National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Rubber Tire Manufacturing Residual Risk and Technology Review |
|---|
|
Andrew Wheeler
Environmental Protection Agency
24 July 2020
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 143 (Friday, July 24, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44752-44770]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12541]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0392; FRL-10008-48-OAR]
RIN 2060-AT07
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Rubber
Tire Manufacturing Residual Risk and Technology Review
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action finalizes the residual risk and technology review
(RTR) conducted for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category
regulated under national emission standards for hazardous air
pollutants (NESHAP). In addition, we are taking final action to add
electronic reporting of performance test results and reports,
compliance reports, and Notification of Compliance Status (NOCS)
reports and to remove the provision that exempts emissions from
compliance with the standards during periods of startup, shutdown, and
malfunction (SSM). These amendments are made under the authority of the
Clean Air Act (CAA) and will improve effectiveness of the rule. The
amendments are environmentally neutral.
DATES: This final rule is effective on July 24, 2020.
ADDRESSES: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has
established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2019-0392. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov/ website. Although listed, some information is not
publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly
available docket materials are available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov/. Out of an abundance of caution for members of
the public and our staff, the EPA Docket Center and Reading Room was
closed to public visitors on March 31, 2020, to reduce the risk of
transmitting COVID-19. Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide
remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. There is a
temporary suspension of mail delivery to the EPA, and no hand
deliveries are currently accepted. For further information and updates
on EPA Docket Center services and the current status, please visit us
online at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this final action,
contact Mr. Korbin Smith, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D243-
04), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711;
telephone number: (919) 541-2416; fax number: (919) 541-4991; and email
address: smith.korbin@epa.gov. For specific information regarding the
risk modeling methodology, contact Mr. James Hirtz, Health and
Environmental Impacts Division (C539-02), Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-0881;
and email address: hirtz.james@epa.gov. For information about the
applicability of the NESHAP to a particular entity, contact Mr. John
Cox, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, WJC South Building (Mail Code 2227A), 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202)
564-1395; and email address: cox.john@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Preamble acronyms and abbreviations. We use
multiple acronyms and terms in this preamble. While this list may not
be exhaustive, to ease the reading of this preamble and for reference
purposes, the EPA defines the following terms and acronyms here:
CAA Clean Air Act
CDX Central Data Exchange
CEDRI Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
HAP hazardous air pollutants(s)
ICR information collection request
MACT maximum achievable control technology
NESHAP national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
NOCS Notification of Compliance Status
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
PRA Paper Reduction Act
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RIN Regulatory Information Number
RTO regenerative thermal oxidizer
RTR Risk and Technology Review
SSM startup, shutdown, and malfunction
tpy tons per year
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
VOC volatile organic compound(s)
Background information. On October 30, 2019 the EPA proposed
revisions to the Rubber Tire Manufacturing NESHAP based on the RTR. In
this action, we are finalizing decisions and revisions for the rule. We
summarize some of the more significant comments we timely received
regarding the proposed rule and provide our responses in this preamble.
A summary of all other public comments on the proposal and the EPA's
responses to those comments is available in the Summary of Public
Comments and Responses for Rubber Tire Manufacturing Residual Risk and
Technology Review, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0392. A ``track
changes'' version of the regulatory language that incorporates the
changes in this action is available in the docket.
Organization of this document. The information in this preamble is
organized as follows:
[[Page 44753]]
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
C. Judicial Review and Administrative Reconsideration
II. Background
A. What is the statutory authority for this action?
B. What is the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category and how
does the NESHAP regulate HAP emissions from the source category?
C. What changes did we propose for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing
source category in our October 30, 2019, proposal?
III. What is included in this final rule?
A. What are the final rule amendments based on the risk review
for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category?
B. What are the final rule amendments based on the technology
review for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category?
C. What are the final rule amendments addressing emissions
during periods of SSM?
D. What other changes have been made to the NESHAP?
E. What are the effective and compliance dates of the standards?
IV. What is the rationale for our final decisions and amendments for
the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category?
A. Residual Risk Review for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing Source
Category
B. Technology Review for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing Source
Category
C. SSM Provisions
D. Electronic Reporting
V. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts and
Additional Analyses Conducted
A. What are the affected facilities?
B. What are the air quality impacts?
C. What are the cost impacts?
D. What are the economic impacts?
E. What are the benefits?
F. What analysis of environmental justice did we conduct?
G. What analysis of children's environmental health did we
conduct?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Orders 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
Regulated entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated
by this action are shown in Table 1 of this preamble.
Table 1--NESHAP and Industrial Source Categories Affected by This Final
Action
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NESHAP and source category NAICS \1\ code
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR part 63, subpart XXXX, Rubber Tire Manufacturing. 326211,
326212, 314992
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.
Table 1 of this preamble is not intended to be exhaustive, but
rather to provide a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be
affected by the final action for the source category listed. To
determine whether your facility is affected, you should examine the
applicability criteria in the appropriate NESHAP. If you have any
questions regarding the applicability of any aspect of this NESHAP,
please contact the appropriate person listed in the preceding FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble.
B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this final action will also be available on the internet. Following
signature by the EPA Administrator, the EPA will post a copy of this
final action at: https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/rubber-tire-manufacturing-national-emission-standards-hazardous-air.
Following publication in the Federal Register, the EPA will post the
Federal Register version and key technical documents at this same
website.
Additional information is available on the RTR website at https://www.epa.gov/stationary-sources-air-pollution/risk-and-technology-review-national-emissions-standards-hazardous. This information
includes an overview of the RTR program and links to project websites
for the RTR source categories.
C. Judicial Review and Administrative Reconsideration
Under CAA section 307(b)(1), judicial review of this final action
is available only by filing a petition for review in the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the Court) by
September 22, 2020. Under CAA section 307(b)(2), the requirements
established by this final rule may not be challenged separately in any
civil or criminal proceedings brought by the EPA to enforce the
requirements.
Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further provides that only an
objection to a rule or procedure which was raised with reasonable
specificity during the period for public comment (including any public
hearing) may be raised during judicial review. This section also
provides a mechanism for the EPA to reconsider the rule if the person
raising an objection can demonstrate to the Administrator that it was
impracticable to raise such objection within the period for public
comment or if the grounds for such objection arose after the period for
public comment (but within the time specified for judicial review) and
if such objection is of central relevance to the outcome of the rule.
Any person seeking to make such a demonstration should submit a
Petition for Reconsideration to the Office of the Administrator, U.S.
EPA, Room 3000, WJC South Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460, with a copy to both the person(s) listed in the
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section, and the Associate
General Counsel for the Air and Radiation Law Office, Office of General
Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), U.S. EPA, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW,
Washington, DC 20460.
II. Background
A. What is the statutory authority for this action?
Section 112 of the CAA establishes a two-stage regulatory process
to address emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from stationary
sources. In the first stage, we must identify categories of sources
emitting one or more of the HAP listed in CAA section 112(b) and then
promulgate technology-based NESHAP for those sources. ``Major sources''
are those that emit, or have the potential to emit, any single HAP at a
rate of 10 tons per year (tpy) or more, or 25 tpy or more of any
combination of HAP. For major sources, these standards are commonly
referred to as maximum achievable control technology (MACT)
[[Page 44754]]
standards and must reflect the maximum degree of emission reductions of
HAP achievable (after considering cost, energy requirements, and non-
air quality health and environmental impacts). In developing MACT
standards, CAA section 112(d)(2) directs the EPA to consider the
application of measures, processes, methods, systems, or techniques,
including, but not limited to, those that reduce the volume of or
eliminate HAP emissions through process changes, substitution of
materials, or other modifications; enclose systems or processes to
eliminate emissions; collect, capture, or treat HAP when released from
a process, stack, storage, or fugitive emissions point; are design,
equipment, work practice, or operational standards; or any combination
of the above.
For these MACT standards, the statute specifies certain minimum
stringency requirements, which are referred to as MACT floor
requirements, and which may not be based on cost considerations. See
CAA section 112(d)(3). For new sources, the MACT floor cannot be less
stringent than the emission control achieved in practice by the best-
controlled similar source. The MACT standards for existing sources can
be less stringent than floors for new sources, but they cannot be less
stringent than the average emission limitation achieved by the best-
performing 12 percent of existing sources in the category or
subcategory (or the best-performing five sources for categories or
subcategories with fewer than 30 sources). In developing MACT
standards, we must also consider control options that are more
stringent than the floor under CAA section 112(d)(2). We may establish
standards more stringent than the floor, based on the consideration of
the cost of achieving the emissions reductions, any non-air quality
health and environmental impacts, and energy requirements.
In the second stage of the regulatory process, the CAA requires the
EPA to undertake two different analyses, which we refer to as the
technology review and the residual risk review. Under the technology
review, we must review the technology-based standards and revise them
``as necessary (taking into account developments in practices,
processes, and control technologies)'' no less frequently than every 8
years, pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(6). Under the residual risk
review, we must evaluate the risk to public health remaining after
application of the technology-based standards and revise the standards,
if necessary, to provide an ample margin of safety to protect public
health or to prevent, taking into consideration costs, energy, safety,
and other relevant factors, an adverse environmental effect. The
residual risk review is required within 8 years after promulgation of
the technology-based standards, pursuant to CAA section 112(f). In
conducting the residual risk review, if the EPA determines that the
current standards provide an ample margin of safety to protect public
health, it is not necessary to revise the MACT standards pursuant to
CAA section 112(f).\1\ For more information on the statutory authority
for this rule, see 84 FR 58268.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Court has affirmed this approach of implementing CAA
section 112(f)(2)(A): NRDC v. EPA, 529 F.3d 1077, 1083 (D.C. Cir.
2008) (``If EPA determines that the existing technology-based
standards provide an 'ample margin of safety,' then the Agency is
free to readopt those standards during the residual risk
rulemaking.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. What is the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category and how does
the NESHAP regulate HAP emissions from the source category?
The EPA promulgated the Rubber Tire Manufacturing NESHAP on July 9,
2002 (67 FR 45588). The standards are codified at 40 CFR part 63,
subpart XXXX. The rubber tire manufacturing industry consists of
facilities that produce components of rubber tires, which include, but
are not limited to, rubber compounds, sidewalls, tread, tire beads,
tire cord, and liners. The source category covered by this MACT
standard currently includes 21 facilities.
The Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category is subcategorized
into four subcategories, which include rubber processing, tire
production, tire cord production, and puncture sealant application.
Emissions limits in the 2002 NESHAP for the Rubber Tire
Manufacturing source category were set for each subcategory separately:
1. Rubber Processing
There are no emission limits for rubber processing affected
sources.
2. Tire Production
There are two options for compliance under this subcategory. The
first is a HAP constituent option that requires that emissions of each
HAP in Table 16 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart XXXX, not exceed 1,000 grams
HAP per megagram (2 pounds per ton) of total cements and solvents used
at the tire production affected source, and that emissions of each HAP
not in Table 16 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart XXXX, not exceed 10,000
grams HAP per megagram (20 pounds per ton) of total cements and
solvents used at the tire production affected source.
The second emission limit option is a production-based option. For
this option, emissions of HAP must not exceed 0.024 grams per megagram
(0.00005 pounds per ton) of rubber used at the tire production affected
source.
3. Tire Cord Production
There are three options for compliance under this subcategory,
depending, in part, on whether the source is an existing or new source.
The first option is a production-based option for existing tire cord
production affected sources. As part of this option, emissions must not
exceed 280 grams HAP per megagram (0.56 pounds per ton) of fabric
processed at the tire cord production affected source.
The second option is a production-based option for new or
reconstructed tire cord production affected sources. As part of this
option, emissions must not exceed 220 grams HAP per megagram (0.43
pounds per ton) of fabric processed at the tire cord production
affected source.
The third option is a HAP constituent option available to both
existing and new or reconstructed tire cord production affected
sources. As part of this option, emissions of each HAP in Table 16 to
40 CFR part 63, subpart XXXX, must not exceed 1,000 grams HAP per
megagram (2 pounds per ton) of total coatings used at the tire cord
production affected source, and emissions of each HAP not in Table 16
to 40 CFR part 63, subpart XXXX, must not exceed 10,000 grams HAP per
megagram (20 pounds per ton) of total coatings used at the tire cord
production affected source.
4. Puncture Sealant Application
There are three options for compliance under this subcategory,
again depending, in part, on whether the source is an existing or new
source. The first option is a percent reduction option for existing
puncture sealant application spray booths. As part of this option,
facilities are required to reduce spray booth HAP (measured as volatile
organic compounds (VOC)) emissions by at least 86 percent by weight.
The second option is a percent reduction option for new or
reconstructed puncture sealant application spray booths. As part of
this option, facilities are required to reduce spray booth HAP
(measured as VOC) emissions by at least 95 percent by weight.
The third option is a HAP constituent option for both existing and
new or reconstructed puncture sealant
[[Page 44755]]
application spray booths. As part of this option, emissions of each HAP
in Table 16 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart XXXX, must not exceed 1,000
grams HAP per megagram (2 pounds per ton) of total puncture sealants
used at the puncture sealant affected source, and emissions of each HAP
not in Table 16 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart XXXX, must not exceed 10,000
grams HAP per megagram (20 pounds per ton) of total puncture sealants
used at the puncture sealant affected source.
5. Alternatives for Meeting Emission Limits
The three subcategories subject to emission limits (tire
production, tire cord production, and puncture sealant application)
offer compliance alternatives to meet the above-mentioned emission
limits. For more information, a detailed breakdown of the subcategory
alternatives can be found in 40 CFR 63.5985, 40 CFR 63.5987, and 40 CFR
63.5989.
C. What changes did we propose for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source
category in our October 30, 2019, proposal?
On October 30, 2019, the EPA published a proposed rule in the
Federal Register for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing NESHAP, 40 CFR part
63, subpart XXXX, that took into consideration the RTR analyses. In the
proposed rule, we determined that it was not necessary to revise the
standard pursuant to the technology or risk reviews. However, we did
propose revisions to the SSM provisions of the MACT rule in order to
ensure that the regulations are consistent with the Court decision in
Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008). This decision
vacated two provisions in the EPA's ``General Provisions'' implementing
CAA section 112 at 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, that exempted sources
from the requirement to comply with otherwise applicable CAA section
112(d) emission standards during periods of SSM. In addition, we
proposed to require electronic submittal of the NOCS report,
performance test reports, and compliance reports for rubber tire
manufacturing facilities.
III. What is included in this final rule?
This action finalizes the EPA's determinations pursuant to the RTR
provisions of CAA section 112 for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source
category that it is not necessary to revise the standard pursuant to
the technology and risk reviews. This actions also finalizes the
removal of the SSM exemption and the addition of electronic reporting.
A. What are the final rule amendments based on the risk review for the
Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category?
The EPA proposed no changes to the 40 CFR part 63, subpart XXXX,
NESHAP based on the risk review conducted pursuant to CAA section
112(f). We are finalizing our proposed determination that risks from
the source category following implementation of MACT standards are
acceptable, considering all the health information and factors
evaluated, and risk estimation uncertainty. We are also finalizing our
proposed determination that the existing NESHAP provides an ample
margin of safety to protect public health and to prevent an adverse
environmental effect. The EPA received no new data or other information
during the public comment period that affected our determinations.
Therefore, we are not making any revisions to the existing standards,
pursuant to CAA section 112(f), and we are readopting the existing
standards.
B. What are the final rule amendments based on the technology review
for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category?
We determined that there are no developments in practices,
processes, and control technologies. Therefore, we are not revising the
MACT standards under CAA section 112(d)(6).
C. What are the final rule amendments addressing emissions during
periods of SSM?
We are finalizing the proposed amendments to the Rubber Tire
Manufacturing source category to remove and revise provisions related
to SSM. In its 2008 decision in Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019 (D.C.
Cir. 2008), the Court vacated portions of two provisions in the EPA's
CAA section 112 regulations governing the emissions of HAP during
periods of SSM. Specifically, the Court vacated the SSM exemption
contained in 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1) and 40 CFR 63.6(h)(1), holding that
under section 302(k) of the CAA, emissions standards or limitations
must be continuous in nature and that the SSM exemption violates the
CAA's requirement that some CAA section 112 standards apply
continuously. As detailed in section IV.D.1 of the proposal preamble
(84 FR 58268, October 30, 2019), we proposed to remove the SSM
exemptions for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category and
require that the standards apply at all times (see 40 CFR 63.5990(a)),
consistent with the Court decision in Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F. 3d
1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008).
Further, the EPA is not establishing standards for malfunctions. As
discussed in the October 30, 2019, proposal preamble, the EPA
interprets CAA section 112 as not requiring emissions that occur during
periods of malfunction to be factored into development of CAA section
112 standards, although the EPA has the discretion to set standards for
malfunctions where feasible. For the action, it is unlikely that a
malfunction would result in a violation of the standards, and no
comments were submitted that would suggest otherwise. Refer to section
IV.D.1.a of the proposal preamble for further discussion of the EPA's
rationale for the decision not to set standards for malfunctions, as
well as a discussion of the actions a source could take in the unlikely
event that a source fails to comply with the applicable CAA section
112(d) standards as a result of a malfunction event, given that
administrative and judicial procedures for addressing exceedances of
the standards fully recognize that violations may occur despite good
faith efforts to comply and can accommodate those situations.
As is explained in more detail below, we are finalizing revisions
to the General Provisions table to 40 CFR part 63, subpart XXXX, to
eliminate requirements that include rule language providing an
exemption for periods of SSM. We are also making an additional
conforming change to Table 17 of the corresponding line for 40 CFR
63.7(e)(1), and have removed the proposed 180 day compliance period for
removal of the vacated general provisions SSM exemption in 40 CFR
63.6(f)(1). Additionally, we are finalizing our proposal to eliminate
language related to SSM that treats periods of startup and shutdown the
same as periods of malfunction, as explained further below. Finally, we
are finalizing our proposal to revise the compliance report and related
records as they relate to malfunctions, as further described below. As
discussed in the proposal preamble, these revisions are consistent with
the requirement in 40 CFR 63.5990(a), that the standards apply at all
times. Refer to sections III.C.1 through 5 of the proposal preamble for
a detailed discussion of these amendments.
D. What other changes have been made to the NESHAP?
To increase the ease and efficiency of data submittal and data
accessibility, we are finalizing a requirement that owners
[[Page 44756]]
and operators of facilities in the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source
category submit electronic copies of certain required performance test
reports, compliance reports, and NOCS reports through the EPA's Central
Data Exchange (CDX) website. We also are finalizing, as proposed,
provisions that allow facility operators the ability to seek extensions
for submitting electronic reports for circumstances beyond the control
of the facility, (i.e., for a possible outage in the CDX or Compliance
and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI) or for a force majeure
event in the time just prior to a report's due date), as well as the
process to assert such a claim.
Based on comments received during the comment period, the EPA is
modifying the compliance report provision. The regulations currently
require sources to report the emission limit option and the compliance
alternative that they have chosen to meet for each affected source. In
the final rule, we are allowing facilities to report the emission limit
option and compliance alternative at the facility level rather than for
each affected source, if the same emission limit option and compliance
alternative is used across all affected sources at the facility that
are subject to the NESHAP. This change is reflected at 40 CFR
63.6010(c)(7).
We are finalizing a change from proposal to 40 CFR 63.6010(d) and
40 CFR 63.6010(d)(2) to correct typographical errors, and further
clarify the requirements for reporting deviations in the compliance
report.
Lastly, while the electronic reporting template is not part of the
final rule, we note that we are adding a column to the template titled
``actions taken to minimize emissions in accordance with Sec.
63.5990,'' to correspond with 40 CFR 63.6010(d)(3). While stated
correctly in the preamble to the proposed rule, it was accidently
omitted from the electronic reporting template. We are also modifying
the template, consistent with the change to 40 CFR 63.6010(c)(7) to
specify that facilities may report the emission limit option and
compliance alternative at the facility level rather than for each
affected source, if the same emission limit option and compliance
alternative is used across all affected sources at the facility that
are subject to the NESHAP.
E. What are the effective and compliance dates of the standards?
The revisions to the MACT standards being promulgated in this
action are effective on July 24, 2020.
The compliance date for existing affected sources in the Rubber
Tire Manufacturing source category is January 20, 2021, with the
exception of the electronic format for submitting the compliance
reports, and the vacated SSM exemption contained in 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1).
We are revising Table 17 to clarify that for all affected sources, the
vacated SSM exemption does not apply following the Court vacatur in
Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F. 3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008).
For the electronic format for submitting compliance reports, both
existing and new affected sources will have 1 year after the electronic
reporting templates are available on CEDRI, or 1 year after July 24,
2020, whichever is later. The EPA selected these compliance dates based
on experience with similar industries and the EPA's detailed
justification for the selected compliance dates is included in the
preamble to the proposed rule (84 FR 58268).
IV. What is the rationale for our final decisions and amendments for
the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category?
For each issue, this section provides a description of what we
proposed and what we are finalizing for the issue, the EPA's rationale
for the final decisions and amendments, and a summary of key comments
and responses. For all comments not discussed in this preamble, comment
summaries and the EPA's responses can be found in the comment summary
and response document available in the docket.
A. Residual Risk Review for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing Source
Category
1. What did we propose pursuant to CAA section 112(f) for the
Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category?
Pursuant to CAA section 112(f), the EPA conducted a risk review and
presented the results for the review, along with our proposed decisions
regarding risk acceptability and ample margin of safety, in the October
30, 2019, proposed rule for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source
category (84 FR 58268). The results of the risk assessment are
presented briefly in Table 2 of this preamble and in the risk report
titled Residual Risk Assessment for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing
Source Category in Support of the 2020 Risk and Technology Review Final
Rule, and sections III and IV of the proposal preamble (84 FR 58268,
October 30, 2019) available in the docket for this action.
Table 2--Inhalation Risk Assessment Summary for Rubber Tire Manufacturing \1\ Source Category
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum individual Population at increased Annual cancer incidence Maximum chronic Maximum
cancer risk (in 1 risk of cancer >= 1-in-1 (cases per year) based noncancer TOSHI \4\ screening
million) \3\ based on . million based on . . . on . . . based on . . . acute
. . ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ noncancer
Number of facilities \2\ -------------------------- HQ \5\
Actual Allowable Actual Allowable Actual Allowable based on
Actual Allowable emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions emissions actual
emissions emissions level level level level level level emissions
level level level
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21................................. 4 4 4500 4500 0.002 0.002 0.2 0.2 0.4 (REL)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Based on actual and allowable emissions.
\2\ Number of facilities evaluated in the risk assessment. Includes 21 operating facilities subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart XXXX.
\3\ Maximum individual excess lifetime cancer risk due to HAP emissions from the source category.
\4\ Maximum target organ-specific hazard index (TOSHI). The target organ with the highest TOSHI for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category is the
spleen.
\5\ The maximum estimated acute exposure concentration was divided by available short-term threshold values to develop an array of hazard quotient (HQ)
values. HQ values shown use the lowest available acute threshold value, which in most cases is the recommended exposure limit (REL). When an HQ
exceeds 1, we also show the HQ using the next lowest available acute dose-response value. The HQ of 0.4 is based upon an acute REL based upon worst-
case screening values.
As proposed at 84 FR 58268-58301, for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing
source category, the risk analysis indicates that the cancer risk to
the individual most exposed is 4-in-1 million from both actual and
allowable emissions. The risk analysis also estimates a cancer
incidence of 0.002 excess cancer cases per year, or 1 case every 500
years, as well as a maximum chronic noncancer target organ-specific
hazard index value of 0.2 for both actual and allowable emissions. The
results of the acute screening analysis also estimate a maximum acute
noncancer
[[Page 44757]]
HQ screening value of less than 1 based on the acute reference exposure
level. Mixing, extruding, and buffing emissions result in 88 percent of
the cancer incidence for this source category with metal emissions from
mixing, extruding, and buffing contributing 40 percent of the cancer
incidence. Based on the low risks, we proposed risks are acceptable.
We then examined whether additional controls were needed to provide
an ample margin of safety to protect public health or to prevent an
adverse environmental effect. In the original NESHAP rulemaking, we
identified regenerative thermal oxidizers (RTOs) as an option for
further reducing organic HAP emissions, but these controls were
determined to not be cost effective. The associated costs for
installing and operating an RTO have not changed significantly since
the analysis in the original NESHAP.
Based upon the previous analysis, we determined that the costs from
the application of additional controls are not justified considering
the low risks and the small reduction in risk resulting from the
application of additional controls. Therefore, we proposed that the
current NESHAP provides an ample margin of safety to protect public
health.
Lastly, as proposed regarding risk to the environment, we conducted
a Tier 1 and Tier 2 environmental risk screening analysis (see 84 FR
58284-58285). Based on the results of the environmental risk screening
analysis, we do not expect an adverse environmental effect as a result
of HAP emissions from this source category and, therefore, we are
finalizing our determination that it is not necessary to set more
stringent standards to prevent an adverse environmental effect.
2. How did the risk review change for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing
source category?
We did not receive any information that changed our risk or cost
analyses and we are finalizing our proposed conclusion on the risk
review.
3. What key comments did we receive on the risk review, and what are
our responses?
We received several comments regarding the proposed risk review and
our determination that no revisions were warranted under CAA section
112(f)(2). Comments both supported and suggested changes to our risk
review. After review of these comments, we determined that no changes
were necessary. The comments and our specific responses can be found in
the document, Summary of Public Comments and Responses for Rubber Tire
Manufacturing Residual Risk and Technology Review, which is available
in the docket for this action.
4. What is the rationale for our final approach and final decisions for
the risk review?
We evaluated all the comments on the EPA's risk review and
determined that no changes to the review are needed. For the reasons
explained in the proposed rule, we determined that the risks from the
Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category are acceptable, the current
standards provide an ample margin of safety to protect public health,
and more stringent standards are not necessary to prevent an adverse
environmental effect. Therefore, pursuant to CAA section 112(f)(2), we
are finalizing our residual risk determination as proposed.
B. Technology Review for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing Source Category
1. What did we propose pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(6) for the Rubber
Tire Manufacturing source category?
Our review of the developments in technology for the Rubber Tire
Manufacturing source category did not reveal any developments in
practices, processes, and controls. Because our review did not identify
any practices, processes, or controls to reduce emissions in the
category since promulgation of the current NESHAP, we proposed that no
revisions to the NESHAP are necessary pursuant to CAA section
112(d)(6).
2. How did the technology review change for the Rubber Tire
Manufacturing source category?
The technology review did not change from proposal. Therefore, we
are finalizing our determination that no revisions to the NESHAP are
necessary pursuant to CAA section 112(d)(6).
3. What key comments did we receive on the technology review, and what
are our responses?
We received two comments regarding the proposed technology review
and our determination that no revisions were warranted under CAA
section 112(d)(6). The first comment supported our determination
regarding the technology review. The second commenter stated that EPA
legally must set emission limits for rubber processing which currently
is unregulated. In support of their comment, the commenter states, ``As
the Clean Air Act and D.C. Circuit Court precedent make clear, EPA must
set limits on every emitted HAP. See, e.g., Nat'l Lime Ass'n v. EPA,
233 F.3d 625, 633 (D.C. Cir. 2000); 42 U.S.C. 7412(d)(1)-(3). EPA's 42
U.S.C. 7412(d)(6) authority does not allow EPA to ignore any pollutants
while reviewing the emission standards for this source category,
including subcategories. Rather, EPA must review and revise ``as
necessary'' the emission standards for Rubber Processing.''
CAA section 112(d)(6) requires the EPA to review and revise, as
necessary (taking into account developments in practices, processes,
and control technologies), emission standards promulgated under this
section. The EPA reads CAA section 112(d)(6) as a limited provision
requiring the Agency to, at least every 8 years, review the emission
standards already promulgated in the NESHAP and to revise those
standards as necessary taking into account developments in practices,
processes, and control technologies. Under this reading, section
112(d)(6) of the CCA does not impose upon the Agency any obligation to
promulgate new emission standards or expand the scope of an existing
regulation.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ On April 21, 2020, as the Agency was preparing the final
rule for signature, a decision was issued in LEAN v. EPA, 955 F. 3d.
1088 (D.C. Cir. 2020) in which the Court held that the EPA has an
obligation to set standards for unregulated pollutants as part of
technology reviews under CAA section 112(d)(6). At the time of
signature, the mandate in that case had not been issued and the EPA
is continuing to evaluate the decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When the EPA establishes initial standards for previously
unregulated HAP or emissions points, we do so--consistent with CAA
sections 112(d)(2) and (3) or, if the prerequisites are met, CAA
section 112(d)(4). Establishing emissions standards under these
provisions of the CAA involves a different analytical approach from
reviewing emissions standards under CAA section 112(d)(6).
4. What is the rationale for our final approach for the technology
review?
Our technology review looked for add-on control technology that was
not identified during the original NESHAP development and for
improvements to existing add-on controls. We also looked for new work
practices, operational procedures, process changes, pollution
prevention alternatives, coating formulations, or application
techniques that have the potential to reduce emissions. Based on our
review, we did not identify any developments. Since proposal, no
information has been presented to cause us to change the proposed
determination. Consequently, we are finalizing our CAA section
112(d)(6) determination as proposed.
[[Page 44758]]
C. SSM Provisions
1. What did we propose for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source
category?
We proposed amendments to the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source
category to remove and revise provisions related to SSM that are not
consistent with the requirement that the standards apply at all times.
More information concerning the elimination of SSM provisions is in the
preamble to the proposed rule (84 FR 58285-58287, October 30, 2019).
2. How did the SSM provisions change for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing
source category?
We are finalizing the SSM provisions as proposed, while making an
additional conforming change to Table 17 of the corresponding line for
40 CFR 63.7(e)(1) (see 84 FR 58268, October 30, 2019). We are not
including a 180-day compliance period for removal of the general
provisions SSM exemption in 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1), which were vacated by
the Court in Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019 (D.C. Cir. 2008).
3. What key comments did we receive on the SSM provisions, and what are
our responses?
We received one comment related to our proposed revisions to the
SSM provisions. The commenter generally supported the proposed
revisions to the SSM provisions and thus it does not support changes to
the proposed SSM provisions. A summary of the comment and our response
are located in the memorandum titled Summary of Public Comments and
Responses for Rubber Tire Manufacturing Residual Risk and Technology
Review, which is available in the docket for this action.
4. What is the rationale for our final approach for the SSM provisions?
For the reasons explained in the proposed rule, we are finalizing
the amendments to remove and revise provisions related to SSM that are
not consistent with the requirement that the standards apply at all
times. More information concerning the amendments to the SSM provisions
is in the preamble to the proposed rule (84 FR 58285-58287). We are
finalizing, as proposed, the amendments to remove or revise provisions
related to SSM.
Regarding compliance with the removal of the SSM exemption, our
experience with similar industries shows that this sort of regulated
facility generally requires a time period of 180 days to read and
understand the amended rule requirements; to evaluate their operations
to ensure that they can meet the standards during periods of startup
and shutdown as defined in the rule and make any necessary adjustments;
and to update their operation, maintenance, and monitoring plan to
reflect the revised requirements. The EPA recognizes the confusion that
multiple different compliance dates for individual requirements would
create and the additional burden such an assortment of dates would
impose. From our assessment of the time frame needed for compliance
with the entirety of the revised requirements, the EPA considers a
period of 180 days to be the most expeditious compliance period
practicable and, thus, is finalizing that all affected sources that
commenced construction or reconstruction on or before October 30, 2019,
be in compliance with all of this regulation's revised requirements
within 180 days of the regulation's effective date. As stated above, we
are not including a 180-day compliance period for removal of the
general provisions SSM exemption in 40 CFR 63.6(f)(1), which were
vacated by the court in Sierra Club v. EPA, 551 F.3d 1019 (D.C. Cir.
2008).
D. Electronic Reporting
1. What did we propose for the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source
category?
In the October 30, 2019, proposal, we proposed that owners and
operators of facilities subject to the Rubber Tire Manufacturing NESHAP
submit electronic copies of performance test results, compliance
reports, and NOCS reports through the EPA's CDX, using CEDRI. More
information concerning the proposed amendments to electronic reporting
provisions is in the preamble to the proposed rule (84 FR 58288-58289).
A description of the electronic submission process is provided in the
memorandum, Electronic Reporting Requirements for New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS) and National Emissions Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) Rules, August 8, 2018, in the docket
for this action.
We proposed an extension of the reporting deadline may be warranted
due to outages of the EPA's CDX or CEDRI that precludes an owner or
operator from accessing the system and submitting required reports (see
84 FR 58288). Additionally, we proposed that an extension may be
warranted due to a force majeure event, such as an act of nature, act
of war or terrorism, or equipment failure or safety hazards beyond the
control of the facility.
2. How did the electronic reporting provisions change for the Rubber
Tire Manufacturing source category?
Based on comments received during the comment period, the EPA is
modifying the electronic reporting provisions in one respect. The
reporting provisions state that each facility that operates a tire
production affected source record the emission limit option in 40 CFR
63.5984 and the compliance alternative in 40 CFR 63.5985 that it
chooses to meet to comply with the standards. In the final rule, we are
allowing facilities to report the emission limit option at the facility
level instead of for each affected source, if the facility uses the
above-mentioned emission limit option facility wide.
3. What key comments did we receive on the electronic reporting
provisions, and what are our responses?
We received two comments regarding our proposed changes to the
electronic reporting provisions. The first commenter generally
supported the proposed electronic reporting provisions but stated that
there should not be exemptions for force majeure events. The second
commenter asks EPA to align reporting deadlines with state required
reporting deadlines. A summary of the comments and our responses are
located in the memorandum titled Summary of Public Comments and
Responses for Rubber Tire Manufacturing Residual Risk and Technology
Review, which is available in the docket for this action.
Additionally, the second commenter requested that the EPA simplify
the e-reporting template. This commenter stated that the template
currently requires existing facilities to identify each piece of
equipment subject to the Rubber Tire Manufacturing NESHAP and the
emission limit option to which it is subject. The commenter requested,
to reduce reporting burden, that the EPA allow facilities to designate
the manner in which they comply with the MACT for the entire facility,
instead of for each piece of equipment. We first note that the concern
raised by the commenter is a concern with the regulatory text; the
template merely reflects the requirements in the regulation. As stated
in the section above, the EPA agrees with the commenter that reporting
should be allowed at the facility level, if the facility uses the
emission limit option facility wide and EPA is modifying the reporting
requirements in the regulation (see 40 CFR 63.6010(c)(7)),. The
electronic reporting template will be modified to
[[Page 44759]]
be consistent with the change to the regulatory text.
4. What is the rationale for our final approach for the electronic
reporting provisions?
For the reasons explained in the proposed rule and after evaluation
of the comments on the proposed amendments, the EPA is requiring owners
and operators of facilities subject to the Rubber Tire Manufacturing
NESHAP to submit electronic copies of performance test, compliance
reports, and NOCS reports through the EPA's CDX, using CEDRI. The
rationale for the proposed amendments to the electronic reporting
provisions is in the preamble to the proposed rule (84 FR 58268).
Additionally, as stated above, the EPA has determined that
requiring facilities to report the emission limit option for each
affected source (piece of equipment) is unnecessary where the facility
is using the same emission limit option for all affected sources
subject to this standard. In this case, simply reporting the only
utilized emission limit option provides the EPA the same level of
information while reducing unnecessary reporting burden on industry.
V. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts and Additional
Analyses Conducted
A. What are the affected facilities?
The EPA estimates that there are 21 rubber tire manufacturing
facilities that are subject to the Rubber Tire Manufacturing NESHAP
affected by the final amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart XXXX. The
bases of our estimates of affected facilities are provided in the
memorandum, Rubber Tire Major Source Memo, which is available in the
docket for this action. We are not currently aware of any planned or
potential new or reconstructed rubber tire manufacturing facilities in
the source category.
B. What are the air quality impacts?
All major sources in the source category would be required to
comply with the relevant emission standards at all times, including
periods of SSM. We do not anticipate any air quality impacts as a
result of the final amendments as facilities are already in compliance
with emission limits during all periods, including SSM.
C. What are the cost impacts?
The one-time cost associated with reviewing the revised rule and
becoming familiar with the electronic reporting requirements is
estimated to be $6,740 (2017$). The total cost per facility is
estimated to be $321. All other costs associated with notifications,
reporting, and recordkeeping are believed to be unchanged because the
facilities in each source category are currently required to comply
with notification, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements and will
continue to be required to comply with those requirements. The number
of personnel-hours required to develop the materials in support of
reports required by the NESHAP remain unchanged.
D. What are the economic impacts?
Economic impact analyses focus on changes in market prices and
output levels. If changes in market prices and output levels in the
primary markets are significant enough, impacts on other markets may
also be examined. Both the magnitude of costs needed to comply with a
final rule and the distribution of these costs among affected
facilities can have a role in determining how the market will change in
response to a final rule. The total cost associated with this final
rule is estimated to be $6,740, which is a one-time cost associated
with reviewing the revised rule and becoming familiar with the
electronic reporting requirements. The estimated cost per facility is
$321. These costs are not expected to result in a significant market
impact, regardless of whether they are passed on to the purchaser or
absorbed by the firms.
E. What are the benefits?
The EPA does not anticipate reductions in HAP emissions as a result
of the final amendments to the Rubber Tire Manufacturing NESHAP.
However, the final amendments would improve the rule by ensuring that
the standards apply at all times and by requiring electronic submittal
of initial notifications, performance test results, and compliance
reports that would increase the usefulness of the data and would
ultimately result in less burden on the regulated community. Because
these final amendments are not considered economically significant, as
defined by Executive Order 12866, and because no emission reductions
were estimated, we did not estimate any health benefits from reducing
emissions.
F. What analysis of environmental justice did we conduct?
We examined the potential for any environmental justice issues that
might be associated with the source category by performing a
demographic analysis of the population close to the facilities. In this
analysis, we evaluated the distribution of HAP-related cancer and
noncancer risks from the 40 CFR part 63, subpart XXXX source category
across different social, demographic, and economic groups within the
populations living near facilities identified as having the highest
risks. The methodology and the results of the demographic analyses are
included in a technical report, Risk and Technology Review--Analysis of
Demographic Factors for Populations Living Near Rubber Tire
Manufacturing Source Category Operations, available in the docket for
this action (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0392). The results, for
various demographic groups, are based on the estimated risks from
actual emissions levels for the population living within 50 kilometers
(km) of the facilities.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ This metric comes from the Benzene NESHAP. See 54 FR 38046.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The results of the risk analysis indicate that there are
approximately 4,500 people within a 50-km radius of modeled facilities
exposed to a cancer risk greater than or equal to 1-in-1 million as a
result of emissions from Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category
operations. The specific demographic results for minority populations,
low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples, indicate that the
percentage of the population potentially impacted by Rubber Tire
Manufacturing emissions is greater than its corresponding nationwide
percentage for: African American (25 percent for the source category
compared to 12 percent nationwide) and below the poverty level (21
percent for the source category compared to 14 percent nationwide). The
remaining demographic group percentages within 50 km of Rubber Tire
Manufacturing source category operations exposed to a cancer risk
greater than or equal to 1-in-1 million are the same or less than the
corresponding nationwide percentages.
The risks due to HAP emissions from this source category were found
to be acceptable for all populations (e.g., with inhalation cancer
risks less than or equal to 4-in-1 million for all populations and non-
cancer hazard indexes are less than 1). We do not expect this final
rule to achieve significant reductions in HAP emissions. However, this
final rule will provide additional benefits to all populations,
including these demographic groups that have a greater representation
in the 50 km radius of modeled facilities, by improving the compliance,
monitoring, and implementation of the NESHAP.
[[Page 44760]]
G. What analysis of children's environmental health did we conduct?
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 sections
III.A and IV.A and B of the proposal preamble and further documented in
the memorandum, Residual Risk Assessment for the Rubber Tire
Manufacturing Source Category in Support of the 2020 Risk and
Technology Review Final Rule, available in the docket for this action.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.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. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action
because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
The information collection activities in this rule have been
submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA. The Information Collection
Request (ICR) document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR
number 1982.04. 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.
We are finalizing changes to the recordkeeping and reporting
requirements associated with 40 CFR part 63, subpart XXXX, in the form
of eliminating the SSM plan and related reporting requirements;
including reporting requirements for deviations in compliance reports;
and including the requirement for electronic submittal of reports. In
addition, the number of facilities subject to the standards changed
since the original ICR was finalized. The number of respondents was
reduced from 23 to 21 based on consultation with industry
representatives and state/local agencies.
Respondents/affected entities: The respondents to the recordkeeping
and reporting requirements are owners or operators of rubber tire
manufacturing facilities subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart XXXX.
Respondent's obligation to respond: Mandatory (40 CFR part 63,
subpart XXXX).
Estimated number of respondents: 21 facilities.
Frequency of response: The frequency of responses varies depending
on the burden item. Responses include, reports of periodic performance
tests and compliance reports.
Total estimated burden: The annual recordkeeping and reporting
burden for responding facilities to comply with all of the requirements
in the NESHAP, averaged over the 3 years of this ICR, is estimated to
be 5,870 hours (per year). The average annual burden to the Agency over
the 3 years after the amendments are final is estimated to be 156 hours
(per year) for the Agency. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: The annual recordkeeping and reporting cost
after amendments for responding facilities to comply with all of the
requirements in the NESHAP, averaged over the 3 years of this ICR, is
estimated to be $819,000 (rounded, per year). Amendments for this
rulemaking account for $6,740 (2017$) of the $819,000 (rounded, per
year). The total cost per facility is estimated to be $321. There are
no estimated capital and operation and maintenance costs. The total
average annual Agency cost over the first 3 years after the amendments
are final is estimated to be $7,330.
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.
D. 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. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities, since there
are no small entities in the source category.
E. 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. While this action
creates an enforceable duty on the private sector, the cost does not
exceed $100 million or more.
F. 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.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action has tribal implications. However, it will neither
impose substantial direct compliance costs on federally recognized
tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law. Two facilities subject to
this rulemaking are located on tribal land.
The EPA consulted with tribal officials under the EPA Policy on
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes early in the process
of developing this regulation to permit them to have meaningful and
timely input into its development. A summary of that consultation is
provided in the Rubber Tire Tribal Consultation Letter, available in
the docket for this rulemaking.
H. 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
sections III.A and IV.A and B of the proposal preamble and further
documented in the memorandum, Residual Risk Assessment for the Rubber
Tire Manufacturing Source Category in Support of the 2020 Risk and
Technology Review Final Rule, available in the docket for this action.
[[Page 44761]]
I. 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.
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations, and/or indigenous peoples, as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The documentation for this decision is contained in sections IV.A,
IV.B, IV.F, and IV.G of the proposal preamble. As discussed in sections
IV.A, IV.B, IV.F, and IV.G of the proposal preamble, we performed a
demographic analysis for the source category, which is an assessment of
risks to individual demographic groups, of the population close to the
facilities (within 50 km and within 5 km). The results of this
evaluation are contained in the memorandum, Risk and Technology
Review--Analysis of Demographic Factors for Populations Living Near
Rubber Tire Manufacturing Source Category Operations, which is
available in the docket for this action.
L. 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.
Andrew Wheeler,
Administrator.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the EPA is amending 40
CFR part 63 as follows:
PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES
0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
Subpart XXXX--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Rubber Tire Manufacturing
0
2. Section 63.5990 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a), (b), (d), (f) introductory text, (f)(2) and
(3); and
0
b. Adding paragraph (f)(4).
The revisions and addition read as follows:
Sec. 63.5990 What are my general requirements for complying with
this subpart?
(a) Before January 21, 2021, you must be in compliance with the
applicable emission limitations specified in Tables 1 through 4 to this
subpart at all times, except during periods of startup, shutdown, and
malfunction if you are using a control device to comply with an
emission limit. After January 20, 2021, you must be in compliance with
the applicable emission limitations specified in Tables 1 through 4 to
this subpart at all times.
(b) Before January 21, 2021, except as provided in Sec.
63.5982(b)(4), you must always operate and maintain your affected
source, including air pollution control and monitoring equipment,
according to the provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i). After January 20,
2021, at all times, you 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 you 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.
* * * * *
(d) Before January 21, 2021, for each affected source that complies
with the emission limits in Tables 1 through 3 to this subpart using a
control device, you must develop a written startup, shutdown, and
malfunction plan according to the provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(3). After
January 20, 2021, a startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan is not
required.
* * * * *
(f) Before January 21, 2021, in your site-specific monitoring plan,
you must also address the ongoing procedures specified in paragraphs
(f)(1) through (3) of this section as follows. After January 20, 2021,
in your site-specific monitoring plan, you must also address the
ongoing procedures specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (4) of this
section as follows.
* * * * *
(2) Before January 21, 2021, ongoing data quality assurance
procedures in accordance with the general requirements of Sec.
63.8(d). After January 20, 2021, ongoing data quality assurance
procedures in accordance with the general requirements of Sec.
63.8(d)(1) and (2).
(3) Before January 21, 2021, ongoing recordkeeping and reporting
procedures in accordance with the general requirements of Sec.
63.10(c), (e)(1), and (e)(2)(i). After January 20, 2021, the owner or
operator shall keep these written procedures on record for the life of
the affected source or until the affected source is no longer subject
to the provisions of this part, to be made available for inspection,
upon request, by the Administrator. If the performance evaluation plan
is revised, the owner or operator shall keep previous (i.e.,
superseded) versions of the performance evaluation plan on record to be
made available for inspection, upon request, by the Administrator, for
a period of 5 years after each revision to the plan. The program of
corrective action should be included in the plan required under Sec.
63.8(d)(2); and
(4) After January 20, 2021, ongoing recordkeeping and reporting
procedures in accordance with the general requirements of Sec.
63.10(c), (e)(1), and (e)(2)(i).
0
3. Section 63.5993 is amended by revising paragraphs (c) and (d) to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.5993 What performance tests and other procedures must I use?
* * * * *
(c) Before January 21, 2021, you may not conduct performance tests
during periods startup, shutdown, or malfunction, as specified in Sec.
63.7(e)(1). After January 20, 2021, performance tests shall be
conducted under such conditions as the Administrator specifies to the
owner or operator based
[[Page 44762]]
on representative performance of the affected source for the period
being tested. Representative conditions exclude periods of startup and
shutdown unless specified by the Administrator or an applicable
subpart. 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.
(d) Before January 21, 2021, You must conduct three separate test
runs for each performance test required in this section, as specified
in Sec. 63.7(e)(1) unless otherwise specified in the test method. Each
test run must last at least 1 hour. After January 20, 2021, you must
conduct three separate test runs for each performance test required in
this section, as specified in Sec. 63.5993(c) above, unless otherwise
specified in the test method. Each test run must last at least 1 hour.
* * * * *
0
4. Section 63.5995 is amended by revising paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.5995 What are my monitoring installation, operation, and
maintenance requirements?
* * * * *
(d) For any other control device, or for other capture systems,
ensure that the CPMS is operated according to a monitoring plan
submitted to the Administrator with the Notification of Compliance
Status report required by Sec. 63.9(h). The monitoring plan must meet
the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (d)(1) through (3) of this
section. Conduct monitoring in accordance with the plan submitted to
the Administrator unless comments received from the Administrator
require an alternate monitoring scheme.
* * * * *
0
5. Section 63.6009 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (e)(2); and
0
b. Adding paragraph (k)
The revision and addition read as follows:
Sec. 63.6009 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(2) Before January 21, 2021, for each initial compliance
demonstration required in tables 6 through 8 to this subpart that
includes a performance test conducted according to the requirements in
table 5 to this subpart, you must submit the Notification of Compliance
Status, including the performance test results, before the close of
business on the 60th calendar day following the completion of the
performance test according to Sec. 63.10(d)(2). After January 20,
2021, for each initial compliance demonstration required in tables 6
through 8 to this subpart that includes a performance test conducted
according to the requirements in table 5 to this subpart, you must
submit the Notification of Compliance Status, including the performance
test results, before the close of business on the 60th calendar day
following the completion of the performance test according to Sec.
63.10(d)(2) and Sec. 63.6010(h)(1) through (3).
* * * * *
(k) You must submit to the Administrator notification reports of
the following recorded information. Beginning on January 21, 2021 or
once the reporting form has been available on the Compliance and
Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI) website for 1-year,
whichever date is later, you must submit all subsequent notification of
compliance status reports required in Sec. Sec. 63.9(h) and 63.6009(d)
through (i) to the EPA via the CEDRI. The CEDRI interface can be
accessed through the EPA's Central Data Exchange (CDX) (https://cdx.epa.gov). You must use the appropriate electronic report form
(i.e., template) on the CEDRI website (https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/cedri) for this subpart. The date on which the
report form becomes available will be listed on the CEDRI website. If
the reporting form for the notification of compliance status report
specific to this subpart is not available in CEDRI at the time that the
report is due, you must submit the report to the Administrator at the
appropriate addresses listed in Sec. 63.13. Once the form has been
available in CEDRI for 1 year, you must begin submitting all subsequent
notification of compliance status reports via CEDRI. The applicable
notification must be submitted by the deadline specified in this
subpart, regardless of the method in which the report is submitted. The
EPA will make all the information submitted through CEDRI available to
the public without further notice to you. Do not use CEDRI to submit
information you claim as confidential business information (CBI).
Anything submitted using CEDRI cannot later be claimed to be CBI.
Although we do not expect persons to assert a claim of CBI, if persons
wish to assert a CBI, if you claim that some of the information
required to be submitted via CEDRI is CBI, submit a complete report,
including information claimed to be CBI, to the EPA. The report must be
generated using the appropriate electronic reporting form found on the
CEDRI website. Submit the file on a compact disc, flash drive, or other
commonly used electronic storage medium and clearly mark the medium as
CBI. Mail the electronic medium to U.S. EPA/OAQPS/CORE CBI Office,
Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old
Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same file with the CBI omitted shall be
submitted to the EPA via the EPA's CDX CEDRI as described earlier in
this paragraph. All CBI claims must be asserted at the time of
submission. Furthermore, under CAA section 114(c) emissions data is not
entitled to confidential treatment and requires EPA to make emissions
data available to the public. Thus, emissions data will not be
protected as CBI and will be made publicly available. Where applicable,
you may assert a claim of the EPA system outage, in accordance with
Sec. 63.6010(i), or force majeure, in accordance with Sec.
63.6010(j), for failure to timely comply with this requirement.
0
6. Section 63.6010 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (b)(2) and (4);
0
b. Revising paragraphs (c)(4) and (7);
0
c. Revising paragraphs (d) introductory text, (1), and (2), and adding
paragraph (d)(3);
0
d. Revising paragraph (g); and
0
e. Adding paragraphs (h) through (j).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 63.6010 What reports must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) Before January 21, 2021, the first semiannual compliance report
must be postmarked or delivered no later than July 31 or January 31,
whichever date follows the end of the first calendar half after the
compliance date that is specified for your affected source in Sec.
63.5983. After January 20, 2021, the first semiannual compliance report
must be submitted electronically via CEDRI no later than July 31 or
January 31, whichever date follows the end of the first calendar half
after the compliance date that is specified for your affected source in
Sec. 63.5983.
* * * * *
(4) Before January 21, 2021, each subsequent semiannual compliance
report must be postmarked or delivered no later than July 31 or January
31,
[[Page 44763]]
whichever date is the first date following the end of the semiannual
reporting period. After January 20, 2021, each subsequent semiannual
compliance report must be submitted electronically via CEDRI no later
than July 31 or January 31, whichever date is the first date following
the end of the semiannual reporting period.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(4) Before January 21, 2021, if you had a startup, shutdown and
malfunction during the reporting period and you took actions consistent
with your startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan, the compliance
report must include the information in Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(i). After
January 20, 2021, a startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan is not
required.
* * * * *
(7) Before January 21, 2021, for each tire production affected
source, the emission limit option in Sec. 63.5984 and the compliance
alternative in Sec. 63.5985 that you have chosen to meet. After
January 20, 2021, for each tire production affected source, the
emission limit option in Sec. 63.5984 and the compliance alternative
in Sec. 63.5985 that you have chosen to meet. If you have chosen the
same emission limit option and compliance alternative for every tire
production affected source at your facility, then you may report the
emission limit option and compliance alternative for the facility
rather than for each tire production affected source.
* * * * *
(d) Before January 21, 2021, for each deviation from an emission
limitation (emission limit or operating limit) that occurs at an
affected source where you are not using a CPMS to comply with the
emission limitations in this subpart, the compliance report must
contain the information in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) and paragraphs
(d)(1) and (2) of this section. This includes periods of startup,
shutdown, and malfunction when the affected source is operating. After
January 20, 2021, for each deviation from an emission limitation
(emission limit or operating limit) that occurs at an affected source
where you are not using a CPMS to comply with the emission limitations
in this subpart, the compliance report must contain the information in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) and (d)(1) through (3) of this section.
This includes periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction when the
affected source is operating.
(1) Before January 20, 2021 the total operating time of each
affected source during the reporting period. After January 20, 2021, 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 each failure.
(2) Before January 20, 2021 information on the number, duration,
and cause of deviations (including unknown cause, if applicable) and
the corrective action taken. After January 20, 2021, for each failure
to meet an applicable standard, record and retain a list of the cause
of deviations (including unknown cause, if applicable), affected
sources or equipment, an estimate of the quantity of each regulated
pollutant emitted over any emission limit and a description of the
method used to estimate the emissions.
(3) After January 20, 2021, record actions taken to minimize
emissions in accordance with Sec. 63.5990, and any corrective actions
taken to return the affected unit to its normal or usual manner of
operation.
* * * * *
(g) Before July 24, 2021, or once the reporting form has been
available on the CEDRI website for 1-year, whichever date is later, if
acceptable to both the Administrator and you, you may submit reports
and notifications electronically. Beginning on July 24, 2021, or once
the reporting form has been available on the CEDRI website for 1-year,
whichever date is later, you must submit compliance reports required in
Sec. 63.6010(c)(1) through (10), as applicable, to the EPA via the
CEDRI. The CEDRI interface can be accessed through the EPA's CDX
(https://cdx.epa.gov). You must use the appropriate electronic report
form on the CEDRI website (https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/cedri) for this subpart. The date on which the report
form becomes available will be listed on the CEDRI website. If the
reporting form for the compliance report specific to this subpart is
not available in CEDRI at the time that the report is due, you must
submit the report to the Administrator at the appropriate addresses
listed in Sec. 63.13. Once the form has been available in CEDRI for 1-
year, you must begin submitting all subsequent reports via CEDRI. The
reports must be submitted by the deadlines specified in this subpart,
regardless of the method in which the reports are submitted. The EPA
will make all the information submitted through CEDRI available to the
public without further notice to you. Do not use CEDRI to submit
information you claim as CBI. Anything submitted using CEDRI cannot
later be claimed to be CBI. Although we do not expect persons to assert
a claim of CBI, if persons wish to assert a CBI, if you claim that some
of the information required to be submitted via CEDRI is CBI, submit a
complete report, including information claimed to be CBI, to the EPA.
The report must be generated using the appropriate electronic reporting
form found on the CEDRI website. Submit the file on a compact disc,
flash drive, or other commonly used electronic storage medium and
clearly mark the medium as CBI. Mail the electronic medium to U.S. EPA/
OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group Leader, Measurement Policy
Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd., Durham, NC 27703. The same file
with the CBI omitted shall be submitted to the EPA via the EPA's CDX
CEDRI as described earlier in this paragraph. All CBI claims must be
asserted at the time of submission. Furthermore, under CAA section
114(c) emissions data is not entitled to confidential treatment and
requires EPA to make emissions data available to the public. Thus,
emissions data will not be protected as CBI and will be made publicly
available.
(h) After January 20, 2021, if you use a control system (add-on
control device and capture system) to meet the emission limitations,
you must also conduct a performance test at least once every 5 years
following your initial compliance demonstration to verify control
system performance and reestablish operating parameters or operating
limits for control systems used to comply with the emissions limits.
Within 60 days after the date of completing each performance test
required by this subpart, you must submit the results of the
performance test following the procedures specified in paragraphs
(h)(1) through (3) of this section.
(1) Data collected using test methods supported by the EPA's
Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT) as listed on the EPA's ERT website
(https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/electronic-reporting-tool-ert) at the time of the test. Submit the results of the
performance test to the EPA via the CEDRI, which can be accessed
through the EPA's CDX (https://cdx.epa.gov/). The data must be
submitted in a file format generated through the use of the EPA's ERT.
Alternatively, you may submit an electronic file consistent with the
extensible markup language (XML) schema listed on the EPA's ERT
website.
(2) Data collected using test methods that are not supported by the
EPA's ERT as listed on the EPA's ERT website at the time of the test.
The results of the
[[Page 44764]]
performance test must be included as an attachment in the ERT or an
alternate electronic file consistent with the XML schema listed on the
EPA's ERT website. Submit the ERT generated package or alternative file
to the EPA via CEDRI.
(3) CBI. If you claim some of the information submitted under
paragraph (h) of this section is CBI, you must submit a complete file,
including information claimed to be CBI, to the EPA. The file must be
generated through the use of the EPA's ERT or an alternate electronic
file consistent with the XML schema listed on the EPA's ERT website.
Submit the file on a compact disc, flash drive, or other commonly used
electronic storage medium and clearly mark the medium as CBI. Mail the
electronic medium to U.S. EPA/OAQPS/CORE CBI Office, Attention: Group
Leader, Measurement Policy Group, MD C404-02, 4930 Old Page Rd.,
Durham, NC 27703. The same file with the CBI omitted must be submitted
to the EPA via the EPA's CDX as described in paragraph (h) of this
section. All CBI claims must be asserted at the time of submission.
Furthermore, under CAA section 114(c) emissions data is not entitled to
confidential treatment and requires EPA to make emissions data
available to the public. Thus, emissions data will not be protected as
CBI and will be made publicly available.
(i) After January 20, 2021 if you are required to electronically
submit a report or notification (i.e., Notification of Compliance
Status Report) through CEDRI in the EPA's CDX, you may assert a claim
of the EPA system outage for failure to timely comply with the
reporting requirement. To assert a claim of the EPA system outage, you
must meet the requirements outlined in paragraphs (i)(1) through (7) of
this section.
(1) You must have been or will be precluded from accessing CEDRI
and submitting a required report or notification within the time
prescribed due to an outage of either the EPA's CEDRI or CDX systems.
(2) The outage must have occurred within the period of time
beginning 5 business days prior to the date that the submission is due.
(3) The outage may be planned or unplanned.
(4) You must submit notification to the Administrator in writing as
soon as possible following the date you first knew, or through due
diligence should have known, that the event may cause or has caused a
delay in reporting.
(5) You must provide to the Administrator a written description
identifying:
(i) The date(s) and time(s) when CDX or CEDRI was accessed and the
system was unavailable;
(ii) A rationale for attributing the delay in reporting beyond the
regulatory deadline to the EPA system outage;
(iii) Measures taken or to be taken to minimize the delay in
reporting; and
(iv) The date by which you propose to report, or if you have
already met the reporting requirement at the time of the notification,
the date you reported.
(6) The decision to accept the claim of the EPA system outage and
allow an extension to the reporting deadline is solely within the
discretion of the Administrator.
(7) In any circumstance, the report or notification must be
submitted electronically as soon as possible after the outage is
resolved.
(j) After January 20, 2021 if you are required to electronically
submit a report or notification (i.e., Notification of Compliance
Status Report) through CEDRI in the EPA's CDX, you may assert a claim
of force majeure for failure to timely comply with the reporting
requirement. To assert a claim of force majeure, you must meet the
requirements outlined in paragraphs (j)(1) through (5) of this section.
(1) You may submit a claim if a force majeure event is about to
occur, occurs, or has occurred or there are lingering effects from such
an event within the period of time beginning five business days prior
to the date the submission is due. For the purposes of this section, a
force majeure event is defined as an event that will be or has been
caused by circumstances beyond the control of the affected facility,
its contractors, or any entity controlled by the affected facility that
prevents you from complying with the requirement to submit a report
electronically within the time period prescribed. Examples of such
events are acts of nature (e.g., hurricanes, earthquakes, or floods),
acts of war or terrorism, or equipment failure or safety hazard beyond
the control of the affected facility (e.g., large scale power outage).
(2) You must submit notification to the Administrator in writing as
soon as possible following the date you first knew, or through due
diligence should have known, that the event may cause or has caused a
delay in reporting.
(3) You must provide to the Administrator:
(i) A written description of the force majeure event;
(ii) A rationale for attributing the delay in reporting beyond the
regulatory deadline to the force majeure event;
(iii) Measures taken or to be taken to minimize the delay in
reporting; and
(iv) The date by which you propose to report, or if you have
already met the reporting requirement at the time of the notification,
the date you reported.
(4) The decision to accept the claim of force majeure and allow an
extension to the reporting deadline is solely within the discretion of
the Administrator.
(5) In any circumstance, the reporting must occur as soon as
possible after the force majeure event occurs.
0
7. Section 63.6011 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a)(3); and
0
b. Adding paragraph (e).
The revision and addition read as follows:
Sec. 63.6011 What records must I keep?
(a) * * *
(3) Before January 21, 2021, the records in Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii)
through (v) related to startup, shutdown, and malfunction. After
January 20, 2021, it is not required to keep records in Sec.
63.6(e)(3)(iii) through (v) related to startup, shutdown, and
malfunction.
* * * * *
(e) After January 20, 2021 any records required to be maintained by
this subpart that are submitted electronically via the EPA's CEDRI may
be maintained in electronic format. This ability to maintain electronic
copies does not affect the requirement for facilities to make records,
data, and reports available upon request to a delegated air agency or
the EPA as part of an on-site compliance evaluation.
0
8. Section 63.6015 is amended by revising the definition for
``Deviation'' to read as follows:
Sec. 63.6015 What definitions apply to this part?
* * * * *
Deviation means any instance in which an affected source, subject
to this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source:
(1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this
subpart including, but not limited to, any emission limitation
(including any operating limit) 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) Before January 21, 2021, fails to meet any emission limitation
(including any operating limit) or work practice standard in this
subpart during startup, shutdown, and malfunction, regardless of
whether or not such failure is permitted by this subpart. On and after
[[Page 44765]]
January 21, 2021, this paragraph no longer applies.
* * * * *
0
9. Table 15 of Subpart XXXX is revised to read as follows:
Table 15 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Requirements for Reports
[As stated in Sec. 63.6010, you must submit each report that applies to you according to the following table]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You must submit a(n) The report must contain . . . You must submit the report . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Compliance report a. If there are no deviations from Semiannually according to the
any emission limitations that apply requirements in Sec. 63.6010(b),
to you, a statement that there were unless you meet the requirements
no deviations from the emission for annual reporting in Sec.
limitations during the reporting 63.6010(f).
period. If there were no periods
during which the CPMS was out-of-
control as specified in Sec.
63.8(c)(7), a statement that there
were no periods during which the
CPMS was out-of-control during the
reporting period
b. If you have a deviation from any Semiannually according to the
emission limitation during the requirements in Sec. 63.6010(b),
reporting period at an affected unless you meet the requirements
source where you are not using a for annual reporting in Sec.
CPMS, the report must contain the 63.6010(f).
information in Sec. 63.6010(d).
If the deviation occurred at a
source where you are using a CMPS
or if there were periods during
which the CPMS were out-of-control
as specified in Sec. 63.8(c)(7),
the report must contain the
information required by Sec.
63.5990(f)(3)
c. Before January 21, 2021, If you Before January 21, 2021,
had a startup, shutdown, and semiannually according to the
malfunction during the reporting requirements in Sec. 63.6010(b),
period and you took actions unless you meet the requirements
consistent with your startup, for annual reporting in Sec.
shutdown, and malfunction plan, the 63.6010(f). After January 20, 2021,
compliance report must include the this information is no longer
information in Sec. required.
63.10(d)(5)(i). After January 20,
2021, this information is no longer
required
2. Before January 21, 2021, a. Before January 21, 2021, actions Before January 21, 2021, by fax or
immediate startup, shutdown, and taken for the event. After January telephone within 2 working days
malfunction report if you had a 20, 2021, this report is no longer after starting actions inconsistent
startup, shutdown, and malfunction required with the plan. After January 20,
during the reporting period that is 2021, this report is no longer
not consistent with your startup, required.
shutdown, and malfunction plan.
After January 20, 2021, this report
is no longer required
b. Before January 21, 2021, the Before January 21, 2021, by letter
information in Sec. within 7 working days after the end
63.10(d)(5)(ii). After January 20, of the event unless you have made
2021, this report is no longer alternative arrangements with the
required permitting authority (Sec.
63.10(d)(5)(ii)). After January 20,
2021, this report is no longer
required.
3. Performance Test Report If you use a control system (add-on Conduct a performance test at least
control device and capture system) once every 5 years following your
to meet the emission limitations initial compliance demonstration
according to the requirements in
Sec. 63.5993.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
10. Table 17 of Subpart XXXX is revised to read as follows:
Before January 21, 2021, as stated in Sec. 63.6013, you must
comply with the applicable General Provisions (GP) requirements
according to the following table:
Table 17 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to This Subpart XXXX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to Subpart XXXX?
Brief description of ----------------------------------------
Citation Subject applicable sections Using a control Not using a
device control device
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1............. Applicability...... Initial applicability Yes................ Yes.
determination;
applicability after
standard established;
permit requirements;
extensions;
notifications.
Sec. 63.2............. Definitions........ Definitions for part 63 Yes................ Yes.
standards.
Sec. 63.3............. Units and Units and abbreviations Yes................ Yes.
Abbreviations. for part 63 standards.
Sec. 63.4............. Prohibited Prohibited activities; Yes................ Yes.
Activities. compliance date;
circumvention;
severability.
Sec. 63.5............. Construction/ Applicability; Yes................ Yes.
Reconstruction. applications; approvals.
Sec. 63.6(a).......... Applicability...... GP apply unless Yes................ Yes.
compliance extension;
GP apply to area
sources that become
major.
Sec. 63.6(b)(1)-(4)... Compliance Dates Standards apply at Yes................ Yes.
for New and effective date; 3 years
Reconstructed after effective date;
Sources. upon startup; 10 years
after construction or
reconstruction
commences for CAA
section 112(f).
Sec. 63.6(b)(5)....... Notification....... Must notify if commenced Yes................ Yes.
construction or
reconstruction after
proposal.
Sec. 63.6(b)(6)....... [Reserved]......... ........................ ................... ..................
Sec. 63.6(b)(7)....... Compliance Dates ........................ No................. No.
for New and
Reconstructed Area
Sources that
Become Major.
[[Page 44766]]
Sec. 63.6(c)(1)-(2)... Compliance Dates Comply according to date Yes................ Yes.
for Existing in subpart, which must
Sources. be no later than 3
years after effective
date; for CAA section
112(f) standards,
comply within 90 days
of effective date
unless compliance
extension.
Sec. 63.6(c)(3)-(4)... [Reserved]
Sec. 63.6(c)(5)....... Compliance Dates Area sources that become Yes................ Yes.
for Existing Area major must comply with
Sources that major source standards
Become Major. by date indicated in
subpart or by
equivalent time period
(for example, 3 years).
Sec. 63.6(d).......... [Reserved]
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)-(2)... Operation & Operate to minimize Yes................ Yes.
Maintenance. emissions at all times;
correct malfunctions as
soon as practicable;
and operation and
maintenance
requirements
independently
enforceable;
information
Administrator will use
to determine if
operation and
maintenance
requirements were met.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)....... Startup, Shutdown, ........................ Yes................ No.
and Malfunction
Plan.
Sec. 63.6(f)(1)....... Compliance Except ........................ No. See Sec. No.
During Startup, 63.5990(a).
Shutdown, and
Malfunction.
Sec. 63.6(f)(2)-(3)... Methods for Compliance based on Yes................ Yes.
Determining performance test;
Compliance. operation and
maintenance plans;
records; inspection.
Sec. 63.6(g)(1)-(3)... Alternative Procedures for getting Yes................ Yes.
Standard. an alternative standard.
Sec. 63.6(h).......... Opacity/Visible ........................ No................. No.
Emission (VE)
Standards.
Sec. 63.6(i).......... Compliance Procedures and criteria Yes................ Yes.
Extension. for Administrator to
grant compliance
extension.
Sec. 63.6(j).......... Presidential President may exempt Yes................ Yes.
Compliance source category from
Exemption. requirement to comply
with rule.
Sec. 63.7(a)(1)-(2)... Performance Test ........................ No................. No.
Dates.
Sec. 63.7(a)(3)....... CAA section 114 Administrator may Yes................ No.
Authority. require a performance
test under CAA section
114 at any time.
Sec. 63.7(b)(1)....... Notification of Must notify Yes................ No.
Performance Test. Administrator 60 days
before the test.
Sec. 63.7(b)(2)....... Notification of If rescheduling a Yes................ No.
Rescheduling. performance test is
necessary, must notify
Administrator 5 days
before scheduled date
of rescheduled date.
Sec. 63.7(c).......... Quality Assurance/ Requirement to submit Yes................ No.
Test Plan. site-specific test plan
60 days before the test
or on date
Administrator agrees
with: test plan
approval procedures;
performance audit
requirements; and
internal and external
quality assurance
procedures for testing.
Sec. 63.7(d).......... Testing Facilities. Requirements for testing Yes................ No.
facilities.
Sec. 63.7(e)(1)....... Conditions for Performance tests must Yes................ No.
Conducting be conducted under
Performance Tests. representative
conditions; cannot
conduct performance
tests during startup,
shutdown, and
malfunction; not a
violation to exceed
standard during
startup, shutdown, and
malfunction.
Sec. 63.7(e)(2)....... Conditions for Must conduct according Yes................ No.
Conducting to rule and the EPA
Performance Tests. test methods unless
Administrator approves
alternative.
Sec. 63.7(e)(3)....... Test Run Duration.. Must have three test Yes................ No.
runs of at least 1 hour
each; compliance is
based on arithmetic
mean of three runs; and
conditions when data
from an additional test
run can be used.
Sec. 63.7(f).......... Alternative Test Procedures by which Yes................ No.
Method. Administrator can grant
approval to use an
alternative test method.
Sec. 63.7(g).......... Performance Test Must include raw data in Yes................ No.
Data Analysis. performance test
report; must submit
performance test data
60 days after end of
test with the
Notification of
Compliance Status
report; and keep data
for 5 years.
Sec. 63.7(h).......... Waiver of Tests.... Procedures for Yes................ No.
Administrator to waive
performance test.
Sec. 63.8(a)(1)....... Applicability of Subject to all Yes................ Yes.
Monitoring monitoring requirements
Requirements. in standard.
Sec. 63.8(a)(2)....... Performance Performance Yes................ No.
Specifications. Specifications in
appendix B of 40 CFR
part 60 apply.
Sec. 63.8(a)(3)....... [Reserved]
Sec. 63.8(a)(4)....... Monitoring with ........................ No................. No.
Flares.
Sec. 63.8(b)(1)....... Monitoring......... Must conduct monitoring Yes................ Yes.
according to standard
unless Administrator
approves alternative.
Sec. 63.8(b)(2)-(3)... Multiple Effluents Specific requirements Yes................ Yes.
and Multiple for installing
Monitoring Systems. monitoring systems;
must install on each
effluent before it is
combined and before it
is released to the
atmosphere unless
Administrator approves
otherwise; if more than
one monitoring system
on an emission point,
must report all
monitoring system
results, unless one
monitoring system is a
backup.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)....... Monitoring System Maintain monitoring Applies as modified No.
Operation and system in a manner by Sec.
Maintenance. consistent with good 63.5990(e) and (f).
air pollution control
practices.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(i).... Routine and ........................ No................. No.
Predictable
Startup, Shutdown,
and Malfunction.
[[Page 44767]]
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(ii)... Startup, Shutdown, ........................ No................. No.
and Malfunction
not in Startup,
Shutdown, and
Malfunction Plan.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(iii).. Compliance with How Administrator Yes................ Yes.
Operation and determines if source
Maintenance complying with
Requirements. operation and
maintenance
requirements; review of
source operation and
maintenance procedures,
records, manufacturer's
instructions,
recommendations, and
inspection of
monitoring system.
Sec. 63.8(c)(2)-(3)... Monitoring System Must install to get Yes................ No.
Installation. representative emission
and parameter
measurements; must
verify operational
status before or at
performance test.
Sec. 63.8(c)(4)....... CMS Requirements... ........................ Applies as modified No.
by Sec.
63.5990(f).
Sec. 63.8(c)(5)....... Continuous Opacity ........................ No................. No.
Monitoring Systems
Minimum Procedures.
Sec. 63.8(c)(6)....... CMS Requirements... ........................ Applies as modified No.
by Sec.
63.5990(e).
Sec. 63.8(c)(7)-(8)... CMS Requirements... Out-of-control periods, Yes................ No.
including reporting.
Sec. 63.8(d).......... CMS Quality Control ........................ Applies as modified No.
by Sec.
63.5990(e) and (f).
Sec. 63.8(e).......... CMS Performance ........................ No................. No.
Evaluation.
Sec. 63.8(f)(1)-(5)... Alternative Procedures for Yes................ Yes.
Monitoring Method. Administrator to
approve alternative
monitoring.
Sec. 63.8(f)(6)....... Alternative to ........................ No................. No.
Relative Accuracy
Test.
Sec. 63.8(g).......... Data Reduction..... ........................ Applies as modified No.
by Sec.
63.5990(f).
Sec. 63.9(a).......... Notification Applicability and state Yes................ Yes.
Requirements. delegation.
Sec. 63.9(b)(1)-(5)... Initial Submit notification 120 Yes................ Yes.
Notifications. days after effective
date; notification of
intent to construct/
reconstruct,
notification of
commencement of
construct/reconstruct,
notification of
startup; and contents
of each.
Sec. 63.9(c).......... Request for Can request if cannot Yes................ Yes.
Compliance comply by date or if
Extension. installed best
available control
technology or lowest
achievable emission
rate.
Sec. 63.9(d).......... Notification of For sources that Yes................ Yes.
Special Compliance commence construction
Requirements for between proposal and
New Source. promulgation and want
to comply 3 years after
effective date.
Sec. 63.9(e).......... Notification of Notify Administrator 60 Yes................ No.
Performance Test. days prior.
Sec. 63.9(f).......... Notification of VE/ No...................... No................. ..................
Opacity Test.
Sec. 63.9(g).......... Additional No...................... No................. ..................
Notifications When
Using CMS.
Sec. 63.9(h).......... Notification of Contents; due 60 days Yes................ Yes.
Compliance Status. after end of
performance test or
other compliance
demonstration, except
for opacity/VE, which
are due 30 days after;
when to submit to
Federal vs. State
authority.
Sec. 63.9(i).......... Adjustment of Procedures for Yes................ Yes.
Submittal Administrator to
Deadlines. approve change in when
notifications must be
submitted.
Sec. 63.9(j).......... Change in Previous Must submit within 15 Yes................ Yes.
Information. days after the change.
Sec. 63.10(a)......... Recordkeeping/ Applies to all, unless Yes................ Yes.
Reporting. compliance extension;
when to submit to
Federal vs. State
authority; procedures
for owners of more than
1 source.
Sec. 63.10(b)(1)...... Recordkeeping/ General Requirements; Yes................ Yes.
Reporting. keep all records
readily available; and
keep for 5 years..
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(i)- Records related to Yes..................... No................. ..................
(iv). Startup, Shutdown,
and Malfunction.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vi) CMS Records........ Malfunctions, Yes................ No.
and (x)-(xi). inoperative, out-of-
control; calibration
checks; adjustments,
maintenance.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vii)- Records............ Measurements to Yes................ Yes.
(ix). demonstrate compliance
with emission
limitations; -
performance test,
performance evaluation,
and VE observation
results; and
measurements to
determine conditions of
performance tests and
performance evaluations.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xii). Records............ Records when under Yes................ Yes.
waiver.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiii) Records............ ........................ No................. No.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv). Records............ All documentation Yes................ Yes.
supporting Initial
Notification and
Notification of
Compliance Status.
Sec. 63.10(b)(3)...... Records............ Applicability Yes................ Yes.
determinations.
Sec. 63.10(c)......... Records............ ........................ No................. No.
Sec. 63.10(d)(1)...... General Reporting Requirement to report... Yes................ Yes.
Requirements.
Sec. 63.10(d)(2)...... Report of When to submit to Yes................ No.
Performance Test Federal or State
Results. authority.
Sec. 63.10(d)(3)...... Reporting Opacity ........................ No................. No.
or VE Observations.
Sec. 63.10(d)(4)...... Progress Reports... Must submit progress Yes................ Yes.
reports on schedule if
under compliance
extension.
Sec. 63.10(d)(5)...... Startup, Shutdown, ........................ Yes................ No.
and Malfunction
Reports.
Sec. 63.10(e)......... Additional CMS ........................ No................. No.
Reports.
Sec. 63.10(f)......... Waiver for Procedures for Yes................ Yes.
Recordkeeping/ Administrator to waive.
Reporting.
[[Page 44768]]
Sec. 63.11............ Flares............. ........................ No................. No.
Sec. 63.12............ Delegation......... State authority to Yes................ Yes.
enforce standards.
Sec. 63.13............ Addresses.......... Addresses where reports, Yes................ Yes.
notifications, and
requests are sent.
Sec. 63.14............ Incorporation by Test methods Yes................ Yes.
Reference. incorporated by
reference.
Sec. 63.15............ Availability of Public and confidential Yes................ Yes.
Information. information.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After January 20, 2021, as stated in Sec. 63.6013, you must comply
with the applicable General Provisions (GP) requirements according to
the following table:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to Subpart XXXX?
Brief description of ----------------------------------------
Citation Subject applicable sections Using a control Not using a
device control device
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1............. Applicability...... Initial applicability Yes................ Yes.
determination;
applicability after
standard established;
permit requirements;
extensions;
notifications.
Sec. 63.2............. Definitions........ Definitions for part 63 Yes................ Yes.
standards.
Sec. 63.3............. Units and Units and abbreviations Yes................ Yes.
Abbreviations. for part 63 standards.
Sec. 63.4............. Prohibited Prohibited activities; Yes................ Yes.
Activities. compliance date;
circumvention;
severability.
Sec. 63.5............. Construction/ Applicability; Yes................ Yes.
Reconstruction. applications; approvals.
Sec. 63.6(a).......... Applicability...... GP apply unless Yes................ Yes.
compliance extension;
GP apply to area
sources that become
major.
Sec. 63.6(b)(1)-(4)... Compliance Dates Standards apply at Yes................ Yes.
for New and effective date; 3 years
Reconstructed after effective date;
Sources. upon startup; 10 years
after construction or
reconstruction
commences for CAA
section 112(f).
Sec. 63.6(b)(5)....... Notification....... Must notify if commenced Yes................ Yes.
construction or
reconstruction after
proposal.
Sec. 63.6(b)(6)....... [Reserved]......... ........................ ................... ..................
Sec. 63.6(b)(7)....... Compliance Dates ........................ No................. No.
for New and
Reconstructed Area
Sources that
Become Major.
Sec. 63.6(c)(1)-(2)... Compliance Dates Comply according to date Yes................ Yes.
for Existing in subpart, which must
Sources. be no later than 3
years after effective
date; for CAA section
112(f) standards,
comply within 90 days
of effective date
unless compliance
extension.
Sec. 63.6(c)(3)-(4)... [Reserved]......... ........................ ................... ..................
Sec. 63.6(c)(5)....... Compliance Dates Area sources that become Yes................ Yes.
for Existing Area major must comply with
Sources that major source standards
Become Major. by date indicated in
subpart or by
equivalent time period
(for example, 3 years).
Sec. 63.6(d).......... [Reserved]......... ........................ ................... ..................
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i)- Operations and ........................ No................. No.
(ii). Maintenance.
Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(iii)- Operation and Operate to minimize Yes................ Yes.
(2). Maintenance. emissions at all times;
correct malfunctions as
soon as practicable;
and operation and
maintenance
requirements
independently
enforceable;
information
Administrator will use
to determine if
operation and
maintenance
requirements were met.
Sec. 63.6(e)(3)....... Startup, Shutdown, ........................ No................. No.
and Malfunction
Plan.
Sec. 63.6(f)(1)....... Startup, Shutdown, ........................ No. See Sec. No.
and Malfunction 63.5990(a).
Exemption.
Sec. 63.6(f)(2)-(3)... Methods for Compliance based on Yes................ Yes.
Determining performance test;
Compliance. operation and
maintenance plans;
records; inspection.
Sec. 63.6(g)(1)-(3)... Alternative Procedures for getting Yes................ Yes.
Standard. an alternative standard.
Sec. 63.6(h).......... Opacity/Visible ........................ No................. No.
Emissions (VE)
Standards.
Sec. 63.6(i).......... Compliance Procedures and criteria Yes................ Yes.
Extension. for Administrator to
grant compliance
extension.
Sec. 63.6(j).......... Presidential President may exempt Yes................ Yes.
Compliance source category from
Exemption. requirement to comply
with rule.
Sec. 63.7(a)(1)-(2)... Performance Test ........................ No................. No.
Dates.
Sec. 63.7(a)(3)....... CAA section 114 Administrator may Yes................ No.
Authority. require a performance
test under CAA section
114 at any time.
Sec. 63.7(b)(1)....... Notification of Must notify Yes................ No.
Performance Test. Administrator 60 days
before the test.
Sec. 63.7(b)(2)....... Notification of If rescheduling a Yes................ No.
Rescheduling. performance test is
necessary, must notify
Administrator 5 days
before scheduled date
of rescheduled date.
[[Page 44769]]
Sec. 63.7(c).......... Quality Assurance/ Requirement to submit Yes................ No.
Test Plan. site-specific test plan
60 days before the test
or on date
Administrator agrees
with: test plan
approval procedures;
performance audit
requirements; and
internal and external
quality assurance
procedures for testing.
Sec. 63.7(d).......... Testing Facilities. Requirements for testing Yes................ No.
facilities.
Sec. 63.7(e)(1)....... Conditions for Performance tests must No................. No.
Conducting be conducted under
Performance Tests. representative
conditions; cannot
conduct performance
tests during startup,
shutdown, and
malfunction.
Sec. 63.7(e)(2)....... Conditions for Must conduct according Yes................ No.
Conducting to rule and the EPA
Performance Tests. test methods unless
Administrator approves
alternative.
Sec. 63.7(e)(3)....... Test Run Duration.. Must have three test Yes................ No.
runs of at least 1 hour
each; compliance is
based on arithmetic
mean of three runs; and
conditions when data
from an additional test
run can be used.
Sec. 63.7(f).......... Alternative Test Procedures by which Yes................ No.
Method. Administrator can grant
approval to use an
alternative test method.
Sec. 63.7(g).......... Performance Test Must include raw data in Yes................ No.
Data Analysis. performance test
report; must submit
performance test data
60 days after end of
test with the
Notification of
Compliance Status
report; and keep data
for 5 years.
Sec. 63.7(h).......... Waiver of Tests.... Procedures for Yes................ No.
Administrator to waive
performance test.
Sec. 63.8(a)(1)....... Applicability of Subject to all Yes................ Yes.
Monitoring monitoring requirements
Requirements. in standard.
Sec. 63.8(a)(2)....... Performance Performance Yes................ No.
Specifications. Specifications in
appendix B of 40 CFR
part 60 apply.
Sec. 63.8(a)(3)....... [Reserved]......... ........................ ................... ..................
Sec. 63.8(a)(4)....... Monitoring with ........................ No................. No.
Flares.
Sec. 63.8(b)(1)....... Monitoring......... Must conduct monitoring Yes................ Yes.
according to standard
unless Administrator
approves alternative.
Sec. 63.8(b)(2)-(3)... Multiple Effluents Specific requirements Yes................ Yes.
and Multiple for installing
Monitoring Systems. monitoring systems;
must install on each
effluent before it is
combined and before it
is released to the
atmosphere unless
Administrator approves
otherwise; if more than
one monitoring system
on an emission point,
must report all
monitoring system
results, unless one
monitoring system is a
backup.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)....... Monitoring System Maintain monitoring Applies as modified No.
Operation and system in a manner by Sec.
Maintenance. consistent with good 63.5990(e) and (f).
air pollution control
practices.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(i).... Routine and ........................ No................. No.
Predictable
Startup, Shutdown,
and Malfunction.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(ii)... Startup, Shutdown, ........................ No................. No.
and Malfunction
not in Startup,
Shutdown, and
Malfunction Plan.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(iii).. Compliance with How the Administrator No................. No.
Operation and determines if source
Maintenance complying with
Requirements. operation and
maintenance
requirements; review of
source operation and
maintenance procedures,
records, manufacturer's
instructions,
recommendations, and
inspection of
monitoring system.
Sec. 63.8(c)(2)-(3)... Monitoring System Must install to get Yes................ No.
Installation. representative emission
and parameter
measurements; must
verify operational
status before or at
performance test.
Sec. 63.8(c)(4)....... CMS Requirements... ........................ Applies as modified No.
by Sec.
63.5990(f).
Sec. 63.8(c)(5)....... Continuous Opacity ........................ No................. No.
Monitoring Systems
Minimum Procedures.
Sec. 63.8(c)(6)....... CMS Requirements... ........................ Applies as modified No.
by Sec.
63.5990(e).
Sec. 63.8(c)(7)-(8)... CMS Requirements... Out-of-control periods, Yes................ No.
including reporting.
Sec. 63.8(d).......... CMS Quality Control ........................ Applies as modified No.
by Sec.
63.5990(e) and (f).
Sec. 63.8(d)(3)....... Written Procedures ........................ No................. No.
for CMS.
Sec. 63.8(e).......... CMS Performance ........................ No................. No.
Evaluation.
Sec. 63.8(f)(1)-(5)... Alternative Procedures for Yes................ Yes.
Monitoring Method. Administrator to
approve alternative
monitoring.
Sec. 63.8(f)(6)....... Alternative to ........................ No................. No.
Relative Accuracy
Test.
Sec. 63.8(g).......... Data Reduction..... ........................ Applies as modified No.
by Sec.
63.5990(f).
Sec. 63.9(a).......... Notification Applicability and state Yes................ Yes.
Requirements. delegation.
Sec. 63.9(b)(1)-(5)... Initial Submit notification 120 Yes................ Yes.
Notifications. days after effective
date; notification of
intent to construct/
reconstruct,
notification of
commencement of
construct/reconstruct,
notification of
startup; and contents
of each.
Sec. 63.9(c).......... Request for Can request if cannot Yes................ Yes.
Compliance comply by date or if
Extension. installed best
available control
technology or lowest
achievable emission
rate.
Sec. 63.9(d).......... Notification of For sources that Yes................ Yes.
Special Compliance commence construction
Requirements for between proposal and
New Source. promulgation and want
to comply 3 years after
effective date.
Sec. 63.9(e).......... Notification of Notify Administrator 60 Yes................ No.
Performance Test. days prior.
Sec. 63.9(f).......... Notification of VE/ ........................ No................. No.
Opacity Test.
[[Page 44770]]
Sec. 63.9(g).......... Additional ........................ No................. No.
Notifications When
Using CMS.
Sec. 63.9(h).......... Notification of Contents; due 60 days Yes................ Yes.
Compliance Status. after end of
performance test or
other compliance
demonstration, except
for opacity/VE, which
are due 30 days after;
when to submit to
Federal vs. State
authority.
Sec. 63.9(i).......... Adjustment of Procedures for Yes................ Yes.
Submittal Administrator to
Deadlines. approve change in when
notifications must be
submitted.
Sec. 63.9(j).......... Change in Previous Must submit within 15 Yes................ Yes.
Information. days after the change.
Sec. 63.10(a)......... Recordkeeping/ Applies to all, unless Yes................ Yes.
Reporting. compliance extension;
when to submit to
Federal vs. State
authority; procedures
for owners of more than
1 source.
Sec. 63.10(b)(1)...... Recordkeeping/ General Requirements; Yes................ Yes.
Reporting. keep all records
readily available; and
keep for 5 years.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(i) Records related to ........................ No................. No.
and (iv-v). Startup, Shutdown,
and Malfunction.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(ii).. Recordkeeping of ........................ No. See 63.6010 for
failures to meet a recordkeeping of
standard. (1) date, time and
duration; (2)
listing of
affected source or
equipment, and an
estimate of the
quantity of each
regulated
pollutant emitted
over the standard;
and (3) actions to
minimize emissions
and correct the
failure.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(iii), CMS Records........ Malfunctions, Yes................ No.
(vi), and (x)-(xi). inoperative, out-of-
control; calibration
checks; adjustments,
maintenance.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vii)- Records............ Measurements to Yes................ Yes.
(ix). demonstrate compliance
with emission
limitations;
performance test,
performance evaluation,
and VE observation
results; and
measurements to
determine conditions of
performance tests and
performance evaluations.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xii). Records............ Records when under Yes................ Yes.
waiver.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiii) Records............ ........................ No................. No.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv). Records............ All documentation Yes................ Yes.
supporting Initial
Notification and
Notification of
Compliance Status.
Sec. 63.10(b)(3)...... Records............ Applicability Yes................ Yes.
determinations.
Sec. 63.10(c)......... Records............ ........................ No................. No.
Sec. 63.10(d)(1)...... General Reporting Requirement to report... Yes................ Yes.
Requirements.
Sec. 63.10(d)(2)...... Report of When to submit to Yes................ No.
Performance Test Federal or State
Results. authority.
Sec. 63.10(d)(3)...... Reporting Opacity ........................ No................. No.
or VE Observations.
Sec. 63.10(d)(4)...... Progress Reports... Must submit progress Yes................ Yes.
reports on schedule if
under compliance
extension.
Sec. 63.10(d)(5)...... Startup, Shutdown, ........................ No................. No.
and Malfunction
Reports.
Sec. 63.10(e)......... Additional CMS ........................ No................. No.
Reports.
Sec. 63.10(f)......... Waiver for Procedures for Yes................ Yes.
Recordkeeping/ Administrator to waive.
Reporting.
Sec. 63.11............ Flares............. ........................ No................. No.
Sec. 63.12............ Delegation......... State authority to Yes................ Yes.
enforce standards.
Sec. 63.13............ Addresses.......... Addresses where reports, Yes................ Yes.
notifications, and
requests are sent.
Sec. 63.14............ Incorporation by Test methods Yes................ Yes.
Reference. incorporated by
reference.
Sec. 63.15............ Availability of Public and confidential Yes................ Yes.
Information. information.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2020-12541 Filed 7-23-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P