[Federal Register: August 28, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 166)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 49196-49198]
[DOCID:fr28au07-27]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2007-0421a; FRL-8452-1]

Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, South
Coast Air Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from refinery flares and
storage tanks at petroleum facilities. We are approving local rules
that regulate these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended
in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

DATES: This rule is effective on October 29, 2007 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by September 27, 2007. If
we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2007-0421a, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow

the on-line instructions.
    2. E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at http://www.regulations.gov,

including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail.

http://www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not

know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
    Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available
electronically at http://www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region

IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents
in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly
available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material),
and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI).
To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment
during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerald S. Wamsley, EPA Region IX, at
either<PHONE_NUMBER>, or<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. The State's Submittal.
    A. What rules did the State submit?
    B. Are there other versions of these rules?
    C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?
II. EPA's Evaluation and Action.
    A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?
    B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?
    C. EPA recommendations to further improve the rules.
    D. Public comment and final action.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.

I. The State's Submittal

A. What rules did the State submit?

    Table 1 lists the rules we are approving with the dates that they
were adopted by the local air agencies and submitted by the California
Air Resources Board (CARB).

                                            Table 1.--Submitted Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Local agency                    Rule No.                Rule title            Adopted     Submitted
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SCAQMD.............................  1178.................  Further Control of VOC         04/07/06     06/16/06
                                                             Emissions from Storage
                                                             Tanks at Petroleum
                                                             Facilities.
SCAQMD.............................  1118.................  Control of Emissions from      11/04/05     10/05/06
                                                             Refinery Flares.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 21, 2006 and October 24, 2006, respectively, EPA found that
SCAQMD Rules 1178 and 1118 met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR part
51, Appendix V. The state's submittal must meet these criteria before
EPA's formal review can begin.

B. Are there other versions of these rules?

    We approved a version of Rule 1178 into the SIP on August 26, 2003
(see 68 FR 51181). Rule 1118 has not been submitted previously to EPA
for SIP inclusion. There have been no intervening submittals of these
rules since we acted on the prior version of Rule 1178, or since Rule
1118 was submitted.

C. What is the purpose of the submitted rules?

    VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human
health and the environment. Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states
to submit regulations that control VOC emissions. Rule 1178 applies
additional controls to reduce VOC emissions during the filling,
storage, and emptying of large tanks at petroleum facilities. Rule 1178
applies to facilities emitting more than 20 tons/year of VOCs that have
storage tanks larger than 19,815 gallons storing organic liquids with a
true vapor pressure greater than or equal to 0.1 psi and establishes
vapor pressure containment and control requirements for organic liquid
storage tanks. Tanks and systems of tanks must have a vapor recovery
system that recovers at least 95% of ROC vapors by weight or combusts
excess vapors. Rule 1178 also sets specific requirements for vapor loss
control devices, external floating roofs, and internal floating roofs.
While some of Rule 1178's requirements are duplicative, many
requirements are additive and more stringent than SCAQMD Rule 463--
Organic Liquid Storage. Rule 1118 is designed to decrease VOC as well
as, sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide emissions from industries such
as petroleum refineries, sulphur recovery plants, and hydrogen
production plants. The rule also provides for monitoring and recording
data related to flaring operations and flare related emissions.

    EPA's technical support documents (TSD) have more information about
these rules.

II. EPA's Evaluation and Action

A. How is EPA evaluating the rules?

    Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the
Act), must require Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for
each category of sources covered by a Control Techniques Guidelines
(CTG) document as well as each major source in nonattainment areas (see
section 182(a)(2)), and must not relax existing requirements (see
sections 110(l) and 193). The SCAQMD regulates an ozone nonattainment
area (see 40 CFR part 81), so Rule 1178 and 1118 must fulfill RACT.
    Guidance and policy documents that we use to help evaluate specific
enforceability and RACT requirements consistently include the guidance
documents listed below.
    (1) Portions of the proposed post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide
policy that concern RACT, 52 FR 45044, November 24, 1987.
    (2) ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints, Deficiencies,
and Deviations,'' EPA, May 25, 1988 (the Bluebook).
    (3) ``Guidance Document for Correcting Common VOC & Other Rule
Deficiencies,'' EPA Region 9, August 21, 2001 (the Little Bluebook).
    (4) ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Petroleum Liquid
Storage in External Floating Roof Tanks,'' EPA-450/2-78-047, USEPA,
December 1978.
    (5) ``Control of Volatile Organic Emissions from Storage of
Petroleum Liquids in Fixed-Roof Tanks, ``EPA-450/2-77-036, USEPA,
December 1977.
    There are no relevant CTGs for minimizing flare emissions through
event monitoring.

B. Do the rules meet the evaluation criteria?

    We believe these rules are consistent with the relevant policy and
guidance regarding enforceability, RACT, and SIP relaxations. The
amendments to Rule 1178 either clarify the rule, or strengthen its
provisions in a practical manner. Rule 1118 strengthens the SIP by
minimizing emissions from a previously unregulated source of VOC. The
TSD has more information on our respective evaluations.

C. EPA recommendations to further improve the rules

    We have no recommendations for the next time the local agency
modifies the rules.

D. Public comment and final action

    As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, EPA is fully
approving the submitted rules because we believe they fulfill all
relevant requirements. We do not think anyone will object to this
approval, so we are finalizing it without proposing it in advance.
However, in the Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are
simultaneously proposing approval of the same submitted rules. If we
receive adverse comments by September 27, 2007, we will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the
direct final approval will not take effect and we will address the
comments in a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do
not receive timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be
effective without further notice on October 29, 2007. This will
incorporate these rules into the federally enforceable SIP.
    Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a state rule
implementing a Federal standard.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission; to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 29, 2007. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: July 3, 2007.
Laura Yoshii,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.

0
Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart F--California

0
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(345)(i)(A)(2) and
(c)(347)(i)(B) to read as follows:

Sec.  52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (345) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (2) Rule 1178 adopted on December 21, 2001, and amended on April 7,
2006.
* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (347) * * *
    (i) * * *
    (B) South Coast Air Quality Management District.
    (1) Rule 1118 adopted February 13, 1998, and amended November 4,
2005.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E7-16822 Filed 8-27-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: December 20, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 243)]
[Notices]
[Page 75523-75525]
[DOCID:fr20de05-97]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-52951; File No. SR-NYSE-2004-39]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; New York Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Order Approving a Proposed Rule Change and Partial Amendment No. 1 To
Amend Exchange Rule 431 (Margin Requirements)

December 14, 2005.

I. Introduction

    On July 12, 2004, the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (the
``Exchange'' or ``NYSE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``SEC'' or the ``Commission'') a proposed rule change to
amend specified provision of Exchange Rule 431 (margin requirements)
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Exchange Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\3\ On September
29, 2005, the Exchange filed a partial amendment to its proposed rule
change.\4\ The proposed rule change, as amended, was published for
comment in the Federal Register on November 10, 2005.\5\ The Commission
received no comments on the proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \4\ SR-NYSE-2004-39: Amendment No. 1. The NYSE, in coordination
with the Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated (``CBOE''),
filed the partial amendment to conform the complex options spreads
strategies to which its rule amendments apply to those of the CBOE.
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 52738 (Nov. 4,
2005); 70 FR 68501 (Nov. 10, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description

    The Exchange has proposed amendments to Rule 431 (margin
requirements) that will recognize specific additional complex option
spread strategies and set margin requirements commensurate with the
risk of such spread strategies. These complex spread strategies are a
combination of two or more basic option spreads that are already
covered under Exchange Rule 431. In addition, the Exchange has proposed
the elimination of the two-dollar standard exercise price interval
limitation for listed options and certain terminology with respect to
``permitted offsets,'' as defined in its Rule. The proposed amendments
described below have been developed in conjunction with the Chicago
Board Options Exchange (``CBOE'').

A. Complex Option Spreads

    As noted, the Exchange has proposed amendments to Rule 431 to
recognize

certain additional complex option spread strategies that are the net
result of combining two or more spread strategies that are currently
recognized in the Exchange's margin rules. The netting of contracts in
option series common to each of the currently recognized spreads in an
aggregation reduces it to the complex spread strategies outlined below.
    The Exchange states that basic option spreads can be paired in such
ways that they offset each other in terms of risk. The total risk of
the combined spreads is less than the sum of the risk of both spread
positions if viewed as stand-alone strategies. The specific complex
spread strategies listed below are structured using the same principles
as, and are essentially expansions of, the advanced spreads currently
allowed in Rule 431.
    Currently, Rule 431 recognizes and prescribes margin requirements
for advanced spread strategies known as the ``butterfly spread'' and
the ``box spread.'' However, the Exchange noted that these option
spreads are limited in scope and that its proposal expands upon the
types of pairings that would qualify for butterfly spread and box
spread treatment.
    Exchange Rule 431(f)(2)(G)(i) recognizes ``calendar spreads,'' also
known as ``time spreads,'' but these spreads are not identified as
such. The Exchange has proposed to define this term as ``the sale of
one option and the simultaneous purchase of an option with a more
distant expiration date, both specifying the same underlying component
with the same exercise price where the long options do not expire
before the short option with the longest term expiration'' in the
definition section of the Rule (NYSE 431(f)(2)(C)) because some of the
complex spreads recognized in this proposal will include this component
of spread strategies.
    The Exchange noted that to be eligible for the margin requirements
in the proposal, a complex spread must be consistent with one of the
seven patterns specified below. The expiration months and the sequence
of the exercise prices must correspond to the same pattern, and the
intervals between the exercise prices must be equal.
    Under the proposal, members and member organizations will be
required to obtain initial and maintenance margin for the subject
complex spreads, whether established outright or through netting, of
not less than the sum of the margin required on each basic spread in
the equivalent aggregation.
    The Exchange noted that the basic requirements for complex options
spreads are as follows: (a) The complex spreads must be carried in a
margin account; (b) European-style options are prohibited for complex
spread combinations having a long option series that expires after the
other option series. Only American-style options may be used in these
combinations. Additionally, the intervals between exercise prices must
be equal, and each complex spread must comprise four option series,
with the exception of a Long Calendar Butterfly Spread, which must
comprised of three option series.
    According to the Exchange, the sum of the margin required on each
currently recognized spread in each of the applicable aggregations
renders a margin requirement for the subject complex spread strategies
as stated below. The additional complex option strategies and
maintenance margin requirements are as follows: (1) A Long Condor
Spread comprised of two long Butterfly Spreads; (2) a Short Iron
Butterfly Spread comprised of one long Butterfly Spread and one short
Box Spread; (3) a Short Iron Condor Spread comprised of two long
Butterfly Spreads and one short Box Spread; (4) a Long Calendar
Butterfly Spread comprised of one long Calendar Spread and one long
Butterfly Spread; (5) a Long Calendar Condor Spread comprised of one
long Calendar Spread and two long Butterfly Spreads; (6) a Short
Calendar Iron Butterfly Spread comprised of one long Calendar Spread
plus one long Butterfly Spread and one short Box Spread; and (7) a
Short Calendar Iron Condor Spread comprised of one Long Calendar Spread
plus two long Butterfly Spreads and one short Box Spread.
    The Exchange stated that the purpose and benefit of the proposal is
to set levels of margin that more precisely represent the actual net
risk of the option positions in the account and to enable customers to
implement these strategies more efficiently.

B. Permitted Offsets

    Currently, Exchange Rule 431(f)(2)(J) limits permitted offsets \6\
for specialists and market makers in options to option series that are
``in-or-at-the-money.'' \7\ Recently, various options exchanges have
provided for the listing of options with one-dollar strike intervals in
a number of classes. The Exchange stated that as a result, the use of
securities to hedge option series that have one-dollar strike intervals
has unintentionally become more restrictive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ NYSE Rule 431(f)(2)(J) defines a permitted offset position
as, in the case of an option in which a specialist makes a market, a
position in the underlying asset or other related assets, and in the
case of other securities in which a specialist makes a market, a
position in options overlying the securities in which a specialist
makes a market.
    \7\ NYSE Rule 431(f)(2)(J) defines the term ``in or at the
money'' as the current market price of the underlying security is
not more than two standard exercise intervals below (with respect to
a call option) or above (with respect to a put option) the exercise
price of the option.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has proposed a rule change to eliminate the two-dollar
standard exercise price interval limitation for listed options and the
definition of ``in-or-at-the-money.'' As proposed, Rule 431(f)(2)(J)
would require permitted offset transactions be effected for specialist
or market-making purposes such as hedging, risk reduction, rebalancing
of positions, liquidation, or accommodation of customer orders, or
other similar specialist or market-making purposes, while prohibiting
trading in an underlying security that is not related to specialist or
market making option activities, or that does not constitute a
reasonable hedge.
    Because clearing firms have risk monitoring systems that alert them
to unhedged positions and haircut requirements pursuant to Rule 15c3-1
\8\ of the Exchange Act \9\ perform a similar function as NYSE margin
requirements relative to providing adequate risk coverage to broker-
dealers, the Exchange believes that the elimination of the two-dollar
standard exercise price limitation and definition of ``in-or-at-the-
money'' will not diminish the ``safety and soundness'' protections that
Rule 431 provides.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 17 CFR 240.15c3-1.
    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful review, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange.\10\ In particular, the Commission believes that
the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the
Exchange Act,\11\ which requires that the rules of the exchange be
designed, among other things, to remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanisms of a free and open market, and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest. The Commission finds that amending
the rules to permit complex option spread strategies that are the net
result of combining two or more spread strategies that are currently
recognized in the Exchange's margin rules is consistent

with the requirements of Section 6(b)(5) because the amendments will
allow the Exchange to set levels of margin that more precisely
represent the actual net risk of the option positions in the account
and enable customers to implement these strategies more efficiently.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission
notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission further finds elimination of the two-dollar standard
exercise price interval limitation for listed options and elimination
of the definition of ``in-or-at-the-money'' are consistent with the
requirements of Section 6(b)(5). The rules changes should allow
specialists and market makers to hedge risk related to their options
positions while prohibiting trading in an underlying security that is
not related to specialist or market making option activities, or that
does not constitute a reasonable hedge.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\12\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-NYSE-2004-39), as
amended, be, and it hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-7525 Filed 12-19-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23586-23587]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9851]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[EPA-HQ-OPPT-2003-0004; FRL-8871-9]

Access to Confidential Business Information by Syracuse Research
Corporation

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: EPA has authorized its contractor, Syracuse Research
Corporation (SRC) of North Syracuse, New York, to access information
which has been submitted to EPA under sections 4, 5, 6, and 8 of the
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Some of the information may be
claimed or determined to be Confidential Business Information (CBI).

DATES: Access to the confidential data will occur no sooner than May 4,
2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information contact:
Pamela Moseley, Information Management Division (7407M), Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202) 564-8956; fax number:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    For general information contact: The TSCAHotline, ABVIGoodwill, 422
South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554-
1404; e-mail address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this notice apply to me?

    This action is directed to the public in general. This action may,
however, be of interest to all who manufacture, process, or distribute
industrial chemicals. Since other entities may also be interested, the
Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may
be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the
technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?

    EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2003-0004. All documents in the
docket are listed in the docket index available at http://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available electronically at http://www.regulations.gov, or, if only available in hard copy, at the OPPT
Docket. The OPPT Docket is located in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) at
Rm. 3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC.
The EPA/DC Public Reading Room hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number of the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the
telephone number for the OPPT Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Docket visitors
are required to show photographic identification, pass through a metal
detector, and sign the EPA visitor log. All visitor bags are processed
through an X-ray machine and subject to search. Visitors will be
provided an EPA/DC badge that must be visible at all times in the
building and returned upon departure.

II. What action is the Agency taking?

    Under EPA contract number GS-00F-0019L, Order Number EP-G11H-00090,
contractor SRC of 4225 Running Ridge Road, North Syracuse, NY and 2451
Crystal Drive, Suite 804, Arlington, VA will assist the Office of
Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) by performing chemistry
evaluation of New and Existing chemicals including the chemistry
aspects of their manufacture, processing, use, potential new uses, and
pollution prevention. These documents will be examined for information
on chemical structures, manufacture, physical/chemical properties,
production volume and other pertinent data used in the assessment of
the potential effects of chemicals. In accordance with 40 CFR 2.306(j),
EPA has determined that under EPA contract number GS-00F-0019L, Order
Number EP-G11H-00090, SRC will require access to CBI submitted to EPA
under

sections 4, 5, 6, and 8 of TSCA to perform successfully the duties
specified under the contract. SRC's personnel will be given access to
information submitted to EPA under sections 4, 5, 6, and 8 of TSCA.
Some of the information may be claimed or determined to be CBI.
    EPA is issuing this notice to inform all submitters of information
under sections 4, 5, 6, and 8 of TSCA that EPA may provide SRC access
to these CBI materials on a need to know basis only. All access to TSCA
CBI under this contract will take place at EPA Headquarters and at
SRC's North Syracuse, NY and Arlington, VA sites in accordance with
EPA's TSCA CBI Protection Manual.
    Access to TSCA data, including CBI, will continue until September
30, 2011. If the contract is extended, this access will also continue
for the duration of the extended contract without further notice.
    SRC's personnel will be required to sign nondisclosure agreements
and will be briefed on appropriate security procedures before they are
permitted access to TSCA CBI.

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection, Confidential business information.

    Dated: April 17, 2011.
Mario Caraballo,
Acting Director, Information Management Division, Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics.
[FR Doc. 2011-9851 Filed 4-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


     Requirements for Existing Non-Emergency Spark Ignition 4SLB and 4SRB             Stationary RICE >500 HP Located at Area Sources of HAP

(a) Owners and operators of existing non-emergency spark ignition four-stroke lean burn (4SLB) and four-stroke rich burn (4SRB) stationary RICE  >500 HP located at area sources of HAP meeting any of the criteria in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) must meet identical requirements to those currently specified for existing non-emergency spark ignition 4SLB and 4SRB stationary RICE <=500 HP located at area sources of HAP (i.e., the management practices in items 7 and 9 in Table 2d  to subpart ZZZZ and the operation and maintenance requirements in §63.6625(e), (h), and (j)).

(1) Stationary RICE located in an offshore area that is beyond the line of ordinary low water along that portion of the coast of the United States that is in direct contact with the open seas and beyond the line marking the seaward limit of inland waters.

(2) Stationary RICE located on a pipeline segment that meets both of the criteria in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (ii).

(i) A pipeline segment with 10 or fewer buildings intended for human occupancy within 220 yards (200 meters) on either side of the centerline of any continuous 1-mile (1.6 kilometers) length of pipeline. Each separate dwelling unit in a multiple dwelling unit building is counted as a separate building intended for human occupancy.

(ii) The pipeline segment does not lie within 100 yards (91 meters) of either a building or a small, well-defined outside area (such as a playground, recreation area, outdoor theater, or other place of public assembly) that is occupied by 20 or more persons on at least 5 days a week for 10 weeks in any 12-month period. The days and weeks need not be consecutive. The building or area is considered occupied for a full day if it is occupied for any portion of the day.

(iii) For purposes of this paragraph (2), the term pipeline segment means all parts of those physical facilities through which gas moves in transportation, including but not limited to pipe, valves, and other appurtenance attached to pipe, compressor units, metering stations, regulator stations, delivery stations, holders, and fabricated assemblies. Stationary RICE located within 50 yards (46 m) of the pipeline segment providing power for equipment on a pipeline segment are part of the pipeline segment. Transportation of gas means the gathering, transmission, or distribution of gas by pipeline, or the storage of gas. A building is intended for human occupancy if its primary use is for a purpose involving the presence of humans.

(3) Stationary RICE that are not located on pipelines and that have 5 or fewer buildings intended for human occupancy within a 0.25 mile radius around the engine.

(b) Owners and operators of existing non-emergency spark ignition 4SLB and 4SRB stationary RICE  >500 HP located at area sources of HAP meeting the criteria in paragraph (a) must evaluate the status of their stationary RICE every 12 months. If the stationary RICE no longer meets the criteria in paragraph (a), the owner or operator must comply with the requirements specified in paragraph (c) within one year.

(c) Owners and operators of existing non-emergency spark ignition 4SLB and 4SRB stationary RICE  >500 HP located at area sources of HAP that do not meet the criteria in paragraph (a) must meet the requirements of this paragraph (c).

(1) Install a catalyst to reduce emissions of HAP.   (2) Meet the requirements of paragraph (i) or (ii):

(i) Continuously monitor the catalyst inlet temperature and maintain the temperature between the specified range in subpart ZZZZ, or

(ii) Equip the engine with automated shutdown so that the catalyst inlet temperature does not exceed the specified maximum temperature of the range in subpart ZZZZ.

(3) Conduct an initial test, and subsequent annual tests, to show the catalyst reduces emissions as specified in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (ii). The initial test must consist of three test runs. Each subsequent annual test must consist of one test run. Each test run must be of at least 15 minute duration, except that each test run with CTM-034 must consist of one measurement cycle as defined by the method and include at least 2 minutes of test data phase measurement.

(i) For 4SLB stationary RICE, CO emissions must be reduced by 93 percent or more, or limited to 47 ppmvd at 15% O2.

(ii) For 4SRB stationary RICE, CO must be reduced by 75 percent or more, or alternatively, THC must be reduced by 30 percent or more.   (4) The CO and O2 testing required in paragraph (c)(3) can be conducted using EPA Conditional Test Method 034 or the methods already specified in subpart ZZZZ. The THC testing required in paragraph (c)(3) can be conducted using EPA Method 25A.

(5) If any of the tests required in paragraph (c)(3) show that the emissions exceed the levels specified in paragraph (c)(3), the stationary RICE must be shut down as soon as safely possible and appropriate corrective action must be taken (e.g., repairs, the catalyst cleaned or replaced). The stationary RICE must be retested within 7 days of being restarted and the emissions must meet the levels specified in paragraph (c)(3). If the retest shows that the emissions continue to exceed the specified levels, the stationary RICE must again be shut down as soon as safely possible, and the engine may not operate, except for purposes of start-up and testing, until the owner/operator demonstrates through testing that the emissions do not exceed the levels specified in paragraph (c)(3).

(6) Failure to meet any of the requirements of paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(5) is a violation of subpart ZZZZ. Failure to conduct an initial test and subsequent annual tests, as specified in paragraph (c)(3), is a violation of subpart ZZZZ.


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 234 (Thursday, December 5, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66680-66681]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26279]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2018-N-3207]

Request for Nominations of Voting Members on a Public Advisory
Committee; National Mammography Quality Assurance Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is requesting
nominations for voting members to serve on the National Mammography
Quality Assurance Advisory Committee in the Center for Devices and
Radiological Health. Nominations will be accepted for upcoming
vacancies effective with this notice.
    FDA seeks to include the views of women and men, members of all
racial and ethnic groups, and individuals with and without disabilities
on its advisory committees and, therefore, encourages nominations of
appropriately qualified candidates from these groups.

DATES: Nominations received on or before February 3, 2020, will be
given first consideration for membership on the National Mammography
Quality Assurance Advisory Committee. Nominations received after
February 3, 2020, will be considered for nomination to the committee as
later vacancies occur.

ADDRESSES: All nominations for membership should be submitted
electronically by logging into the FDA Advisory Nomination Portal at
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/FACTRSPortal/FACTRS/index.cfm or
by mail to Advisory Committee Oversight and Management Staff, Food and
Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, Rm. 5103,
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Information about becoming a member on an
FDA advisory committee can also be obtained by visiting FDA's website
at https://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Regarding all nomination questions for
membership: Sara Anderson, Center for Devices and Radiological Health,
Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 66, Rm.
5210, Silver Spring, MD 20993,<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FDA is requesting nominations for voting
members to fill upcoming vacancies on the National Mammography Quality
Assurance Advisory Committee.

I. General Description of the Committee Duties

    The National Mammography Quality Assurance Advisory Committee
advises the Commissioner of Food and Drugs (the Commissioner) or
designee on: (1) Developing appropriate quality standards and
regulations for mammography facilities; (2) developing appropriate
standards and regulations for bodies accrediting mammography facilities
under this program; (3) developing regulations with respect to
sanctions; (4) developing procedures for monitoring compliance with
standards; (5) establishing a mechanism to investigate consumer
complaints; (6) reporting new developments concerning breast imaging
that should be

considered in the oversight of mammography facilities; (7) determining
whether there exists a shortage of mammography facilities in rural and
health professional shortage areas and determining the effects of
personnel on access to the services of such facilities in such areas;
(8) determining whether there will exist a sufficient number of medical
physicists after October 1, 1999; and (9) determining the costs and
benefits of compliance with these requirements.

II. Criteria for Voting Members

    The committee consists of a core of 15 members, including the
Chair. Members and the Chair are selected by the Commissioner or
designee from among physicians, practitioners, and other health
professionals, whose clinical practice, research specialization, or
professional expertise includes a significant focus on mammography.
Almost all non-Federal members of this committee serve as Special
Government Employees. Members will be invited to serve for terms of up
to 4 years.

III. Nomination Procedures

    Any interested person may nominate one or more qualified persons
for membership on the advisory committee. Self-nominations are also
accepted. Nominations must include a current, complete
r[eacute]sum[eacute] or curriculum vitae for each nominee, including
current business address, telephone number, and email address if
available, and a signed copy of the Acknowledgement and Consent form
available at the FDA Advisory Nomination Portal (see ADDRESSES).
Nominations must specify the advisory committee for which the nominee
is recommended. Nominations must also acknowledge that the nominee is
aware of the nomination unless self-nominated. FDA will ask potential
candidates to provide detailed information concerning such matters
related to financial holdings, employment, and research grants and/or
contracts to permit evaluation of possible sources of conflict of
interest.
    This notice is issued under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5
U.S.C. app. 2) and 21 CFR part 14, relating to advisory committees.

    Dated: December 2, 2019.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-26279 Filed 12-4-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164-01-P


emissions monitoring system (CEMS) to continuously measure the mercury
concentration in the final exhaust stream from each roaster according
to the requirements of Performance Specification 12A (40 CFR part 60,
appendix B) except that calibration standards traceable to the National
Institute of Standards and Technology are not required. You must
perform a data accuracy assessment of the CEMS according to section 5
of Appendix F in part 60 and follow the applicable monitoring
requirements in Sec.  63.8 as provided in Table 1 to subpart EEEEEEE.
    (i) You must continuously monitor the daily average mercury
concentration from the roaster and maintain the daily average
concentration below the operating limit established in paragraph (a)(4)
of this section.
    (ii) If the daily average mercury concentration from the CEMs is
higher than the operating limit, the exceedance must be reported to the
permit authority as a deviation and corrective actions must be
implemented within 48 hours upon receipt of the sampling results.
Moreover, within 96 hours of the exceedance, the owner or operator must
measure the concentration again (with the CEMs (40 CFR part 60,
appendix B and Procedure 5 of appendix F) and demonstrate to the permit
authority that the mercury concentration is no higher than the
operating limit, or inform the permit authority that the limit
continues to be exceeded. If the measured mercury concentration exceeds
the operating limit for mercury concentration after these 96 hours, the
exceedance must be reported as a deviation within 24 hours to the
permitting authority, and the owner or operator must conduct a full
compliance test pursuant to Sec.  63.11646(a) for the roaster
operations within 40 days to determine if the affected source is in
compliance with the MACT emission standard. For facilities that have
roasters and autoclaves, the owner or operator can use the results of
the previous compliance test for the autoclaves to determine the
emissions for those process units to be used in the calculations of the
emissions for the affected source. If the source is determined to be in
compliance, the compliance test results may also be used to establish a
new operating limit for mercury concentration (in accordance with
paragraph (e) of this section).
    (iii) You must submit a monitoring plan that includes quality
assurance and quality control (QA/QC) procedures sufficient to
demonstrate the accuracy of

the CEMS to your permitting authority for approval 180 days prior to
your initial compliance test. At a minimum, the QA/QC procedures must
include daily calibrations and an annual accuracy test for the CEMS.
    (3) Continuously measure the mercury concentration in the final
exhaust stream from each roaster using EPA Performance Specification
12B (40 CFR part 60 appendix B and Procedure 5 of appendix F).
    (i) You must continuously measure the mercury concentration in the
roaster exhaust and maintain the average daily mercury concentration
below the operating limit established in paragraph (a)(4) of this
section. To determine the appropriate sampling duration, you must
review the available data from previous stack tests to determine the
upper 99th percentile of the range of mercury concentrations in the
exit stack gas. Based on this upper end of expected concentrations,
select an appropriate sampling duration that is likely to provide a
valid sample and not result in breakthrough of the sampling tubes. If
breakthrough of the sampling tubes occurs, you must re-sample within 7
days using a shorter sampling duration.
    (ii) If the daily average mercury concentration is higher than the
operating limit, the exceedance must be reported to the permit
authority as a deviation and corrective actions must be implemented
within 48 hours upon receipt of the sampling results. Moreover, within
96 hours of the exceedance, the owner or operator must measure the
concentration again with PS 12B (40 CFR part 60, appendix B and
Procedure 5 of appendix F), Method 30B or Method 29 (40 CFR part 60,
appendix A-8), or ASTM D6784(incorporated by reference--see Sec.
63.14) and demonstrate to the permit authority that the mercury
concentration is no higher than the operating limit, or inform the
permit authority that the limit continues to be exceeded. If the
measured mercury concentration exceeds the operating limit for mercury
concentration after these 96 hours, the exceedance must be reported as
a deviation within 24 hours to the permitting authority and the owner
or operator must conduct a full compliance test pursuant to Sec.
63.11646(a) for the roaster operations within 40 days to determine if
the affected source is in compliance with the MACT emission standard.
For facilities that have roasters and autoclaves, the owner or operator
can use the results of the previous compliance test for the autoclaves
to determine the emissions for those process units to be used in the
calculations of the emissions for the affected source. If the source is
determined to be in compliance, the compliance test results may also be
used to establish a new operating limit for mercury concentration (in
accordance with paragraph (e) of this section).
    (4) Use Equation (2) of this section to establish an upper
operating limit for mercury concentration as determined by using the
procedures in paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), or (a)(3) of this section
concurrently while you are conducting your annual compliance
performance stack tests according to the procedures in Sec.
63.11646(a).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR17FE11.004

Where:

OLR = mercury concentration operating limit for the roaster (or
roasters that share a common stack) (in micrograms per cubic meter);
Ctest = average mercury concentration measured by the
monitoring procedures (PS 12A or PS 12B or 30B) during the
compliance performance stack test (in micrograms per cubic meter);
EL = emission standard for ore pretreatment processes (in lb/million
tons of ore);
CT = compliance test results for ore pretreatment processes (in lb/
million tons of ore).

    (5) For roasters that utilize calomel-based mercury control systems
for emissions controls, you are not required to perform the monitoring
for mercury emissions in paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), or (a)(3) of this
section if you demonstrate to the satisfaction of your permitting
authority that mercury emissions from the roaster are less than 10
pounds of mercury per million tons of ore throughput. If you make this
demonstration, you must conduct the parametric monitoring as described
below in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.
    (i) The initial demonstration must include three or more
consecutive independent stack tests for mercury at least one month
apart on the roaster exhaust stacks. Subsequent demonstrations may be
based upon the single stack test required in paragraph (a) of section
Sec.  63.11646. The results of each of the tests must be less than 10
pounds of mercury per million tons of ore. The testing must be
performed according to the procedures in Sec.  63.11646(a)(1) through
(a)(4) to determine mercury emissions in pounds per hour.
    (ii) Divide the mercury emission rate in pounds per hour by the ore
throughput rate during the test expressed in millions of tons per hour
to determine the emissions in pounds per million tons of ore.
    (b) For facilities with roasters and a calomel-based mercury
control system that choose to monitor for mercury emissions using the
procedures in paragraph (a)(1) of this section or that qualify for and
choose to follow the requirements in paragraph (a)(5) of this section,
you must establish operating parameter limits for scrubber liquor flow
(or line pressure) and scrubber inlet gas temperature and monitor these
parameters. You may establish your operating parameter limits from the
initial compliance test, according to the manufacturer's
specifications, or based on limits established by the permitting
authority. If you choose to establish your operating parameter limits
from the initial compliance test, monitor the scrubber liquor flow (or
line pressure) and scrubber inlet gas temperature during each run of
your initial compliance test. The minimum operating limit for scrubber
liquor flow rate (or line pressure) is either the lowest value during
any run of the initial compliance test or 10 percent less than the
average value measured during the compliance test, and your maximum
scrubber inlet temperature limit is the highest temperature measured
during any run of the initial compliance test or 10 percent higher than
the average value measured during the compliance test. You must monitor
the scrubber liquor flow rate (or line pressure) and scrubber inlet gas
temperature hourly and maintain the scrubber liquor flow (or line
pressure) at or above the established operating parameter and maintain
the inlet gas temperature below the established operating parameter
limit.
    (c) For facilities with roasters and a calomel-based mercury
control system that choose to monitor for mercury emissions using the
procedures in paragraph (a)(1) of this section or that qualify for and
follow the requirements in paragraph (a)(5) of this section, you must
establish operating parameter ranges for mercuric ion and chloride ion
concentrations or for oxidation reduction potential and pH using the

procedures in paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this section respectively.
    (1) Establish the mercuric ion concentration and chloride ion
concentration ranges for each calomel-based mercury control system. The
mercuric ion concentration and chloride ion concentration ranges for
each calomel-based mercury control system must be based on the
manufacturer's specifications, or based on approval by your permitting
authority. Measure the mercuric ion concentration and chloride ion
concentrations at least once during each run of your initial compliance
test. The measurements must be within the established concentration
range for mercuric ion concentration and chloride ion concentration.
Subsequently, you must sample at least once daily and maintain the
mercuric ion concentration and chloride ion concentrations within their
established range.
    (2) Establish the oxidation reduction potential and pH range for
each calomel-based mercury control system. The oxidation reduction
potential and pH range for each calomel-based mercury control system
must be based on the manufacturer's specifications, or based on
approval by your permitting authority. Install monitoring equipment to
continuously monitor the oxidation reduction potential and pH of the
calomel-based mercury control system scrubber liquor. Measure the
oxidation reduction potential and pH of the scrubber liquor during each
run of your initial compliance test. The measurements must be within
the established range for oxidation reduction potential and pH.
Subsequently, you must monitor the oxidation reduction potential and pH
of the scrubber liquor continuously and maintain it within the
established operating range.
    (d) If you have an exceedance of a control device operating
parameter range provided in paragraphs (b) or (c) of this section, you
must take corrective action and bring the parameters back into the
established parametric ranges. If the corrective actions taken
following an exceedance do not result in the operating parameter value
being returned within the established range within 48 hours, a mercury
concentration measurement (with PS 12B or PS 12A CEMS (40 CFR part 60,
appendix B and Procedure 5 of appendix F), Method 30B or Method 29 (40
CFR part 60, appendix A-8), or ASTM D6784 (incorporated by reference--
see Sec.  63.14)) must be made to determine if the operating limit for
mercury concentration is being exceeded. The measurement must be
performed and the mercury concentration determined within 48 hours
(after the initial 48 hours, or a total of 96 hours from the time the
parameter range was exceeded). If the measured mercury concentration
meets the operating limit for mercury concentration established under
Sec.  63.11647(a)(4), the corrective actions are deemed successful, and
the owner or operator can request the permit authority to establish a
new limit or range for the parameter. If the measured mercury
concentration exceeds the operating limit for mercury concentration
after these 96 hours, the exceedance must be reported as a deviation
within 24 hours to the permitting authority and the owner or operator
must conduct a full compliance test pursuant to Sec.  63.11646(a) for
the roaster operations within 40 days to determine if the affected
source is in compliance with the MACT emission standard. For facilities
that have roasters and autoclaves, the owner or operator can use the
results of the previous compliance test for the autoclaves to determine
the emissions for those process units to be used in the calculations of
the emissions for the affected source. If the source is determined to
be in compliance with the MACT emission standard, the compliance test
may also be used to establish a new operating limit for mercury
concentration (see paragraph (e) of this section).
    (e) You may submit a request to your permitting authority for
approval to change the operating limits established under paragraph
(a)(4) of this section for the monitoring required in paragraph
(a)(1),(a)(2), or (a)(3) of this section. In the request, you must
demonstrate that the proposed change to the operating limit detects
changes in levels of mercury emission control. An approved change to
the operating limit under this paragraph only applies until a new
operating limit is established during the next annual compliance test.
    (f) You must monitor each process unit at each new and existing
affected source that uses a carbon adsorber to control mercury
emissions using the procedures in paragraphs (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this
section. A carbon adsorber may include a fixed carbon bed, carbon
filter packs or modules, carbon columns, and other variations.
    (1) Continuously sample and analyze the exhaust stream from the
carbon adsorber for mercury using Method 30B (40 CFR part 60, appendix
A-8) for a duration of at least the minimum sampling time specified in
Method 30B and up to one week that includes the period of the annual
performance test.
    (i) Establish an upper operating limit for the process as
determined using the mercury concentration measurements from the
sorbent trap (Method 30B) as calculated from Equation (3) of this
section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR17FE11.005

Where:

OLC = mercury concentration operating limit for the carbon adsorber
control device on the process as measured using the sorbent trap,
(micrograms per cubic meter);
Ctrap = average mercury concentration measured using the
sorbent trap during the week that includes the compliance
performance test, (micrograms per cubic meter);
EL = emission standard for the affected sources (lb/ton of
concentrate);
CT = compliance test results for the affected sources (lb/ton of
concentrate).

    (ii) Sample and analyze the exhaust stream from the carbon adsorber
for mercury at least monthly using Method 30B (40 CFR part 60, appendix
A-8). When the mercury concentration reaches 75 percent of the
operating limit, begin weekly sampling and analysis. When the mercury
concentration reaches 90 percent of the operating limit, replace the
carbon in the carbon adsorber within 30 days. If mercury concentration
exceeds the operating limit, change the carbon in the carbon adsorber
within 30 days and report the deviation to your permitting authority.
    (2) Conduct an initial sampling of the carbon in the carbon bed for
mercury 90 days after the replacement of the carbon. A representative
sample must be collected from the inlet of the bed and the exit of the
bed and analyzed using SW-846 Method 7471B (incorporated by reference--
see Sec.  63.14). The depth to which the sampler is inserted must be
recorded. The design capacity is established by calculating the average
carbon loading from the inlet and outlet measurements. Sampling and
analysis

of the carbon bed for mercury must be performed quarterly thereafter.
When the carbon loading reaches 50 percent of the design capacity of
the carbon, monthly sampling must be performed until 90 percent of the
carbon loading capacity is reached. The carbon must be removed and
replaced with fresh carbon no later than 30 days after reaching 90
percent of capacity. For carbon designs where there may be multiple
carbon columns or beds, a representative sample may be collected from
the first and last column or bed instead of the inlet or outlet. If the
carbon loading exceeds the design capacity of the carbon, change the
carbon within 30 days and report the deviation to your permitting
authority.
    (g) You must monitor gas stream temperature at the inlet to the
carbon adsorber for each process unit (i.e., carbon kiln, melt furnace,
etc.) equipped with a carbon adsorber. Establish a maximum value for
the inlet temperature either during the annual performance test
(required in Sec.  63.11646(a)), according to the manufacturer's
specifications, or as approved by your permitting authority. If you
choose to establish the temperature operating limit during the
performance test, establish the temperature operating limit based on
either the highest reading during the test or at 10[deg]F higher than
the average temperature measured during the performance test. Monitor
the inlet temperature once per shift. If an inlet temperature exceeds
the temperature operating limit, you must take corrective actions to
get the temperature back within the parameter operating limit within 48
hours. If the exceedance persists, within 144 hours of the exceedance,
you must sample and analyze the exhaust stream from the carbon adsorber
using Method 30B (40 CFR part 60, appendix A-8) and compare to an
operating limit (calculated pursuant to (f)(1)(i)) or you must conduct
carbon sampling pursuant to (f)(2) of this section. If the
concentration measured with Method 30B is below 90 percent of the
operating limit or the carbon sampling results are below 90 percent of
the carbon loading capacity, you may set a new temperature operating
limit 10[deg]F above the previous operating limit or at an alternative
level approved by your permit authority. If the concentration is above
90 percent of the operating limit or above 90 percent of the carbon
loading capacity you must change the carbon in the bed within 30 days
and report the event to your permitting authority, and reestablish an
appropriate maximum temperature limit based on approval of your permit
authority.
    (h) For each wet scrubber at each new and existing affected source
not followed by a mercury control system, you must monitor the water
flow rate (or line pressure) and pressure drop. Establish a minimum
value as the operating limit for water flow rate (or line pressure) and
pressure drop either during the performance test required in Sec.
63.11646(a), according to the manufacturer's specifications, or as
approved by your permitting authority. If you choose to establish the
operating limit based on the results of the performance test, the new
operating limit must be established based on either the lowest value
during any test run or 10 percent less than the average value measured
during the test. For wet scrubbers on an autoclave, establish the
pressure drop range according to manufacturer's specifications. You
must monitor the water flow rate and pressure drop once per shift and
take corrective action within 24 hours if any daily average is less
than the operating limit. If the parameters are not in range within 72
hours, the owner or operator must report the deviation to the
permitting authority and perform a compliance test for the process
unit(s) controlled with the wet scrubber that has the parameter
exceedance within 40 days to determine if the affected source is in
compliance with the MACT limit. For the other process units included in
the affected source, the owner or operator can use the results of the
previous compliance test to determine the emissions for those process
units to be used in the calculations of the emissions for the affected
source.
    (i) You may conduct additional compliance tests according to the
procedures in Sec.  63.11646 and re-establish the operating limits
required in paragraphs (a) through (c) and (f) through (h) of this
section at any time. You must submit a request to your permitting
authority for approval to re-establish the operating limits. In the
request, you must demonstrate that the proposed change to the operating
limit detects changes in levels of mercury emission control. An
approved change to the operating limit under this paragraph only
applies until a new operating limit is established during the next
annual compliance test.

Sec.  63.11648  What are my notification, reporting, and recordkeeping
requirements?

    (a) You must submit the Initial Notification required by Sec.
63.9(b)(2) no later than 120 calendar days after the date of
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register or within 120
days after the source becomes subject to the standard. The Initial
Notification must include the information specified in Sec.
63.9(b)(2)(i) through (b)(2)(iv).
    (b) You must submit an initial Notification of Compliance Status as
required by Sec.  63.9(h).
    (c) If a deviation occurs during a semiannual reporting period, you
must submit a deviation report to your permitting authority according
to the requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) The first reporting period covers the period beginning on the
compliance date specified in Sec.  63.11641 and ending on June 30 or
December 31, whichever date comes first after your compliance date.
Each subsequent reporting period covers the semiannual period from
January 1 through June 30 or from July 1 through December 31. Your
deviation report must be postmarked or delivered no later than July 31
or January 31, whichever date comes first after the end of the
semiannual reporting period.
    (2) A deviation report must include the information in paragraphs
(c)(2)(i) through (c)(2)(iv) of this section.
    (i) Company name and address.
    (ii) Statement by a responsible official, with the official's name,
title, and signature, certifying the truth, accuracy and completeness
of the content of the report.
    (iii) Date of the report and beginning and ending dates of the
reporting period.
    (iv) Identification of the affected source, the pollutant being
monitored, applicable requirement, description of deviation, and
corrective action taken.
    (d) If you had a malfunction during the reporting period, the
compliance report required in Sec.  63.11648(b) must include the
number, duration, and a brief description for each type of malfunction
which occurred during the reporting period and which caused or may have
caused any applicable emission limitation to be exceeded. The report
must also include a description of actions taken by an owner or
operator during a malfunction of an affected source to minimize
emissions in accordance with Sec.  63.11646(b), including actions taken
to correct a malfunction.
    (e) You must keep the records specified in paragraphs (e)(1)
through (e)(3) of this section. The form and maintenance of records
must be consistent with the requirements in section 63.10(b)(1) of the
General Provisions.
    (1) As required in Sec.  63.10(b)(2)(xiv), you must keep a copy of
each

notification that you submitted to comply with this subpart and all
documentation supporting any Initial Notification, Notification of
Compliance Status, and semiannual compliance certifications that you
submitted.
    (2) You must keep the records of all performance tests,
measurements, monitoring data, and corrective actions required by
Sec. Sec.  63.11646 and 63.11647, and the information identified in
paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (c)(2)(vi) of this section for each
corrective action required by Sec.  63.11647.
    (i) The date, place, and time of the monitoring event requiring
corrective action;
    (ii) Technique or method used for monitoring;
    (iv) Operating conditions during the activity;
    (v) Results, including the date, time, and duration of the period
from the time the monitoring indicated a problem to the time that
monitoring indicated proper operation; and
    (vi) Maintenance or corrective action taken (if applicable).
    (3) You must keep records of operating hours for each process as
required by Sec.  63.11646(a)(5) and records of the monthly quantity of
ore and concentrate processed or produced as required by Sec.
63.11646(a)(10).
    (f) Your records must be in a form suitable and readily available
for expeditious review, according to Sec.  63.10(b)(1). As specified in
Sec.  63.10(b)(1), you must keep each record for 5 years following the
date of each recorded action. You must keep each record onsite for at
least 2 years after the date of each recorded action according to Sec.
63.10(b)(1). You may keep the records offsite for the remaining 3
years.
    (g) After December 31, 2011, within 60 days after the date of
completing each performance evaluation conducted to demonstrate
compliance with this subpart, the owner or operator of the affected
facility must submit the test data to EPA by entering the data
electronically into EPA's WebFIRE data base through EPA's Central Data
Exchange. The owner or operator of an affected facility shall enter the
test data into EPA's data base using the Electronic Reporting Tool or
other compatible electronic spreadsheet. Only performance evaluation
data collected using methods compatible with ERT are subject to this
requirement to be submitted electronically into EPA's WebFIRE database.

Other Requirements and Information

Sec.  63.11650  What General Provisions apply to this subpart?

    Table 1 to this subpart shows which parts of the General Provisions
in Sec. Sec.  63.1 through 63.16 apply to you.

Sec.  63.11651  What definitions apply to this subpart?

    Terms used in this subpart are defined in the Clean Air Act, in
Sec.  63.2, and in this section as follows:
    Autoclave means a pressure oxidation vessel that is used to treat
gold ores (primarily sulfide refractory ore) and involves pumping a
slurry of milled ore into the vessel which is highly pressurized with
oxygen and heated to temperatures of approximately 350[deg] to 430[deg]
F.
    Calomel-based mercury control system means a mercury emissions
control system that uses scrubbers to remove mercury from the gas
stream of a roaster or combination of roasters by complexing the
mercury from the gas stream with mercuric chloride to form mercurous
chloride (calomel). These scrubbers are also referred to as ``mercury
scrubbers.''
    Carbon adsorber means a control device consisting of a single fixed
carbon bed, multiple carbon beds or columns, carbon filter packs or
modules, and other variations that uses activated carbon to remove
pollutants from a gas stream.
    Carbon kiln means a kiln or furnace where carbon is regenerated by
heating, usually in the presence of steam, after the gold has been
stripped from the carbon.
    Carbon processes with mercury retorts means the affected source
that includes carbon kilns, preg tanks, electrowinning cells, mercury
retorts, and melt furnaces at gold mine ore processing and production
facilities that use activated carbon, or resins that can be used as a
substitute for activated carbon, to recover (adsorb) gold from the
pregnant cyanide solution.
    Carbon processes without mercury retorts means the affected source
that includes carbon kilns, preg tanks, electrowinning cells, and melt
furnaces, but has no retorts, at gold mine ore processing and
production facilities that use activated carbon, or resins that can be
used as a substitute for activated carbon, to recover (adsorb) gold
from the pregnant cyanide solution.
    Concentrate means the sludge-like material that is loaded with gold
along with various other metals (such as silver, copper, and mercury)
and various other substances, that is produced by electrowinning, the
Merrill-Crowe process, flotation and gravity separation processes.
Concentrate is measured as the input to mercury retorts, or for
facilities without mercury retorts, as the input to melt furnaces
before any drying takes place. For facilities without mercury retorts
or melt furnaces, concentrate is measured as the quantity shipped.
    Deviation means any instance where an affected source subject to
this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source:
    (1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this
subpart, including but not limited to any emissions limitation or work
practice standard;
    (2) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is
included in the operating permit for any affected source required to
obtain such a permit; or
    (3) Exceeds any operating limit established under this subpart.
    Electrowinning means a process that uses induced voltage on anode
and cathode plates to remove metals from the continuous flow of
solution, where the gold in solution is plated onto the cathode. Steel
wool is typically used as the plating surface.
    Electrowinning Cells means a tank in which the electrowinning takes
place.
    Gold mine ore processing and production facility means any
industrial facility engaged in the processing of gold mine ore that
uses any of the following processes: Roasting operations, autoclaves,
carbon kilns, preg tanks, electrowinning, mercury retorts, or melt
furnaces. Laboratories (see CAA section 112(c)(7)), individual
prospectors, and very small pilot scale mining operations that
processes or produces less than 100 pounds of concentrate per year are
not a gold mine ore processing and production facility. A facility that
produces primarily metals other than gold, such as copper, lead, zinc,
or nickel (where these metals other than gold comprise 95 percent or
more of the total metal production) that may also recover some gold as
a byproduct is not a gold mine ore processing and production facility.
Those facilities whereby 95 percent or more of total mass of metals
produced are metals other than gold, whether final metal production is
onsite or offsite, are not part of the gold mine ore processing and
production source category.
    Melt furnace means a furnace (typically a crucible furnace) that is
used for smelting the gold-bearing material recovered from mercury
retorting, or the gold-bearing material from electrowinning, the
Merrill-Crowe

process, or other processes for facilities without mercury retorts.
    Mercury retort means a vessel that is operated under a partial
vacuum at approximately 1,100 [deg] to 1,300 [deg]F to remove mercury
and moisture from the gold bearing sludge material that is recovered
from electrowinning, the Merrill-Crowe process, or other processes.
Mercury retorts are usually equipped with condensers that recover
liquid mercury during the processing.
    Merrill-Crowe process means a precipitation technique using zinc
oxide for removing gold from a cyanide solution. Zinc dust is added to
the solution, and gold is precipitated to produce a concentrate.
    Non-carbon concentrate processes means the affected source that
includes mercury retorts and melt furnaces at gold mine ore processing
and production facilities that use the Merrill-Crowe process or other
processes and do not use carbon (or resins that substitute for carbon)
to recover (adsorb) gold from the pregnant cyanide solution.
    Ore dry grinding means a process in which the gold ore is ground
and heated (dried) prior to additional preheating or prior to entering
the roaster.
    Ore preheating means a process in which ground gold ore is
preheated prior to entering the roaster.
    Ore pretreatment processes means the affected source that includes
roasting operations and autoclaves that are used to pre-treat gold mine
ore at gold mine ore processing and production facilities prior to the
cyanide leaching process.
    Pregnant solution tank (or preg tank) means a storage tank for
pregnant solution, which is the cyanide solution that contains gold-
cyanide complexes that is generated from leaching gold ore with cyanide
solution.
    Pregnant cyanide solution means the cyanide solution that contains
gold-cyanide complexes that are generated from leaching gold ore with a
dilute cyanide solution.
    Quenching means a process in which the hot calcined ore is cooled
and quenched with water after it leaves the roaster.
    Roasting operation means a process that uses an industrial furnace
in which milled ore is combusted across a fluidized bed to oxidize and
remove organic carbon and sulfide mineral grains in refractory gold
ore. The emissions points of the roasting operation subject to this
subpart include ore dry grinding, ore preheating, the roaster stack,
and quenching.

Sec.  63.11652  Who implements and enforces this subpart?

    (a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by the U.S. EPA or
a delegated authority, such as your state, local, or tribal agency. If
the U.S. EPA Administrator has delegated authority to your state,
local, or tribal agency, then that agency has the authority to
implement and enforce this subpart. You should contact your U.S. EPA
Regional Office to find out if this subpart is delegated to your state,
local, or tribal agency.
    (b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority of this
subpart to a state, local, or tribal agency under 40 CFR part 63,
subpart E, the authorities contained in paragraph (c) of this section
are retained by the Administrator of the U.S. EPA and are not
transferred to the state, local, or tribal agency.
    (c) The authorities that will not be delegated to state, local, or
tribal agencies are listed in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this
section.
    (1) Approval of alternatives to the applicability requirements in
Sec.  63.11640, the compliance date requirements in Sec.  63.11641, and
the applicable standards in Sec.  63.11645.
    (2) Approval of an alternative nonopacity emissions standard under
Sec.  63.6(g).
    (3) Approval of a major change to a test method under Sec.
63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f). A ``major change to test method'' is defined in
Sec.  63.90(a).
    (4) Approval of a major change to monitoring under Sec.  63.8(f). A
``major change to monitoring'' is defined in Sec.  63.90(a).
    (5) Approval of a waiver of recordkeeping or reporting requirements
under Sec.  63.10(f), or another major change to recordkeeping/
reporting. A ``major change to recordkeeping/reporting'' is defined in
Sec.  63.90(a).

Sec.  63.11653  [Reserved]

Tables to Subpart EEEEEEE of Part 63

          Table 1 to Subpart EEEEEEE of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart EEEEEE
 [As stated in Sec.   63.11650, you must comply with the applicable General Provisions requirements according to
                                              the following table]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Citation                      Subject           Applies to  subpart EEEEEEE         Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   63.1(a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3),  Applicability........  Yes............................
 (a)(4), (a)(6), (a)(10)-(a)(12),
 (b)(1), (b)(3), (c)(1), (c)(2),
 (c)(5), (e).
Sec.   63.1(a)(5), (a)(7)-(a)(9),   Reserved.............  No.............................
 (b)(2), (c)(3), (c)(4), (d).
Sec.   63.2.......................  Definitions..........  Yes............................
Sec.   63.3.......................  Units and              Yes............................
                                     Abbreviations.
Sec.   63.4.......................  Prohibited Activities  Yes............................
                                     and Circumvention.
Sec.   63.5.......................  Preconstruction        Yes............................
                                     Review and
                                     Notification
                                     Requirements.
Sec.   63.6(a), (b)(1)-(b)(5),      Compliance with        Yes............................
 (b)(7), (c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(5),     Standards and
 (e)(1)(iii), (f)(2), (f)(3), (g),   Maintenance
 (i), (j).                           Requirements.
Sec.   63.6(e)(1)(i) and (ii),      Startup, Shutdown and  No.............................  Subpart EEEEEEE
 (e)(3), and (f)(1).                 Malfunction                                             standards apply at
                                     Requirements (SSM).                                     all times.
Sec.   63.6(h)(1), (h)(2),          Compliance with        No.............................  Subpart EEEEEEE does
 (h)(4),(h)(5)(i), (ii), (iii) and   Opacity and Visible                                     not contain opacity
 (v), (h)(6)-(h)(9).                 Emission Limits.                                        or visible emission
                                                                                limits.
Sec.   63.6(b)(6), (c)(3), (c)(4),  Reserved.............  No.............................
 (d), (e)(2), (e)(3)(ii), (h)(3),
 (h)(5)(iv).
Sec.   63.7, except (e)(1)........  Applicability and      Yes............................
                                     Performance Test
                                     Dates.
Sec.   63.7(e)(1).................  Performance Testing    No.............................
                                     Requirements Related
                                     to SSM.

Sec.   63.8(a)(1), (b)(1), (f)(1)-  Monitoring             Yes............................
 (5), (g).                           Requirements.
Sec.   63.8(a)(2), (a)(4), (b)(2)-  Continuous Monitoring  Yes............................  Except cross
 (3), (c), (d), (e), (f)(6), (g).    Systems.                                                references to SSM
                                                                                requirements in
                                                                                Sec.   63.6(e)(1)
                                                                                and (3) do not
                                                                                apply.
Sec.   63.8(a)(3).................  [Reserved]...........  No.............................
Sec.   63.9(a), (b)(1), (b)(2)(i)-  Notification           Yes............................
 (v), (b)(4), (b)(5), (c), (d),      Requirements.
 (e), (g), (h)(1)-(h)(3), (h)(5),
 (h)(6), (i), (j).
Sec.   63.9(f)....................  .....................  No.............................
Sec.   63.9(b)(3), (h)(4).........  Reserved.............  No.............................
Sec.   63.10(a), (b)(1),            Recordkeeping and      Yes............................
 (b)(2)(vi)-(xiv), (b)(3), (c),      Reporting
 (d)(1)-(4), (e), (f).               Requirements.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(i)-(v), (d)(5).  Recordkeeping/         No.............................
                                     Reporting Associated
                                     with SSM.
Sec.   63.10(c)(2)-(c)(4), (c)(9).  Reserved.............  No.............................
Sec.   63.11......................  Control Device         No.............................
                                     Requirements.
Sec.   63.12......................  State Authority and    Yes............................
                                     Delegations.
Sec.  Sec.   63.13-63.16..........  Addresses,             Yes............................
                                     Incorporation by
                                     Reference,
                                     Availability of
                                     Information,
                                     Performance Track
                                     Provisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2011-2608 Filed 2-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P