  *  *  *  *
      10. Section 63.689 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(5) to read as follows:
§ 63.689   Standards: Transfer systems.
* * * * *
	(d) * * *
      (5) Whenever an off-site material is in the transfer system, the cover shall be installed with each closure device secured in the closed position, except the opening of closure devices or removal of the cover is allowed to provide access to the transfer system for performing routine inspection, maintenance, repair, or other activities needed for normal operations. Examples of such activities include those times when a worker needs to open a hatch or remove the cover to repair conveyance equipment mounted under the cover or to clear a blockage of material inside the system. Following completion of the activity, the owner or operator shall promptly secure the closure device in the closed position or reinstall the cover, as applicable.
* * * * *
      11. Section 63.691 is amended by:
      a. Revising paragraph (b); and
      b. Adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 63.691 Standards: Equipment leaks.
* * * * *
(b) According to the date an affected source commenced construction or reconstruction and the date an affected source receives off-site material for the first time, as established in § 63.680(e)(i) through (iii) of this subpart, the owner or operator shall control the HAP emitted from equipment leaks in accordance with the applicable provisions specified in either paragraph (b)(1) or (2) of this section.
(1)(i) The owner or operator controls the HAP emitted from equipment leaks in accordance with §§ 61.241 through 61.247 in 40 CFR part 61, subpart V -- National Emission Standards for Equipment Leaks, with the difference noted in paragraphs (b)(1)(iii) and (iv) of this section for the purposes of this subpart; or
(ii) The owner or operator controls the HAP emitted from equipment leaks in accordance with §§ 63.161 through 63.182 in 40 CFR part 63, subpart H -- National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants from Equipment Leaks, with the differences noted in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section for the purposes of this subpart.
(iii) On or after [insert date of publication in the Federal Register], for the purpose of complying with the requirements of 40 CFR 61.242-6(a)(2) or the requirements of 40 CFR 63.167(a)(2), the open end is sealed when instrument monitoring of the open-ended valve or line conducted according to Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A indicates no readings of 500 ppm or greater.
(iv) On or after [insert date of publication in the Federal Register], for the purpose of complying with the requirements of 40 CFR 61.242-6(d) or the requirements of 40 CFR 63.167(d), open-ended valves or lines in an emergency shutdown system which are designed to open automatically in the event of a process upset and that are exempt from the requirements in 40 CFR 61.242-6(a), (b), and (c) or 40 CFR 63.167(a), (b), and (c) must comply with the requirements in § 63.693(c)(2) of this subpart.
(2) The owner or operator controls the HAP emitted from equipment leaks in accordance with §§ 63.161 through 63.183 in 40 CFR part 63, subpart H  -  National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Equipment Leaks, with the differences noted in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (v) of this section for the purposes of this subpart.
(i) For each valve in gas/vapor or in light liquid service, as defined in § 63.681 of this subpart, that is part of an affected source under this subpart, an instrument reading that defines a leak is 500 ppm or greater as detected by Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A.
(ii) For each pump in light liquid service, as defined in
§ 63.681 of this subpart, that is part of an affected source under this subpart, an instrument reading that defines a leak is 1,000 ppm or greater as detected by Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A. Repair is not required unless an instrument reading of 2,000 ppm or greater is detected.
(iii) On or after [insert date of publication in the Federal Register], for the purpose of complying with the requirements of 40 CFR 63.167(a)(2), the open end is sealed when instrument monitoring of the open-ended valve or line conducted according to Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A indicates no readings of 500 ppm or greater.
(iv) On or after [insert date of publication in the Federal Register], for the purpose of complying with the requirements of 40 CFR 63.167(d), open-ended valves or lines in an emergency shutdown system which are designed to open automatically in the event of a process upset and that are exempt from the requirements in 40 CFR 63.167(a), (b), and (c) must comply with the requirements in § 63.693(c)(2) of this subpart.
(v) For the purposes of this subpart, the pressure relief device requirements of § 63.691(c) of this subpart rather than those of 40 CFR 63.165 or of 40 CFR 61.242-4, as applicable, shall apply. The pressure relief device requirements of
§ 63.691(c)(3) and (4) of this subpart apply in addition to the requirements of 40 CFR 63.169 or of 40 CFR 61.242-8, as applicable, for pressure relief devices in liquid service.
(c) Requirements for pressure relief devices. Except as provided in paragraph (c)(4) of this section, the owner or operator must comply with the requirements specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this section for pressure relief devices in off-site material service.
(1) Operating requirements. Except during a pressure release event, operate each pressure relief device in gas/vapor service with an instrument reading of less than 500 ppm above background as detected by Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A.
(2) Pressure release requirements. For pressure relief devices in gas/vapor service, the owner or operator must comply with either paragraph (c)(2)(i) or (ii) of this section following a pressure release, as applicable.
(i) If the pressure relief device does not consist of or include a rupture disk, the pressure relief device shall be returned to a condition indicated by an instrument reading of less than 500 ppm above background, as detected by Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, no later than 5 calendar days after the pressure release device returns to off-site material service following a pressure release, except as provided in 40 CFR 63.171.
(ii) If the pressure relief device consists of or includes a rupture disk, except as provided in 40 CFR 63.171, install a replacement disk as soon as practicable but no later than 5 calendar days after the pressure release.
(3) Pressure release management. Except as provided in paragraph (c)(4) of this section, emissions of HAP listed in Table 1 of this subpart may not be discharged directly to the atmosphere from pressure relief devices in off-site material service, and according to the date an affected source commenced construction or reconstruction and the date an affected source receives off-site material for the first time, as established in § 63.680(e)(1)(i) through (iii) of this subpart, the owner or operator must comply with the requirements specified in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section for all pressure relief devices in off-site material service.
(i) The owner or operator must equip each pressure relief device in off-site material service with a device(s) or use a monitoring system. The device or monitoring system may be either specific to the pressure release device itself or may be associated with the process system or piping, sufficient to indicate a pressure release to the atmosphere. Examples of these types of devices or monitoring systems include, but are not limited to, a rupture disk indicator, magnetic sensor, motion detector on the pressure relief valve stem, flow monitor, pressure monitor, or parametric monitoring system. The devices or monitoring systems must be capable of meeting the requirements specified in paragraphs (c)(3)(i)(A) through (C) of this section.
(A) Identifying the pressure release;
(B) Recording the time and duration of each pressure release; and
(C) Notifying operators immediately that a pressure release is occurring.
(ii) If any pressure relief device in off-site material service releases directly to the atmosphere as a result of a pressure release event, the owner or operator must calculate the quantity of HAP listed in Table 1 of this subpart released during each pressure release event and report this quantity as required in § 63.697(b)(5) of this subpart. Calculations may be based on data from the pressure relief device monitoring alone or in combination with process parameter monitoring data and process knowledge.
(4) Pressure relief devices routed to a drain system, fuel gas system, process or control device. If a pressure relief device in off-site material service is designed and operated to route all pressure releases through a closed vent system to a drain system, fuel gas system, process or control device, paragraphs (c)(1), (2), and (3) of this section do not apply. The fuel gas system or closed vent system and the process or control device (if applicable) must meet the requirements of
§ 63.693 of this subpart. The drain system (if applicable) must meet the requirements of § 63.689 of this subpart.
12. Section 63.693 is amended by:
      a. Revising paragraphs (b)(3) and (8), (c)(1)(ii), and (c)(2) introductory text;
      b. Adding paragraph (c)(2)(iii); and
      c. Revising paragraphs (f)(1)(i)(B), (f)(1)(ii)(B), and (f)(2) introductory text;
      d. Adding paragraph (f)(2)(iii);
      e. Revising paragraphs (g)(1)(v) and (g)(2)(i); and
      f. Adding paragraph (g)(2)(i)(C) to read as follows:
§ 63.693   Standards: Closed-vent systems and control devices.
* * * * *
	(b) * * *
	(3) Whenever gases or vapors containing HAP are routed from a tank through a closed-vent system connected to a control device used to comply with the requirements of § 63.685(b)(1), (2), or (3) of this subpart, the control device must be operating except as provided for in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section.
      (i) The control device may only be bypassed for the purpose of performing planned routine maintenance of the closed-vent system or control device in situations when the routine maintenance cannot be performed during periods that tank emissions are vented to the control device.
      (ii) On an annual basis, the total time that the closed-vent system or control device is bypassed to perform routine maintenance shall not exceed 240 hours per each calendar year.
* * * * *
      (8) In the case when an owner or operator chooses to use a design analysis to demonstrate compliance of a control device with the applicable performance requirements specified in this section as provided for in paragraphs (d) through (g) of this section, the Administrator may require that the design analysis be revised or amended by the owner or operator to correct any deficiencies identified by the Administrator. If the owner or operator and the Administrator do not agree on the acceptability of using the design analysis (including any changes required by the Administrator) to demonstrate that the control device achieves the applicable performance requirements, then the disagreement must be resolved using the results of a performance test conducted by the owner or operator in accordance with the requirements of § 63.694(l) of this subpart. The Administrator may choose to have an authorized representative observe the performance test conducted by the owner or operator. Should the results of this performance test not agree with the determination of control device performance based on the design analysis, then the results of the performance test will be used to establish compliance with this subpart.
* * * * *
	(c) * * *
	(1) * * *
	(ii) A closed-vent system that is designed to operate at a pressure below atmospheric pressure. The system shall be equipped with at least one pressure gauge or other pressure measurement device that can be read from a readily accessible location to verify that negative pressure is being maintained in the closed-vent system when the control device is operating.
	(2) In situations when the closed-vent system includes bypass devices that could be used to divert a vent stream from the closed-vent system to the atmosphere at a point upstream of the control device inlet, each bypass device must be equipped with either a flow indicator as specified in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section or a seal or locking device as specified in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section, except as provided for in paragraph (c)(2)(iii) of this section:
* * * * *
      (iii) Equipment needed for safety reasons, including low leg drains, open-ended valves and lines not in emergency shutdown systems, and pressure relief devices subject to the requirements of § 63.691(c) of this subpart are not subject to the requirements of paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section.
* * * * *
	(f) * * *
	(1) * * *
	(i) * * *
	(B) To achieve a total incinerator outlet concentration for the TOC, less methane and ethane, of less than or equal to 20 ppmv on a dry basis corrected to 3 percent oxygen.
	(ii) * * *
	(B) To achieve a total incinerator outlet concentration for the HAP, listed in Table 1 of this subpart, of less than or equal to 20 ppmv on a dry basis corrected to 3 percent oxygen.
* * * * *
      (2) The owner or operator must demonstrate that the vapor incinerator achieves the performance requirements in paragraph (f)(1) of this section by conducting either a performance test as specified in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this section or a design analysis as specified in paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of this section, except as provided for in paragraph (f)(2)(iii) of this section.
* * * * *
      (iii) An owner or operator is not required to conduct a performance test or design analysis if the incinerator has been issued a final permit under 40 CFR part 270 and complies with the requirements of 40 CFR part 264, subpart O, or has certified compliance with the interim status requirements of 40 CFR part 265, subpart O.
      (g) * * *
	(1) * * *
      (v) Introduce the vent stream to a boiler or process heater for which the owner or operator either has been issued a final permit under 40 CFR part 270 and complies with the requirements of 40 CFR part 266, subpart H; or has certified compliance with the interim status requirements of 40 CFR part 266, subpart H; or has submitted a Notification of Compliance under 40 CFR 63.1207(j) and 63.1210(d) and complies with the requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEE at all times (including times when non-hazardous waste is being burned).
      (2) *  *  *
      (i) If an owner or operator chooses to comply with the performance specifications in either paragraph (g)(1)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this section, the owner or operator must demonstrate compliance with the applicable performance specifications by conducting either a performance test as specified in paragraph (g)(2)(i)(A) of this section or a design analysis as specified in paragraph (g)(2)(i)(B) of this section, except as provided for in paragraph (g)(2)(i)(C) of this section.
*  *  *  *  *
      (C) An owner or operator is not required to conduct a performance test or design analysis if the boiler or process heater has been issued a final permit under 40 CFR part 270 and complies with the requirements of 40 CFR part 266, subpart H; or has certified compliance with the interim status requirements of 40 CFR part 266, subpart H.
*  *  *  *  *
      13. Section 63.694 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(3)(iv), (f)(1), (i)(1), (j)(3), (k)(3), (l) introductory text, (l)(2), (l)(3) introductory text, (l)(3)(i), (l)(3)(ii)(B), (l)(4) introductory text, (l)(4)(i), (l)(4)(ii)(A) and (B), (l)(4)(iii)(A), and (m)(2) and (3) to read as follows:
§ 63.694 Testing methods and procedures.
* * * * *
      (b) * * *
	(3) * * *
      (iv) In the event that the Administrator and the owner or operator disagree on a determination of the average VOHAP concentration for an off-site material stream using knowledge, then the results from a determination of VOHAP concentration using direct measurement as specified in paragraph (b)(2) of this section shall be used to establish compliance with the applicable requirements of this subpart. The Administrator may perform or require that the owner or operator perform this determination using direct measurement.
      (f) * * *
	(1) The actual HAP mass removal rate (MR) shall be determined based on results for a minimum of three consecutive runs. The sampling time for each run shall be at least 1 hour.
* * * * *
	(i) * * *
	(1) The actual HAP mass removal rate (MRbio) shall be determined based on results for a minimum of three consecutive runs. The sampling time for each run shall be at least 1 hour.
* * * * *
	(j) * * *
	(3) Use of knowledge to determine the maximum HAP vapor pressure of the off-site material. Documentation shall be prepared and recorded that presents the information used as the basis for the owner's or operator's knowledge that the maximum HAP vapor pressure of the off-site material is less than the maximum vapor pressure limit listed in Table 3, Table 4, or Table 5 of this subpart for the applicable tank design capacity category. Examples of information that may be used include: the off-site material is generated by a process for which at other locations it previously has been determined by direct measurement that the off-site material maximum HAP vapor pressure is less than the maximum vapor pressure limit for the appropriate tank design capacity category. In the event that the Administrator and the owner or operator disagree on a determination of the maximum HAP vapor pressure for an off-site material stream using knowledge, then the results from a determination of HAP vapor pressure using direct measurement as specified in paragraph (j)(2) of this section shall be used to establish compliance with the applicable requirements of this subpart. The Administrator may perform or require that the owner or operator perform this determination using direct measurement.
	(k) * * *
	(3) The detection instrument shall meet the performance criteria of Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, except the instrument response factor criteria in section 8.1.1 of Method 21 shall be for the weighted average composition of the organic constituents in the material placed in the unit at the time of monitoring, not for each individual organic constituent.
* * * * *
      (l) Control device performance test procedures. Performance tests shall be based on representative performance (i.e., performance based on normal operating conditions)and shall exclude periods of startup and shutdown unless specified by the Administrator. The owner or operator may not conduct performance tests during periods of malfunction. The owner or operator must record the process information that is necessary to document operating conditions during the test and include in such record an explanation to support that such conditions represent normal operation. Upon request, the owner or operator shall make available to the Administrator such records as may be necessary to determine the conditions of performance tests.
* * * * *
      (2) The gas volumetric flow rate shall be determined using Method 2, 2A, 2C, or 2D, 2F, or 2G of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, as appropriate.
       (3) To determine compliance with the control device percent reduction requirement, the owner or operator shall use Method 18 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A to measure the HAP in Table 1 of this subpart or Method 25A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A to measure TOC. Method 18 may be used to measure methane and ethane, and the measured concentration may be subtracted from the Method 25A measurement. Alternatively, any other method or data that has been validated according to the applicable procedures in Method 301 in 40 CFR part 63, appendix A may be used. The following procedures shall be used to calculate percent reduction efficiency:
      (i) A minimum of three sample runs must be performed. The minimum sampling time for each run shall be 1 hour. For Method 18, either an integrated sample or a minimum of four grab samples shall be taken. If grab sampling is used, then the samples shall be taken at approximately equal intervals in time such as 15 minute intervals during the run.
      (ii) * * *
	(B) When the TOC mass rate is calculated, the average concentration reading (minus methane and ethane) measured by Method 25A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A shall be used in the equation in paragraph (l)(3)(ii)(A) of this section.
* * * * *
      (4) To determine compliance with the enclosed combustion device total HAP concentration limit of this subpart, the owner or operator shall use Method 18 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A to measure the total HAP in Table 1 of this subpart or Method 25A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A to measure TOC. Method 18 may be used to measure methane and ethane and the measured concentration may be subtracted from the Method 25A measurement. Alternatively, any other method or data that has been validated according to Method 301 in appendix A of this part, may be used. The following procedures shall be used to calculate parts per million by volume concentration, corrected to 3 percent oxygen:
      (i) A minimum of three sample runs must be performed. The minimum sampling time for each run shall be 1 hour. For Method 18, either an integrated sample or a minimum of four grab samples shall be taken. If grab sampling is used, then the samples shall be taken at approximately equal intervals in time, such as 15 minute intervals during the run.
	(ii) * * *
	(A) The TOC concentration (CTOC) is the average concentration readings provided by Method 25 A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, minus the concentration of methane and ethane.
      (B) The total HAP concentration (CHAP) shall be computed according to the following equation:

CHAP= i=1xj=1nCjix

where:
CHAP = Total concentration of HAP compounds listed in Table 1 of this subpart, dry basis, parts per million by volume.
Cij = Concentration of sample components j of sample i, dry basis, parts per million by volume.
n = Number of components in the sample.
x = Number of samples in the sample run.
      (iii) * * *
      (A) The emission rate correction factor or excess air, integrated sampling and analysis procedures of Method 3B of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A shall be used to determine the oxygen concentration (%O2dry). Alternatively, the owner or operator may use Method 3A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A to determine the oxygen concentration. The samples shall be collected during the same time that the samples are collected for determining TOC concentration or total HAP concentration.
* * * * *
	(m) * * *
	(2) No traverse site selection method is needed for vents smaller than 0.10 meter in diameter. For vents smaller than 0.10 meter in diameter, sample at the center of the vent.
      (3) Process vent stream gas volumetric flow rate must be determined using Method 2, 2A, 2C, 2D, 2F, or 2G of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, as appropriate.
* * * * *
	14. Section 63.695 is amended by:
      a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory text;
      b. Adding paragraph (a)(5);
      c. Revising paragraph (e) introductory text, (e)(4) and (5); and
      d. Removing paragraphs (e)(6) and (7) to read as follows:
§ 63.695   Inspection and monitoring requirements.
      (a) The owner or operator must install, calibrate, maintain, and operate all monitoring system components according to §§ 63.8 of this part, 63.684(e), 63.693(d)(3), (e)(3), (f)(3), (g)(3), and (h)(3) of this subpart, and paragraph (5) of this section and perform the inspection and monitoring procedures specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section.
* * * * *
	(5)(i) Except for periods of monitoring system malfunctions, repairs associated with monitoring system malfunctions and required monitoring system quality assurance or quality control activities (including, as applicable, calibration checks and required zero and span adjustments), the owner or operator must operate the continuous monitoring system at all times the affected source is operating. A monitoring system malfunction is any sudden, infrequent, not reasonably preventable failure of the monitoring system to provide data. Monitoring system failures that are caused in part by poor maintenance or careless operation are not malfunctions. The owner or operator is required to complete monitoring system repairs in response to monitoring system malfunctions and to return the monitoring system to operation as expeditiously as practicable.
      (ii) The owner or operator may not use data recorded during monitoring system malfunctions, repairs associated with monitoring system malfunctions, or required monitoring system quality assurance or control activities in calculations used to report emissions or operating levels. The owner or operator must use all the data collected during all other required data collection periods in assessing the operation of the control device and associated control system. The owner or operator must report any periods for which the monitoring system failed to collect required data.
* * * * *
      (e) Control device monitoring requirements. For each control device required under § 63.693 of this subpart to be monitored in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph (e), the owner or operator must ensure that each control device operates properly by monitoring the control device in accordance with the requirements specified in paragraphs (e)(1) through (5) of this section.
* * * * *
      (4) A deviation for a given control device is determined to have occurred when the monitoring data or lack of monitoring data result in any one of the criteria specified in paragraphs (e)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section being met. When multiple operating parameters are monitored for the same control device and during the same operating day more than one of these operating parameters meets a deviation criterion specified in paragraphs (e)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section, then a single deviation is determined to have occurred for the control device for that operating day.
      (i) A deviation occurs when the daily average value of a monitored operating parameter is less than the minimum operating parameter limit (or, if applicable, greater than the maximum operating parameter limit) established for the operating parameter in accordance with the requirements of paragraph (e)(3) of this section.
      (ii) A deviation occurs when the period of control device operation is 4 hours or greater in an operating day and the monitoring data are insufficient to constitute a valid hour of data for at least 75 percent of the operating hours. Monitoring data are insufficient to constitute a valid hour of data if measured values are unavailable for any of the 15-minute periods within the hour.
      (iii) A deviation occurs when the period of control device operation is less than 4 hours in an operating day and more than 1 of the hours during the period does not constitute a valid hour of data due to insufficient monitoring data. Monitoring data are insufficient to constitute a valid hour of data if measured values are unavailable for any of the 15-minute periods within the hour.
      (5) For each deviation, except when the deviation occurs during periods of non-operation of the unit or the process that is vented to the control device (resulting in cessation of HAP emissions to which the monitoring applies), the owner or operator shall be deemed to have failed to have applied control in a manner that achieves the required operating parameter limits. Failure to achieve the required operating parameter limits is a violation of this standard.
*  *  *  *  *
	15. Section 63.696 is amended by revising paragraph (h) and adding paragraphs (i) and (j) to read as follows:
63.696 Recordkeeping requirements.
*  *  *  *  *
	(h) An owner or operator shall record the malfunction information specified in paragraphs (h)(1) through (3) of this section.
      (1) In the event that an affected unit fails to meet an applicable standard, record the number of failures. For each failure, record the date, time and duration of the failure.
      (2) For each failure to meet an applicable standard, record and retain a list of the affected sources or equipment, an estimate of the volume of each regulated pollutant emitted over any emission limit and a description of the method used to estimate the emissions.
      (3) Record actions taken to minimize emissions in accordance with § 63.683(e) of this subpart and any corrective actions taken to return the affected unit to its normal or usual manner of operation.
      (i) For pressure relief devices in off-site material service, keep records of the information specified in paragraphs (i)(1) through (5) of this section, as applicable.
      (1) A list of identification numbers for pressure relief devices that the owner or operator elects to route emissions through a closed-vent system to a control device, process or drain system under the provisions in § 63.691(c)(4) of this subpart.
      (2) A list of identification numbers for pressure relief devices that do not consist of or include a rupture disk, subject to the provisions in § 63.691(c)(2)(i) of this subpart.
      (3) A list of identification numbers for pressure relief devices equipped with rupture disks, subject to the provisions in § 63.691(c)(2)(ii) of this subpart.
      (4) The dates and results of the Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, monitoring following a pressure release for each pressure relief device subject to the provisions in
§ 63.691(c)(2)(i) of this subpart. The results of each monitoring event shall include:
      (i) The measured background level.
      (ii) The maximum instrument reading measured at each pressure relief device.
      (5) For pressure relief devices in off-site material service subject to § 63.691(c)(3) of this subpart, keep records of each pressure release to the atmosphere, including the following information:
      (i) The source, nature, and cause of the pressure release.
      (ii) The date, time, and duration of the pressure release.
      (iii) An estimate of the quantity of HAP listed in Table 1 of this subpart emitted during the pressure release and the calculations used for determining this quantity.
      (iv) The actions taken to prevent this pressure release.
      (v) The measures adopted to prevent future such pressure releases.
      (j) (1) For pressure tank closure devices, as specified in § 63.685(h)(2) of this subpart, keep records of each release to the atmosphere, including the information specified in paragraphs (j)(3) though (7) of this section.
      (2) For each closed vent system that includes bypass devices that could divert a stream away from the control device and into the atmosphere, as specified in § 63.693(c)(2) of this subpart, and each open-ended valve or line in an emergency shutdown system which is designed to open automatically in the event of a process upset, as specified in 40 CFR 63.167(d) or 40 CFR 61.242-6(d), keep records of each release to the atmosphere, including the information specified in paragraphs (j)(3) though (9) of this section.
      (3) The source, nature, and cause of the release.
      (4) The date, time, and duration of the release.
      (5) An estimate of the quantity of HAP listed in Table 1 of this subpart emitted during the release and the calculations used for determining this quantity.
      (6) The actions taken to prevent this release.
      (7) The measures adopted to prevent future such release.
      (8) Hourly records of whether the bypass flow indicator specified under § 63.693(c)(2) of this subpart was operating and whether a diversion was detected at any time during the hour, as well as records of the times of all periods when the vent stream is diverted from the control device or the flow indicator is not operating.
      (9) Where a seal mechanism is used to comply with
§ 63.693(c)(2) of this subpart, hourly records of flow are not required. In such cases, the owner or operator shall record that the monthly visual inspection of the seals or closure mechanism has been done, and shall record the duration of all periods when the seal mechanism is broken, the bypass line valve position has changed, or the key for a lock-and-key type lock has been checked out, and records of any car-seal that has broken.
	16. Section 63.697 is amended by:
      a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory text, adding paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii) and (a)(3);
      b. Revising paragraph (b)(3) and (4); and
      c. Adding paragraphs (b)(5) and (6) to read as follows:
§ 63.697   Reporting requirements.
      (a) Each owner or operator of an affected source subject to this subpart must comply with the notification requirements specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section and the reporting requirements specified in paragraphs (a)(2) and (3) of this section.
      (1) * * *
      (i) For pressure relief devices in off-site material service subject to the requirements of § 63.691(c) of this subpart, the owner or operator must submit the information listed in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section in the notification of compliance status required under § 63.9(h) of this part within 150 days after the first applicable compliance date for pressure relief device monitoring.
      (ii) For pressure relief devices in off-site material service, a description of the device or monitoring system to be implemented, including the pressure relief devices and process parameters to be monitored (if applicable), a description of the alarms or other methods by which operators will be notified of a pressure release, and a description of how the owner or operator will determine the information to be recorded under
§ 63.696(i)(5)(ii) through (iii) of this subpart (i.e., the duration of the pressure release and the methodology and calculations for determining the quantity of HAP listed in Table 1 of this subpart emitted during the pressure release).
* * * * *
      (3) Electronic reporting. Within 60 days after the date of completing each performance test (as defined in § 63.2 of this part) required by this subpart, the owner or operator must submit the results of the performance test according to the manner specified by either paragraph (a)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section.
      (i) For data collected using test methods supported by the EPA's Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) as listed on the EPA's ERT Web site (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ert/index.html), the owner or operator must submit the results of the performance test to the EPA via the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI) accessed through the EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) (http://cdx.epa.gov/epa_home.asp). Performance test data must be submitted in a file format generated through the use of the EPA's ERT. Owners or operators who claim that some of the performance test information being submitted is confidential business information (CBI) must submit a complete file generated through the use of the EPA's ERT, including information claimed to be CBI, on a compact disc, flash drive, or other commonly used electronic storage media to the EPA. The electronic media must be clearly marked as CBI and mailed to U.S. EPA/OAPQS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Road, Durham, NC 27703. The same ERT file with the CBI omitted must be submitted to the EPA via the EPA's CDX as described earlier in this paragraph (a)(3)(i).
       (ii) For data collected using test methods that are not supported by the EPA's ERT as listed on the EPA's ERT Web site, the owner or operator must submit the results of the performance test to the Administrator at the appropriate address listed in 40 CFR 60.4.
      (b) * * *
      (3) Reports of malfunctions. If a source fails to meet an applicable standard, report such events in  the Periodic Report. Report the number of failures to meet an applicable standard. For each instance, report the date, time and duration of each failure. For each failure the report must include a list of the affected sources or equipment, an estimate of the volume of each regulated pollutant emitted over any emission limit, and a description of the method used to estimate the emissions.
       (4) A summary report specified in § 63.10(e)(3) of this part shall be submitted on a semiannual basis (i.e., once every 6-month period). The summary report must include a description of all deviations as defined in § 63.683(f) and § 63.695(e) of this subpart that have occurred during the 6-month reporting period. For each deviation caused when the daily average value of a monitored operating parameter is less than the minimum operating parameter limit (or, if applicable, greater than the maximum operating parameter limit), the report must include the daily average values of the monitored parameter, the applicable operating parameter limit, and the date and duration of the period that the deviation occurred. For each deviation caused by lack of monitoring data, the report must include the date and duration of period when the monitoring data were not collected and the reason why the data were not collected.
      (5) For pressure relief devices in off-site material service subject to § 63.691(c) of this subpart, Periodic Reports must include the information specified in paragraphs (b)(5)(i) through (iii) of this section.
      (i) For pressure relief devices in off-site material service subject to § 63.691(c) of this subpart, report the results of all monitoring conducted within the reporting period.
      (ii) For pressure relief devices in gas/vapor service subject to § 63.691(c)(2)(i) of this subpart, report any instrument reading of 500 ppm above background or greater, if detected more than 5 days after the pressure release.
      (iii) For pressure relief devices in off-site material service subject to § 63.691(c)(3) of this subpart, report each pressure release to the atmosphere, including the following information:
      (A) The source, nature, and cause of the pressure release.
      (B) The date, time, and duration of the pressure release.
      (C) An estimate of the quantity of HAP listed in Table 1 of this subpart emitted during the pressure release and the method used for determining this quantity.
      (D) The actions taken to prevent this pressure release.
      (E) The measures adopted to prevent future such pressure releases.
      (6) Pressure tank closure device or bypass deviation report. The owner or operator must submit to the Administrator the information specified in paragraph (b)(6)(iv) of this section when any of the conditions in paragraphs (b)(6)(i) through (iii) of this section are met.
      (i) Any pressure tank closure device, as specified in
§ 63.685(h)(2) of this subpart, has released to the atmosphere.
      (ii) Any closed vent system that includes bypass devices that could divert a vent a stream away from the control device and into the atmosphere, as specified in § 63.693(c)(2) of this subpart, has released directly to the atmosphere.
      (iii) Any open-ended valve or line in an emergency shutdown system which is designed to open automatically in the event of a process upset, as specified in 40 CFR 63.167(d) or 40 CFR 61.242-6(d), has released directly to the atmosphere.
      (iv) The pressure tank closure device or bypass deviation report must include the information specified in paragraphs (b)(6)(iv)(A) through (E) of this section.
      (A) The source, nature and cause of the release.
      (B) The date, time and duration of the discharge.
      (C) An estimate of the quantity of HAP listed in Table 1 of this subpart emitted during the release and the method used for determining this quantity.
      (D) The actions taken to prevent this release.
      (E) The measures adopted to prevent future such releases.
* * * * *
      17. Section 63.698 is amended by revising paragraph (c) introductory text and adding paragraph (c)(5) to read as follows:
§ 63.698   Implementation and enforcement.
* * * * *
	(c) The authorities that cannot be delegated to State, local, or Tribal agencies are as specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (5) of this section.
* * * * *
      (5) Approval of alternatives to the electronic reporting requirements in § 63.697(a)(3).
	18. Table 2 to subpart DD of part 63 is amended by:
	a. Removing entries 63.1(a)(13) and 63.1(a)(14);
	b. Revising entries 63.1(b)(2), 63.1(c)(3), and 63.1(c)(4);
	c. Removing entry 63.4(a)(1) through 63.4(a)(3) and adding entries 63.4(a)(1) - 63.4(a)(2) and 63.4(a)(3);
	d. Revising entries 63.4(a)(5) and 63.5(a)(1);
	e. Revising entries 63.5(b)(5), 63.6(b)(3), 63.6(b)(4);
	f. Removing entry 63.6(e) and adding entries 63.6(e)(1)(i) through 63.6(e)(1)(iii), 63.6(e)(2), and 63.6(e)(3);
	g. Revising entry 63.6(f)(1);
      h. Adding entry 63.7(a)(4);
	i. Revising entries 63.7(b), 63.7(c), 63.7(e)(1) and 63.7(f);
	j. Revising entry 63.8(c)(1)(iii);
	k. Revising entries 63.9(e) and 63.9(g);
	l. Revising entries 63.10(b)(2)(i) through (v);
	m. Removing entry 63.10(c) and adding entries 63.10(c)(1)-(6), 63.10(c)(7)-(8), and 63.10(c)(9)-(15);
	n. Removing entries 63.10(d)(5)(i) and 63.10(d)(5)(ii), and adding entry 63.10(d)(5);
	o. Removing entry 63.10(e) and adding entries 63.10(e)(1)-63.10(e)(2), 63.10(e)(3), and 63.10(e)(4); and
	p. Adding entry 63.16 to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart DD of Part 63 -- Applicability of Paragraphs in Subpart A of This Part 63 -- General Provisions to Subpart DD
                              Subpart A reference
                             Applies to Subpart DD
                                  Explanation
         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.1(b)(2)
No
Reserved.
         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.1(c)(3)
No
Reserved.
63.1(c)(4)
No
Reserved.
         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.4(a)(1) - 63.4(a)(2)
Yes

63.4(a)(3)
No
Reserved.
         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.4(a)(5)
No
Reserved.
         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.5(a)(1)
Yes

         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.5(b)(5)
No
Reserved.
         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.6(b)(3)
No

63.6(b)(4)
No

         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.6(e)(1)(i)
No
See § 63.683(e) of this subpart for general duty requirement.
63.6(e)(1)(ii)
No

63.6(e)(1)(iii)
Yes

63.6(e)(2)
No
Reserved.
63.6(e)(3)
No

63.6(f)(1)
No

         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.7(a)(4)
Yes

63.7(b)
Yes

63.7(c)
Yes

         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.7(e)(1)
No
See § 63.694(l) of this subpart.
         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.7(f)
Yes

         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.8(c)(1)(iii)
No

         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.9(e)
Yes

         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.9(g)
Yes

         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.10(b)(2)(i)
No

63.10(b)(2)(ii)
No
See § 63.696(h) of this subpart for recordkeeping of (1) date, time and duration; (2) listing of affected source or equipment, and an estimate of the volume of each regulated pollutant emitted over the standard; and (3) actions to minimize emissions and correct the failure.
63.10(b)(2)(iii)
Yes

63.10(b)(2)(iv)
No

63.10(b)(2)(v)
No

         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.10(c)(1)-(6)
No

63.10(c)(7)-(8)
Yes

63.10(9)-(15)
No

*         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.10(d)(5)
No
See § 63.697(b)(3) of this subpart for reporting of malfunctions.
63.10(e)(1)  -
63.10(e)(2)
No

63.10(e)(3)
Yes

63.10(e)(4)
No

         *         *         *         *         *         *         *
63.16
No

* * * * *
      19. Table 3 to subpart DD of part 63 is revised to read as follows:
Table 3 to Subpart DD of Part 63 -- Tank Control Levels for Tanks at Existing Affected Sources as Required by 40 CFR 63.685(b)(1)(i)
                      Tank design capacity (cubic meters)
Maximum HAP vapor pressure of off-site material managed in tank (kilopascals)
                              Tank control level
Design capacity less than 75 m[3]
Maximum HAP vapor pressure less than 76.6 kPa
Level 1.
Design capacity less than 75 m[3]
Maximum HAP vapor pressure equal to or greater than 76.6 kPa
Level 2, except that fixed roof tanks equipped with an internal floating roof and tanks equipped with an external floating roof as provided for in § 63.685(d)(1) and (2) of this subpart shall not be used.
Design capacity equal to or greater than 75 m[3] and less than 151 m[3]
Maximum HAP vapor pressure less than 27.6 kPa
Level 1.

Maximum HAP vapor pressure equal to or greater than 27.6 kPa
Level 2.
Design capacity equal to or greater than 151 m[3]
Maximum HAP vapor pressure less than 5.2 kPa
Level 1.

Maximum HAP vapor pressure equal to or greater than 5.2 kPa
Level 2.

      20. Table 4 to subpart DD of part 63 is revised to read as follows:
Table 4 to Subpart DD of Part 63 -- Tank Control Levels for Tanks at Existing Affected Sources as Required by 40 CFR 63.685(b)(1)(ii)
                      Tank design capacity (cubic meters)
Maximum HAP vapor pressure of off-site material managed in tank (kilopascals)
                              Tank control level
Design capacity less than 75 m[3]
Maximum HAP vapor pressure less than 76.6 kPa
Level 1.
Design capacity less than 75 m[3]
Maximum HAP vapor pressure equal to or greater than 76.6 kPa
Level 2, except that fixed roof tanks equipped with an internal floating roof and tanks equipped with an external floating roof as provided for in § 63.685(d)(1) and (2) of this subpart shall not be used.
Design capacity equal to or greater than 75 m[3] and less than 151 m[3]
Maximum HAP vapor pressure less than 13.1 kPa
Level 1.

Maximum HAP vapor pressure equal to or greater than 13.1 kPa
Level 2.
Design capacity equal to or greater than 151 m[3]
Maximum HAP vapor pressure less than 5.2 kPa
Level 1.

Maximum HAP vapor pressure equal to or greater than 5.2 kPa
Level 2.

      21. Table 5 is added to subpart DD of part 63 to read as follows:
Table 5 to Subpart DD of Part 63 -- Tank Control Levels for Tanks at New Affected Sources as Required by 40 CFR 63.685(b)(2)
                      Tank design capacity (cubic meters)
Maximum HAP vapor pressure of off-site material managed in tank (kilopascals)
                              Tank control level
Design capacity less than 38 m[3]
Maximum HAP vapor pressure less than 76.6 kPa
Level 1.
Design capacity less than 38 m[3]
Maximum HAP vapor pressure equal to or greater than 76.6 kPa
Level 2, except that fixed roof tanks equipped with an internal floating roof and tanks equipped with an external floating roof as provided for in § 63.685(d)(1) and (2) of this subpart shall not be used.
Design capacity equal to or greater than 38 m[3] and less than 151 m[3]
Maximum HAP vapor pressure less than 13.1 kPa
Level 1.

Maximum HAP vapor pressure equal to or greater than 13.1 kPa
Level 2.
Design capacity equal to or greater than 151 m[3]
Maximum HAP vapor pressure less than 0.7 kPa
Level 1.

Maximum HAP vapor pressure equal to or greater than 0.7 kPa
Level 2.