Reclassification of Major Sources as Area Sources Under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act
| Published date | 19 November 2020 |
| Citation | 85 FR 73854 |
| Record Number | 2020-22044 |
| Section | Rules and Regulations |
| Court | Environmental Protection Agency |
Federal Register, Volume 85 Issue 224 (Thursday, November 19, 2020)
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 224 (Thursday, November 19, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 73854-73922]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-22044]
[[Page 73853]]
Vol. 85
Thursday,
No. 224
November 19, 2020
Part IIEnvironmental Protection Agency-----------------------------------------------------------------------40 CFR Part 63Reclassification of Major Sources as Area Sources Under Section 112 of
the Clean Air Act; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 224 / Thursday, November 19, 2020 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 73854]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0282; FRL-10014-50-OAR]
RIN 2060-AM75
Reclassification of Major Sources as Area Sources Under Section
112 of the Clean Air Act
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule finalizes amendments to the General Provisions that
apply to National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP). These amendments implement the plain language reading of the
``major source'' and ``area source'' definitions of section 112 of the
Clean Air Act (CAA) and provide that a major source can be reclassified
to area source status at any time upon reducing its potential to emit
(PTE) hazardous air pollutants (HAP) to below the major source
thresholds (MST) of 10 tons per year (tpy) of any single HAP and 25 tpy
of any combination of HAP. This rule also finalizes amendments to
clarify the compliance dates, notification, and recordkeeping
requirements that apply to sources choosing to reclassify to area
source status and to sources that revert back to major source status,
including a requirement for electronic notification.
DATES: This final rule is effective on January 19, 2021.
ADDRESSES: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0282. 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 the public, with limited exceptions, to reduce the risk of
transmitting COVID-19. Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide
remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. 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 rule,
contact Ms. Elineth Torres, Sector Policies and Programs Division
(D205-02), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711; telephone number: (919) 541-4347; fax number: (919) 541-4991;
and email address: [email protected]. Questions concerning
specific reclassifications should be directed to the appropriate
Regional office.
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
CEDRI Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
D.C. Cir. the United States Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit
EAV equivalent annualized value
EIA economic impact analysis
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FIP Federal Implementation Plan
HAP hazardous air pollutant(s)
MACT maximum achievable control technology
MM2A Major MACT to Area
MRR monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
MST major source thresholds
NESHAP national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants
NMA National Mining Association
NSPS new source performance standards
NSR New Source Review
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
OIAI Once In, Always In
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
PSD prevention of significant deterioration
PTE potential to emit
PV present value
RTO regenerative thermal oxidizers
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis
RTR residual risk and technology review
SIP State Implementation Plan
TIP Tribal Implementation Plan
TSM technical support memorandum
tpy tons per year
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
VOC volatile organic compound(s)
Background information. On July 26, 2019, the EPA proposed
revisions to the General Provisions that apply to the NESHAP to
implement the plain language reading of the ``major source'' and ``area
source'' definitions of CAA section 112 and provide that a major source
can be reclassified to area source status at any time upon limiting its
potential to emit HAP to below the MST of 10 tpy of any single HAP and
25 tpy of any combination of HAP (also referred to herein as Major
Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) to Area or ``MM2A
proposal'') (see 84 FR 36304). In this rule, we are taking final action
on some of the amendments as proposed, and we are taking final action
on other amendments as modified based on the public comments to clarify
the requirements that apply to sources choosing to reclassify to area
source status at any time, including reclassification that occurs after
the first substantive compliance date of applicable major source NESHAP
requirements and the requirements that apply to sources that reclassify
from major to area source status and then revert back to their previous
major source status. Regarding the proposed amendments to the PTE
definition, we are not finalizing the definition of ``legally and
practicably enforceable'' PTE limits or the effectiveness criteria for
those limits in this action. We are, however, promulgating a
ministerial amendment to the regulatory definition of ``potential to
emit'' in the interim. We are also finalizing revisions to the General
Provisions tables and initial notification requirements within most
NESHAP subparts to account for the regulatory provisions we are
finalizing in this rule. We summarize some of the more significant
public comments we received regarding the proposed rule and provide our
responses to those comments 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 Response to Comments document available in
the docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0282. A ``track changes'' version of the
regulatory language that incorporates the changes finalized in this
rule is also available in the docket.
Organization of this document. The information in this preamble is
organized as follows:
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action
B. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Regulatory Action
C. Impacts of the Final Regulatory Action
II. General Information
A. Does this rule apply to me?
B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
C. Judicial Review and Administrative Reconsideration
III. Background
IV. Statutory Authority
V. Summary of Final Amendments
A. Final Amendments to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A: General
Provisions
[[Page 73855]]
B. Amendments to Individual NESHAP General Provisions
Applicability Tables
C. Amendments to Individual NESHAP
VI. Other Considerations
A. PTE Determination
B. Reclassification Process and Permitting
VII. Interim Ministerial Revision of 40 CFR Part 63 PTE Definition
VIII. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts
A. Analytical Scenarios
B. Cost Analysis
C. Environmental Analysis
D. Economic Analysis
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulations and Regulatory Review
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulation 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. Determination Under CAA Section 307(d)
M. Congress Review Act (CRA)
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of the Regulatory Action
In this final rule (also referred to herein as ``final MM2A rule''
or final rule), the EPA is finalizing amendments to the General
Provisions of the NESHAP regulations in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A to
implement the plain language reading of the ``major source'' and ``area
source'' statutory definitions of section 112 of the CAA and provide
that a major source can be reclassified to area source status at any
time upon reducing its emissions and PTE, as defined in 40 CFR 63.2, to
below the MST of 10 tpy of any single HAP and 25 tpy of any combination
of HAP. Prior to proposing these amendments, the EPA reviewed the
statutory provisions that govern when a major source can reclassify to
area source status, including after being subject to major source
requirements under section 112 of the CAA (also referred to herein as
``CAA section 112 requirements'' or ``requirements''). After further
review of CAA section 112 provisions and public comments received on
the MM2A proposal, the EPA is finalizing its conclusion that the
statutory definitions of major source and area source contain no
language fixing a source's status at any particular point in time and
contain no language suggesting a cutoff date after which the source's
status cannot change. Accordingly, the Agency is finalizing its reading
that a major source may be reclassified as an area source at any time
upon reducing its HAP emissions and PTE below the applicable CAA
section 112 MST. Thus, major sources that reclassify to area source
status at any time, including after the first substantive compliance
date of an applicable major NESHAP, will no longer be subject to CAA
section 112 major source NESHAP requirements and will be subject to any
applicable area source NESHAP requirements. A full discussion of the
statutory authority for this final MM2A rule can be found in section IV
of this preamble.
B. Summary of the Major Provisions of the Regulatory Action
The EPA is finalizing amendments to the General Provisions of the
NESHAP regulations in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A to clarify the
requirements that apply to sources choosing to reclassify to area
source status at any time, including after being subject to major
source requirements under section 112 of the CAA. The EPA is finalizing
amendments to the applicability section found in 40 CFR 63.1 by adding
a new paragraph (c)(6). This paragraph specifies that a major source
may become an area source at any time upon reducing its emissions of
and PTE HAP, as defined in this subpart, to below the major source
thresholds established in 40 CFR 63.2.
The EPA is finalizing in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6) that a major source
reclassifying to area source status remains subject to any applicable
major source NESHAP requirements until the reclassification becomes
effective. After the reclassification becomes effective, the source is
subject to any applicable area source NESHAP requirements in 40 CFR
part 63. For sources that reclassify from major to area source status
and then revert back to their previous major source status, the EPA is
also finalizing in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6) that the source becomes subject to
the applicable major source NESHAP requirements of 40 CFR part 63
immediately upon becoming a major source again. The EPA is finalizing
in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6) regulatory text to address the interaction of the
reclassification of sources with enforcement actions arising from
violations that occurred before reclassification. Specifically, we are
finalizing that the reclassification of a source does not affect the
source's liability or any enforcement investigations or enforcement
actions for a source's past conduct that occurred prior to the source's
reclassification.
To ensure that all sources that reclassify notify the EPA, the EPA
is finalizing amendments clarifying the existing notification
requirements in 40 CFR 63.9(b) and (j). With these amendments, the
notification requirements of 40 CFR 63.9 will cover not only cases
where a source switches from major to area source status, but also
cases where an area source reverts to major source status. A source
that reclassifies in either direction must notify the EPA of any
changes in the applicability of the standards that the source was
subject to per the notification requirements of 40 CFR 63.9(j). The EPA
is also finalizing amendments to the notification requirements in 40
CFR 63.9(b) and (j) to require in certain circumstances that the
notification be submitted electronically through the Compliance and
Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI). The final rule amends the
General Provisions to add 40 CFR 63.9(k) to include the CEDRI
submission procedures. The EPA is finalizing amendments to remove the
time limit for record retention in 40 CFR 63.10(b)(3) so sources that
obtain enforceable PTE limits after the effective date of this final
rule are required to keep the applicability determination records as
long as they rely on the PTE limits to be area sources. The EPA is also
finalizing amendments to 40 CFR 63.12(c) to clarify that a source may
not be exempted from electronic reporting requirements. Further, the
EPA is finalizing amendments to 40 CFR 63.13 to clarify that when
required by this part, or at the request of the EPA Regional office,
submitting a report or notification to CEDRI fulfills the obligation to
report to the EPA Regional office.
This final action includes amendments to the General Provisions
applicability tables contained within most subparts of 40 CFR part 63
to add a reference to the new provision in 63.1(c)(6) discussed above.
We are also finalizing revisions to several NESHAP subparts by removing
the date limitation after which a major source cannot become an area
source. The provisions amended are: 40 CFR part 63, subpart HH at
63.760(a)(1); 40 CFR 63, subpart HHH at 63.1270(a); 40 CFR part 63,
subpart QQQ at 63.1441; 40 CFR part 63, subpart QQQQQ at 63.9485; 40
CFR
[[Page 73856]]
part 63, subpart RRRRR at 63.9581; and Table 2 of 40 CFR part 63,
subpart WWWW. The final rule also includes amendments to the initial
notification requirements of most NESHAP subparts because the date that
was specified in the regulations has passed.
The EPA is still considering the proposed effectiveness criteria
for HAP PTE limits and the proposed changes to the definition of
``potential to emit'' in 40 CFR 63.2 and is not taking any final action
on those aspects of the proposed rule at this time. Thus, this final
rule does not include responses to comments on proposed effectiveness
criteria for PTE limits or comments related to the proposed changes to
the PTE definition. The EPA is still reviewing comments received and
will respond to them in a subsequent action. In the meantime, while we
continue to consider what final action to take on the proposed
amendments, the EPA is making an interim ministerial revision to the
PTE definition to address the court decision in National Mining
Association (NMA) v. EPA, 59 F.3d 1351, 1363-1365 (D.C. Cir. 1995).
Specifically, this revision removes the word ``federally'' from the
phrase ``federally enforceable'' in the PTE definition. This interim
ministerial revision is also consistent with the EPA's long-standing
policy \1\ that allows for any physical or operational limitation on
the capacity of the stationary source to emit a pollutant to be treated
as part of the source's design if the limitation or the effect it would
have on emissions is, first, either federally enforceable or legally
enforceable by a state or local permitting authority and, second,
practicably enforceable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See January 25, 1995, memorandum titled ``Options for
Limiting the Potential to Emit (PTE) of a Stationary Source Under
Section 112 and Title V of the Clean Air Act (Act)'' and December
20, 1999, memorandum titled ``Third Extension of January 25, 1995
Potential to Emit Transition Policy.'' Available at https://www.epa.gov/guidance/guidance-documents-managed-office-air-and-radiation and in the docket of this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Impacts of the Final Regulatory Action
The final rule does not require any source to reclassify to area
source status. An evaluation of the potential to reclassify from major
source to area source status involves many source-specific
considerations. Each source will assess its own circumstances to
determine whether it is feasible and advantageous to undergo the
reclassification process. The unique nature of each source's decision
process makes it difficult for the EPA to determine the number and type
of sources that may choose to reclassify under this rule. Because of
this, the EPA is limited to presenting illustrative analyses concerning
the impacts of this final rule. The illustrative assessment of impacts
includes the potential net cost savings and potential emissions changes
that may result from this final action. The illustrative impacts are
estimated for the three analytical scenarios established for the rule
and are estimated in relation to a baseline in which sources remain
subject to major source NESHAP requirements after the first substantive
compliance date of such standards. The potential impacts presented in
the preamble reflect the results of the illustrative analysis of the
primary scenario, which, for analytical purposes, is defined as
including those facilities whose actual emissions are below 75 percent
of the MST (i.e., 7.5 tpy for a single HAP and 18.75 tpy for all HAP).
This scenario is further described in section VIII of this preamble, in
the technical support memorandums (TSM),\2\ and the Regulatory Impact
Analysis (RIA) that is available in the docket for this action. The
memorandums and RIA also present an analysis of two alternative
scenarios to provide a range of estimated potential cost impacts.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See ``Documentation of the Data for Analytical Evaluations
and Summary of Industries Potentially Impacted by the Final Rule
titled Reclassification of Major Sources as Area Sources Under
Section 112 of the Clean Air Act,'' and ``Analysis of Illustrative
125% Scenario for MM2A Final--Potential Cost Impacts from HAP Major
Sources Reducing Emissions as part of Reclassifying to HAP Area
Sources.''
\3\ Alternative scenario 1 analyzes those facilities whose
actual emissions are below 50 percent of the MST (5 tpy for a single
HAP and 12.5 tpy for all HAP). Alternative scenario 2 analyzes that
sources below 125 percent of the MST (12.5 tpy for a single HAP and
31.25 tpy for all HAP). Discussions of these scenarios and results
can be found in the RIA for this final action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA estimates that this final action may result in substantial
annual cost savings of $90.6 million (2017$) based on illustrative
estimates of its potential reduction in administrative burden if
sources reclassify to area source status.\4\ The voluntary actions
taken by sources to reclassify will be carried out over a period of
time, but once a source reclassifies, the cost savings will accrue for
as long as the source continues to operate as an area source. While
cost savings will accrue for the life of the facility, we present a 5-
year outlook of potential cost savings from this action to provide
insight into the cost distribution over time. Results are also
presented as the present value (PV) and equivalent annualized value
(EAV) of the cost savings of the final MM2A rule in 2017 dollars. The
PV is the one-time value of a stream of impacts over time, discounted
to the current (or nearly current) day. The EAV is a measure of the
annual cost that is calculated consistent with the PV. The illustrative
cost savings of the final MM2A rule in 2017 dollars are presented in
detail later in section VIII of this preamble and in the RIA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Annual cost savings reflect impacts in Year 2 of the
reclassification process for all sources that choose to reclassify
under the primary scenario. All cost savings are net of any
additional permitting and recordkeeping costs to state regulatory
agencies and sources. These annual cost savings are those for 2025
and subsequent years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 presents a summary of key results from the RIA for the
final MM2A rule. This table presents the PV and EAV, estimated in 2017
dollars using discount rates of 7 and 3 percent and discounted to 2020,
of the illustrative net cost savings of the final MM2A rule. The EAV
estimates are consistent with the PV and reflect the illustrative total
net cost savings of the rule from 2021, the first year after rule
promulgation, and subsequent years.
Table 1--Illustrative Net Cost Savings Incremental to the Baseline
[(Including following years) (Billions 2017$) *]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7 Percent 3 Percent
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Equivalent Equivalent
Present value annualized Present value annualized
value value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Potential Net Cost Savings.................. $0.86 0.07 $1.50 0.08
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The overall analytic timeline begins in 2021 and continues thereafter for an indefinite period. The cost
savings in 2016 dollars and discounted to 2016, as defined as a present value, are $0.654 billion at 7 percent
and $1.13 billion at 3 percent. As equivalent annualized values, the cost savings are $52 million at 7 percent
and $58 million at 3 percent.
[[Page 73857]]
Impacts in Table 1 reflect the potential impacts of the final MM2A
rule for the year in which all reclassifications are expected to have
taken place (2025) and beyond.
To assess the potential changes in emissions that may result from
the reclassification of major sources to area sources under this rule,
we reviewed the permits and other information from 69 sources that have
reclassified since January 2018, consistent with the EPA's plain
language reading of the CAA section 112 definitions of ``major'' and
``area'' source, and also performed an illustrative analysis of 72
source categories in detail. Because we do not have information on the
major sources that may choose to reclassify to area source status in
the future and the enforceable conditions they will take in order to
reclassify, we are not able to provide an assessment of the emissions
impacts for actual reclassifications beyond the 69 sources that have
already reclassified.\5\ Therefore, we conducted a detailed
illustrative analysis of 72 source categories to provide a broad
characterization of the potential changes in emissions for all NESHAP
source categories that could be impacted by this action. The assessment
of the 69 reclassifications shows that 68 facilities have requirements
in their operating permits that would continue to implement the
compliance methods used to comply with the major source NESHAP
requirements and prevent emissions increases. However, the EPA found
that one of the 69 reclassified sources will not continue to employ the
same compliance methods that it used to meet the major source NESHAP
and thus it may increase its emissions. For the illustrative analysis
of emissions impacts conducted, we find that 65 source categories in
the major source NESHAP program will either not be impacted or will not
increase emissions as a result of the rule. Based on the broad
assumptions applied in the analysis, we found a potential for emissions
increases for some facilities in seven source categories. While a
majority of facilities are not anticipated to change emissions,
approximately 3.1 percent of the facilities in the MM2A database that
we were able to analyze could increase emissions if sources: (1)
Voluntarily opt to reclassify and (2) were allowed to reduce operation
of adjustable add-on controls. We also found a potential for emissions
decreases in cases where sources choose to reduce emissions from above
the MST to below the MST to reclassify. The facilities that we were
able to assess for emission increases and decreases are located across
the United States (i.e., in more than 10 states and in every region of
the United States) and are not clustered in close proximity to each
other. Further discussion of the impacts of the final rule are
presented in section VIII of this preamble and presented in detail in
the technical support memorandums, titled Documentation of the
Emissions Analysis for the Final Rule ``Reclassification of Major
Sources as Area Sources Under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act'' and
the Analysis of the Illustrative 125% Scenario for MM2A Rule--Potential
Cost Impacts from HAP Major Sources Reducing Emissions as part of
Reclassifying to HAP Area Sources, and the RIA for the final rule, all
of which are available in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Of the 69 sources, 68 have already reclassified and one was
undergoing the process of reclassification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. General Information
A. Does this rule apply to me?
Categories and entities potentially impacted by this rule include
sources subject to NESHAP requirements under section 112 of the CAA.
The final amendments are applicable to sources that reclassify from
major source to area source status under section 112 of the CAA and
sources that revert from their reclassified area source status to their
previous major source status.
Federal, state, local, and tribal governments may be affected by
this rule if they own or operate sources that choose to request
reclassification from major source status to area source status or if
reclassified sources choose to revert to their previous major source
status at some time in the future. The EPA is the permitting authority
for issuing, rescinding, and amending permits for sources that request
reclassification in Indian country, with four exceptions.\6\ State,
local, or tribal regulatory authorities \7\ may receive requests to
issue new permits or make changes to existing permits for sources in
their jurisdiction to address reclassification-related activities
(e.g., title V, synthetic minor permits, establishing limits on a
source's PTE).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Two tribes have approved title V programs or delegation of
40 CFR part 71. The tribes may have sources that request to no
longer be covered by title V. Neither of these two tribes have
approved minor source permitting programs but may in the future. In
the meantime, the tribes will need to coordinate with the EPA, who
is the permitting authority in Indian country for these requests. In
addition, two other tribes have approved Tribal Implementation Plans
(TIPs) authorizing the issuance of minor source permits. Only one of
these tribes has a major source that would be eligible to request
reclassification. If that source requests a new permit, the tribe
may issue the minor source permit, but the EPA would need to be made
aware of the request, as the EPA is the permitting authority for
title V.
\7\ The term regulatory authority is intended to be inclusive of
the federal, state, tribal, or local air pollution control agency
with authority to process reclassification requests and issuance of
enforceable PTE limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
the final MM2A rule is 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/reclassification-major-sources-area-sources-under-section-112-clean.
Following publication in the Federal Register, the EPA will post the
Federal Register version and key technical documents at this same
website.
A redline version of the regulatory language that incorporates the
amendments finalized in this rule is available in the docket for this
action (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0282).
C. Judicial Review and Administrative Reconsideration
Under CAA section 307(b)(1), judicial review of this final rule is
available only by filing a petition for review in the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (DCCir.) by
January 19, 2021. 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 that 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,
[[Page 73858]]
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.
III. Background
Shortly after the EPA began implementing individual NESHAP
resulting from the 1990 CAA Amendments, the Agency received multiple
requests to clarify when a major source of HAP could avoid CAA section
112 requirements applicable to major sources by taking enforceable
limits on its PTE below the major source thresholds. In response, the
EPA issued, on May 16, 1995, a memorandum from John Seitz, Director of
the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, to the EPA Regional
Air Division Directors (the May 1995 Seitz Memorandum).\8\ The May 1995
Seitz Memorandum provided guidance on three timing issues related to
avoidance of CAA section 112 requirements for major sources:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See ``Potential to Emit for MACT Standards-Guidance on
Timing Issues.'' From John Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, to the EPA Regional Air Division Directors.
May 16, 1995, https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-02/documents/pteguid.pdf. Also available in the docket of this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
``By what date must a facility limit its PTE if it wishes
to avoid major source requirements of a MACT standard?''
``Is a facility that is required to comply with a MACT
standard permanently subject to that standard?''
``In the case of facilities with two or more sources in
different source categories: If such a facility is a major source for
purposes of one MACT standard, is the facility necessarily a major
source for purposes of subsequently promulgated MACT standards?''
In the May 1995 Seitz Memorandum, the EPA stated its interpretation
of the relevant statutory language that facilities that are major
sources of HAP may switch to area source status at any time until the
``first compliance date'' of the standard.\9\ Under this
interpretation, facilities that are major sources on the first
substantive compliance date of an applicable major source NESHAP were
required to comply permanently with that major source standard even if
the source was subsequently to become an area source by limiting its
PTE. This position was commonly referred to as the ``Once In, Always
In'' (OIAI) policy. The May 1995 Seitz Memorandum provided that a
source that is major for one NESHAP would not be considered major for a
subsequent NESHAP if the source's potential to emit HAP emissions was
reduced to below major source levels by complying with the first major
source NESHAP. In the May 1995 Seitz Memorandum, the EPA set forth
transitional policy guidance that was intended to remain in effect only
until the Agency proposed and promulgated amendments to the 40 CFR part
63 General Provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The ``first substantive compliance date'' is defined as the
first date a source must comply with an emissions limitation or
other substantive regulatory requirement (i.e., leak detection and
repair programs, work practice measures, etc . . . , but not a
notice requirement) in the applicable standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After issuing the May 1995 Seitz Memorandum, the EPA twice proposed
regulatory amendments that would have altered the OIAI policy. In 2003,
the EPA proposed amendments that focused on HAP emissions reductions
resulting from pollution prevention (P2) activities. Apart from certain
provisions associated with the EPA's National Environmental Performance
Track Program--a national voluntary program designed to recognize and
encourage top environmental performers whose program participants go
beyond compliance with regulatory requirements to attain levels of
environmental performance that benefit people, communities, and the
environment--that proposal was never finalized. See 68 FR 26249 (May
15, 2003); 69 FR 21737 (April 22, 2004). In 2007, the EPA issued a
proposed rule to replace the OIAI policy set forth in the May 1995
Seitz Memorandum. See 72 FR 69 (January 3, 2007). In that proposal, the
EPA reviewed the provisions in CAA section 112 relevant to the OIAI
policy interpretation, applicable regulatory language, stakeholder
concerns, and potential implications. Id. at 71-74. Based on that
review, the EPA proposed an interpretation of the relevant statutory
language that a major source that is subject to a major source NESHAP
would no longer be subject to that major source standard if the source
were to become an area source through enforceable limitations on its
PTE HAP emissions. Id. at 72-73. Under the 2007 proposal, major sources
could take such limits on their PTE and obtain ``area source'' status
at any time and would not be limited to doing so only before the
``first substantive compliance date,'' as the OIAI policy provided. Id.
at 70. The EPA did not take final action on this 2007 proposal.
In 2017, the EPA received public comments pursuant to Executive
Order 13777, Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda (February 24,
2017), and the Presidential Memorandum on Streamlining Permitting and
Reducing Regulatory Burdens for Domestic Manufacturing (January 24,
2017) supporting the withdrawal of the OIAI policy.\10\ Per these
comments, the OIAI policy imposed an artificial time limit on major
sources obtaining area source status not found in the definitions of
``major source'' and ``area source'' in CAA sections 112(a)(1) and (2).
Commenters further stated that the temporal limitation imposed by the
OIAI policy was inconsistent with the CAA and created an arbitrary date
by which sources must determine whether their HAP PTE will exceed
either of the major source thresholds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See Executive Order 13777 at 82 FR 12285 (February 24,
2017) and request for comment at 82 FR 17793 (April 13, 2017),
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0190. See Presidential Memorandum at
82 FR 8667 (January 24, 2017) and request for information at 82 FR
12786 (March 7, 2017), Docket ID No. DOC-2017-0001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 25, 2018, the EPA issued a guidance memorandum from
William L. Wehrum, Assistant Administrator of the Office of Air and
Radiation, to the EPA Regional Air Division Directors titled
``Reclassification of Major Sources as Area Sources Under Section 112
of the Clean Air Act'' (MM2A Memorandum).\11\ The MM2A Memorandum
discussed the statutory provisions that govern when a source subject to
major source NESHAP requirements under section 112 of the CAA may be
reclassified as an area source and thereby avoid being subject
thereafter to major source NESHAP requirements and other requirements
applicable to major sources under CAA section 112. In the MM2A
Memorandum, the EPA discussed the plain language of CAA section 112(a)
stating Congress's definitions of ``major source'' and ``area source''
and determined that the OIAI policy articulated in the 1995 Seitz
Memorandum was contrary to the plain language of the CAA and,
therefore, must be withdrawn. In the MM2A Memorandum, the EPA announced
the future publication of a proposed rule to receive input from the
public on adding regulatory text consistent with the plain reading of
the statute as described in the MM2A Memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See notice of issuance of this guidance memorandum at 83 FR
5543 (February 8, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 26, 2019, the EPA proposed regulatory text to implement the
plain
[[Page 73859]]
language reading of the statute as discussed in the MM2A Memorandum.
See 84 FR 36304. The 2019 MM2A proposal superseded and replaced the
2007 proposal. See 72 FR 69 (January 3, 2007). The EPA solicited
comment on all aspects of the MM2A proposal, including the EPA's
position that the withdrawal of the OIAI policy and the proposed
approach gives proper effect to the statutory definitions of ``major
source'' and ``area source'' in CAA section 112(a) and is consistent
with the plain language and structure of the CAA as well as the impacts
of the proposal on costs, benefits, and emissions impacts. Publication
of the MM2A proposal in the Federal Register opened comment on the
proposal for an initial 60-day public comment period. The EPA held a
public hearing on August 15, 2019, in Washington, DC. In response to
requests for an extension of the comment period, the EPA reopened the
public comment period for an additional 30 days through November 1,
2019. The EPA received more than 16,000 comments on the MM2A proposal.
After review and consideration of public comments, the EPA is
finalizing the implementation of the plain language reading of the
definitions of major source and area source under CAA section 112. Per
CAA section 307(d)(6)(B), the EPA is providing a response to the to the
most significant comments received on the MM2A proposal in this
preamble, and responses to the other comments in the Response to
Comments document available in the docket.
IV. Statutory Authority
As discussed in the preamble of the MM2A proposal at 84 FR 36304,
36309-36313 (July 26, 2019), CAA section 112 distinguishes between
major and area sources of HAP emissions. Indeed, the very first
provisions in CAA section 112 are the major source definition in CAA
section 112(a)(1) and area source definition in CAA section 112(a)(2))
that create the major/area distinction. Major sources emit more HAP
than area sources and, generally, different requirements apply to major
sources and area sources. For some section 112 source categories, the
EPA has promulgated requirements for only major sources, and HAP
emissions from area sources are not regulated under the NESHAP program.
Whether a source is a ``major source'' or an ``area source''
depends on the amount of HAP emitted by the source based on its actual
and potential emissions. Congress defined ``major source'' to mean a
source that emits or has the potential to emit at or above either of
the statutory thresholds of 10 tpy of any one HAP or 25 tpy of total
HAP. CAA section 112(a)(1). An ``area source'' is defined as any source
of HAP that is not a major source. CAA section 112(a)(2). If a source
does not emit or does not have the potential to emit at or above either
of the major source thresholds, then it is an ``area source.'' The
statutory definitions of ``major source'' and ``area source'' do not
contain any language that fixes a source's status as a major source or
area source at any particular point in time, nor do they otherwise
contain any language suggesting that there is a cutoff date after which
a source's status cannot change.
Congress did, however, create a distinction based on timing in CAA
section 112 in defining and creating provisions related to ``new
sources'' and ``existing sources.'' Specifically, Congress defined
``new source'' to mean a source that is constructed or reconstructed
after the EPA first proposes regulations covering the source. CAA
section 112(a)(4). An ``existing source'' is defined as any source
other than a new source. CAA section 112(a)(10). A source will be
subject to different requirements depending on whether it is a new
source or an existing source. See, e.g., CAA section 112(d)(3)
(identifying different minimum levels of stringency (known as ``MACT
floors'') for new and existing sources).
The emissions-based distinction (arising from the definitions of
major source and area source) and the timing-based distinction (arising
from the definitions of new source and existing source) are
independent, and neither is tied to the other. For example, the
statutory definition of ``major source'' does not provide that major
source status is determined based on a source's emissions or PTE as of
the date that the EPA first proposes regulations applicable to that
source or any other point in time. As noted above, the plain language
of the ``major source'' and ``area source'' definitions create a
distinction that is based solely on amount of emissions and PTE, and
not timing. Similarly, with respect to the timing-based distinction, a
source is a ``new source'' or an ``existing source'' based entirely on
the timing of its construction or reconstruction and without
consideration of its actual emissions or PTE. The contrast between the
temporal distinction in the contrasting definitions of existing and new
sources on the one hand, and the absence of any temporal dimension to
the contrasting definitions of major and area sources on the other, is
further evidence that Congress did not intend to place a temporal
limitation on a source's ability to be classified as an area source
(including a source's ability to be classified as an area source
through the permitting authority's ``considering controls'' that may
have been imposed after the source was initially classified as major).
Notwithstanding the independence of the two distinctions that the
statute created based on amount of emissions and timing (and without
addressing that independence or otherwise addressing the plain language
of the statutory definitions of ``major source'' and ``area source''),
the EPA issued the May 1995 Seitz Memorandum, which set forth the OIAI
policy. Under the OIAI policy, a source's status as a major source for
the purpose of applying a specific major source MACT standard issued
under the requirements of CAA section 112 was deemed to be unalterably
fixed on the first substantive compliance date of the specific
applicable major source requirements. Thus, a source that was a major
source on that first compliance date would continue to be subject to
the major source requirements for that specific NESHAP even if the
source reduced its emissions of and PTE HAP to below the statutory
thresholds in the definition of ``major source,'' and, thus, fell
within the definition of ``area source.''
On January 25, 2018, the EPA issued the MM2A Memorandum. The MM2A
Memorandum discussed the statutory definitions of ``major source'' and
``area source'' and explained that the OIAI policy articulated in the
May 1995 Seitz Memorandum was contrary to the plain language of the
CAA, and, therefore, must be withdrawn.
As discussed above, Congress expressly defined the terms ``major
source'' and ``area source'' in CAA section 112(a) in unambiguous
language. Nonetheless, under the OIAI policy, a source that reduced its
emissions of and PTE HAP to below the statutory thresholds for major
source status after the relevant compliance date would continue to be
subject to the requirements applicable to major sources. This policy
was applied notwithstanding that the statutory definitions of ``major
source'' and ``area source'' lack any reference to the compliance date
of major source requirements or any other text that indicates a time
limit for changing between major source status and area source status.
In short, Congress placed no temporal limitations on the determination
of whether a source emits or has the potential to emit HAP in
sufficient quantity to be a major source
[[Page 73860]]
under CAA section 112. Because the OIAI policy imposed such a temporal
limitation (before the ``first compliance date''), the EPA had no
authority for the OIAI policy under the plain language of the CAA.
Under the plain language of the statute, a major source that takes
enforceable limits on its PTE to bring its HAP emissions below the CAA
section 112 major source thresholds, no matter when it may choose to do
so, becomes an area source under Congress's definition in CAA section
112(a)(2). In this final action, we are implementing the plain language
of CAA section 112 and making clear that such a source can reclassify
to area source status at any time, and after reclassification, will no
longer be subject to the CAA section 112 requirements applicable to the
source as a major source under CAA section 112--so long as the source's
actual and PTE HAP emissions remain below the CAA section 112
thresholds--and will instead be subject to any applicable area source
requirements.
A discussion of the statutory definitions of ``new source'' and
``existing source'' in CAA section 112(a)(4) and (10) further
demonstrates that the OIAI policy was inconsistent with the language of
the statute. As discussed above, the major source/area source
distinction and the new source/existing source distinction are two
separate and independent features of the statute. Significantly, the
statutory definitions of ``new source'' and ``existing source'' dictate
that the new source/existing source distinction is determined by when a
source commences construction or reconstruction and says nothing about
the source's volume of emissions. No one can reasonably suggest that
this silence concerning volume of emissions indicates that Congress
intended to give the EPA the discretion to conclude that sources should
be classified as new or existing based, in part, on how much they emit.
For example, if the EPA were to say that a source is only a new source
if it both (1) commences construction after regulations are first
proposed (as stated in CAA section 112(a)(4)), and (2) emits more than
20 tpy of any single HAP (which is not stated anywhere in the statute),
that second element would be contrary to the plain language of the
statute. Similarly, the OIAI policy of considering timing as part of
the major source/area source distinction is contrary to the plain
language of the statute, because it interjects timing into the major/
area distinction when Congress provided that such distinction would be
based only on the source's actual and potential emissions. In short,
Congress's creation of the timing distinction in the new source and
existing source definitions shows that Congress was explicit when it
wanted to classify sources based on timing, and it did not do so in
creating the major/area source distinction.
Some commenters have argued that the EPA's plain language reading
cannot be correct in light of various provisions in CAA section 112.
The EPA has considered these comments and concluded that the EPA's
plain language reading is the correct reading, for the reasons
discussed below, in the Response to Comments document and elsewhere in
the record.
CAA section 112(i)(3)(A)--Some commenters assert that the EPA's
plain language reading of the definitions of ``major source'' and
``area source'' is contradicted by CAA section 112(i)(3)(A).
Specifically, they contend that the first phrase in CAA section
112(i)(3)(A) precludes a major source from reclassifying to area source
status after the source has become subject to a major source standard
and that this statutory text compels the OIAI policy. The EPA disagrees
with this contention. The first phrase in CAA section 112(i)(3)(A)
states: ``After the effective date of any emissions standard,
limitation or regulation promulgated under this section and applicable
to a source, no person may operate such source in violation of such
standard, limitation or regulation . . . .'' As discussed in the
proposal (84 FR 36311), the EPA reads this phrase to have the same
meaning as similar ``effective date'' provisions in the CAA, such as
CAA section 111(e), notwithstanding that CAA section 112(i)(3)(A) has
somewhat different phrasing. In short, this text simply provides that,
after the effective date of a CAA section 112 rule, sources to which a
standard is applicable must comply with that standard. This text is not
reasonably read to say that, once a standard is applicable to a source,
that standard continues to be applicable to the source for all time,
even if the source's potential to emit changes such that it no longer
meets the applicability criteria for the standard. Such a reading would
produce some results that are clearly incorrect. For example, if the
first phrase in CAA section 112(i)(3)(A) were read to say that a
source's applicable requirements are determined at the point in time
that a source first becomes subject to CAA section 112 requirements,
then an area source would continue to be subject to area source
requirements even if that source increased its potential to emit above
either of the major source thresholds. Such a result would be contrary
to the EPA regulations, which provide that an area source that
increases its emissions or PTE above the MST becomes subject to the
applicable major source requirements. 40 CFR 63.6(a)(2), 63.6(b)(7),
63.6(c)(5).
Further, reliance on CAA 112(i)(3)(A) to argue against the EPA's
plain language reading and for a return to the OIAI policy ignores that
the ``effective date'' of a CAA section 112 standard is not the same as
the ``compliance date.'' CAA section 112(i)(3)(A) expressly provides
that the EPA may set the ``compliance date'' for existing sources up to
3 years after the ``effective date.'' Similarly, CAA section 112(i)(5)
(which is applicable in certain circumstances for sources that make
early reductions in HAP emissions) provides for a delayed compliance
date that will be after the effective date. This is significant because
the cutoff deadline for reclassification that the commenters say is
required under CAA section 112(i)(3)(A) is not the effective date.
Under the OIAI policy, the cutoff date for reclassification was the
first substantive compliance date, which (as just discussed) is clearly
distinguished from the effective date in CAA section 112(i)(3)(A) in
the statute. Thus, commenters' reading of CAA section 112(i)(3)(A)
would not only be contrary to the EPA's plain language reading but
would also be contrary to the OIAI policy under which sources could
reclassify after the effective date as long as they did so before the
first substantive compliance date.
In sum, the EPA has concluded that the CAA section 112 definitions
of ``major source'' and ``area source'' and the ``effective date''
provision in CAA section 112(i)(3)(A) are properly read together to say
that sources must comply with the applicable requirements corresponding
to their major source or area source status, and that if this status
changes, then the source becomes subject to the requirements
corresponding to its status after the change.
CAA sections 112(c)(3) and (6)--Some commenters argue that CAA
sections 112(c)(3) and (6) reflect a Congressional intent that sources
be subject to continuous, permanent compliance with major source
standards and that these provisions are, therefore, inconsistent with
the EPA's plain language reading. But there is no inconsistency here.
Those provisions required the EPA to ensure that sources accounting for
90 percent of the emissions of specific pollutants were listed and
regulated by November 2000. The premise of the commenters' argument
based on CAA
[[Page 73861]]
sections 112(c)(3) and (6) is that these provisions do not simply
require the EPA to list and regulate sufficient source categories to
meet the 90-percent requirement at a given point in time; rather, they
require that the EPA's regulations ensure that 90 percent of emissions
are subject to regulation on an ongoing basis. This is not a reasonable
reading of CAA sections 112(c)(3) and (6) because, as explained in
greater detail in the proposed rule preamble at 84 FR 36311, the
requirements of the statute and subsequent standards will result in the
emissions from the listed source categories falling below the 90-
percent threshold once those source categories are regulated. If
commenters' interpretation were correct, CAA sections 112(c)(3) and (6)
would create a never-ending cycle of listing and regulation in order to
achieve an unattainable goal of ensuring that 90 percent of emissions
are regulated. See 84 FR 36311.
In response to the EPA's discussion in the proposed rule preamble,
commenters have stated that the statutory text in CAA sections
112(c)(3) and (6) is properly read not to focus on the source
categories that those provisions require to be listed but on the
individual sources that are within those categories--specifically, that
these provisions require the EPA to regulate the sources that produced
those emissions. But if the listing and regulation required pursuant to
CAA sections (c)(3) and (6) were read to apply to the sources that
produced the emissions as of the time of the listing of the categories,
then that would mean that new sources within the listed source
categories would not be regulated. The EPA does not think this is a
reasonable reading of those provisions. Instead, the proper reading of
these provisions is that the EPA is to list and regulate source
categories, and then a source is regulated pursuant to the standard
applicable to a given source category to the extent that, and as long
as, the source remains within the source category. Thus, under a proper
reading of CAA sections 112(c)(3) and (6), those provisions do not
prevent reclassification, so there is no conflict between the EPA's
plain language reading of CAA sections 112(a)(1)-(2) and the
requirements of CAA sections 112(c)(3) and (6).
CAA section 112(f)(2)--Commenters also point to CAA section
112(f)(2) (commonly referred to as the residual risk provision) and
contend that the EPA's plain language reading allows reclassified
sources to avoid the review required under that provision. But this
argument fails to refute the discussion that the EPA provided in the
proposed rule preamble (at 84 FR 36311-36312). First, as a general
matter, Congress in CAA section 112 plainly distinguished between major
sources emitting above the MST and area sources emitting below the MST
and subjected them to different requirements. Second, with regard to
CAA section 112(f), CAA section 112(f)(5) contains an express exemption
from the CAA section (f)(2) review for area sources, and there is no
statutory basis or logical reason for treating an area source
differently just because it is a former major source. For these
reasons, CAA section 112(f) is not inconsistent with the EPA's plain
language reading.
CAA section 112(d)--Some commenters have pointed to the
requirements of CAA section 112(d) as requiring sources that are at any
point subjected to major source standards must continue to be subject
to major source standards permanently. These commenters have argued
that the EPA's plain language reading undermines the emissions
reductions required by these CAA section 112 standards. Section
112(d)--and in particular, sections 112(d)(2) and (3) of the CAA--
addresses how the EPA sets MACT standards for major sources (based on
the maximum degree of emissions reduction the EPA determines is
achievable, which may be a complete prohibition on emissions). But the
question of what standard is applicable to major sources in a source
category--whether MACT floor standards or otherwise--logically cannot
determine which sources are major sources . Instead, the text and
structure of CAA section 112 demonstrate that whether a source is
classified as a major source or an area source is the threshold
question under CAA section 112, and what requirements apply to the
source flows from how the source is classified, with major sources and
area sources facing significantly different regulation.
As noted above, the very first provisions in CAA section 112 are
the major source definition in CAA section 112(a)(1) and area source
definition in CAA section 112(a)(2) that create the major/area
distinction. Following from this threshold distinction, CAA section 112
treats major sources and area sources differently in fundamental ways.
To state a few examples that illustrate this:
(1) The EPA must list all categories of major sources of HAP
pursuant to CAA section 112(c)(1), but only has to list categories of
area sources representing 90 percent of HAP under CAA section
112(c)(3). This distinction is then carried over to what sources are
regulated, as provided in CAA section 112(d)(1), which provides that
the EPA will regulate those categories listed under CAA section 112(c).
(2) Major sources are subject to MACT standards under CAA section
112(d)(2) and (3), but area sources may be subject to generally
available control technology (GACT) standards under CAA section
112(d)(5).
(3) Area source categories and subcategories listed under CAA
section 112(c)(3) and for which standards are set under CAA section
112(d)(5) are not subject to residual risk review under CAA section
112(f)(2), pursuant to CAA section 112(f)(5).
In short, to the extent that major sources become area sources by
reducing their emissions of and PTE HAP below the MST, and, thus, are
no longer subject to major source requirements, that is not a
``loophole'' or an ``end-run'' around the major source requirements.
That is simply the result of the provisions and structure of CAA
section 112 that Congress enacted and reflects the fundamental
distinction between how CAA section 112 addresses major sources and
area sources.
Further, allowing a major source to take a PTE limit below the
major source threshold and thereby avoid having to comply with major
source requirements is not a new concept under MM2A. Indeed, that is
precisely what happened under the OIAI policy. The only change under
MM2A is one of timing. Under the OIAI policy, major sources could
reclassify if they took the PTE limit before the first substantive
compliance date. Under MM2A, sources can reclassify at any time.
Nothing in the statute says, and there is no logical reason why, a
major source that could reclassify to area source status on the day
before its first substantive compliance date (as allowed under the OIAI
policy) is foreclosed from doing so on the day after its first
substantive compliance date.
Similarly, having a source reclassify after the first substantive
compliance date is not a new concept under MM2A. During the time that
the OIAI policy was in effect, area sources were reclassified to major
source status at any time that they increased emissions or their PTE
above the major source threshold, even if the increase occurred after
the first substantive compliance date under the applicable area source
rule.
For these reasons, the EPA concludes that the standard-setting
provisions in CAA sections 112(d)(2) and (3) do not contradict the
plain language of the major source and area source definitions
[[Page 73862]]
on the issue of whether a source can reclassify at any time.
Parties opposed to the EPA's plain language reading also suggest
that the EPA's reading is inconsistent with the purpose and provisions
of CAA section 112 because it will lead major sources that reclassify
to area source status to increase their emissions above what they could
emit if they continued to be major sources. The EPA disagrees with the
suggestion that a source's reclassification from major source to area
source will necessarily lead to an increase in emissions from the
source above what would have been allowed to emit under the major
source standard. As discussed in section VIII of the preamble, there
are a number of reasons why reclassified sources are generally not
expected to increase their emissions. The EPA's analysis of the sources
that have reclassified to date and sources that might reclassify from
various source categories shows that in 68 out of 69 operating permits
for sources that have already reclassified to area source status since
January 2018, sources achieved and maintain area source status by
operating the emission controls or continuing to implement the
practices they used to comply with the major source NESHAP
requirements. However, the EPA found that one of the 69 reclassified
sources will not continue to employ the same compliance method that it
used to meet the major source standard, and thus may increase its
emissions. In addition to this review of actual reclassification
actions since January 2018, the EPA also prepared an illustrative
analysis for 72 source categories in the major source NESHAP program
(114 total) to evaluate the potential emissions impacts. After
considering the information and data available for the illustrative
emissions analysis, we found that 65 source categories will not change
emissions as a result of the rule. For the other seven, there was a
potential for (but not a certainty of) emissions increases based on
conservative assumptions that are likely to overstate the change in
emissions at some facilities. Sources in these in seven source
categories assessed in the primary scenario could increase emissions if
those facilities (1) opted to reclassify and (2) were permitted to
change the operation of adjustable add-on controls. Further details of
this illustrative analysis and the results are provided below in
section VIII.
Further, allowing major sources to reclassify to area source status
after the first substantive compliance date may create an incentive for
sources to evaluate their operations and consider changes that can
further reduce their HAP emissions to below the MST if the source views
those changes as an opportunity to reduce costs of production, increase
productivity, or reduce the costs of complying with major source NESHAP
requirements. For example, sources using surface coatings may see the
opportunity to become an area source as an extra incentive to invest in
the development of new low- or no-HAP content coatings, inks, and
binders. Similarly, sources with boilers and engines may benefit from
replacing old boilers and engines with new, more efficient, and clean
technologies. Such a replacement not only could help a source reduce
HAP to below the MST but could also reduce fuel use and associated
costs. To assess the opportunity for such emission decreases, we looked
at an alternative scenario and determined that some sources operating
between 75 and 125 percent of the MST could decrease emissions if those
sources were to reclassify. Further details of this illustrative
analysis and the results are provided below in section VIII.
In the MM2A proposal, the EPA took comment on whether it can and
should promulgate regulatory provisions that would prevent a source
that has reclassified from major to area source status from increasing
emissions above what the source was allowed to emit when it was a major
source. See 84 FR 36312-36313. Upon further consideration of this issue
and the comments received, the EPA has concluded that the plain
language of CAA section 112 precludes the promulgation of such
provisions. As discussed above, the plain language of CAA section 112
provides that a source is an area source if its emissions and PTE are
below the thresholds of 10 tpy of any one HAP and 25 tpy of any
combination of HAP. Just as there is nothing in the statutory
definitions in CAA sections 112(a)(1) and (2) or elsewhere in CAA
section 112 that sets, or gives the EPA the authority to set, a cut-off
date after which a major source cannot classify to area source status,
there is nothing in CAA section 112 that imposes, or gives the EPA the
authority to impose, a requirement that a source can only be an area
source if it limits its emissions to some level below the MST. Congress
clearly identified the thresholds of 10 tpy of any one HAP and 25 tpy
of all combined HAP as the dividing line between major source status
and area source status. The EPA cannot impose a different dividing line
from what Congress wrote into CAA section 112. See Utility Air
Regulatory Group v. EPA, 573 U.S. 302, 325-326 (2014) (where Congress
created precise numerical thresholds in the statute, the EPA's
rewriting of the statutory thresholds is impermissible).
Further, even if there were some ambiguity in the text and
structure of CAA section 112 that gave the EPA the discretion to impose
such a requirement, the EPA's conclusion in light of both the statute
and policy considerations is that such a requirement should not be
imposed. As discussed above, whether a source is classified as a major
source or an area source is the threshold question under CAA section
112, and what requirements apply to the source flows from how the
source is classified, with major sources and area sources facing
significantly different statutory requirements. If the EPA were to
mandate that a reclassified area source maintain its emissions below
the level that the source was subject to as a major source, that would
be contrary to the fundamental structure that Congress created in CAA
section 112. Further, as discussed below in section VIII, even in the
absence of any provisions preventing emissions above what a
reclassified source was allowed to emit as a major source, most sources
are not expected to increase emissions and those that do would have
only modest increases. Thus, as a matter of policy judgment, the EPA
would not interpret any ambiguity in the statute to allow the
imposition of a new limit on reclassified area sources more stringent
than the limit applied to other area sources.
For these reasons, the EPA is not promulgating provisions that
would prevent a source that has reclassified from major to area source
status from increasing emissions above what the source was allowed to
emit when it was a major source.
V. Summary of Final Amendments
To implement the plain language reading of the statute as discussed
in section IV above, the EPA is finalizing amendments to the General
Provisions of 40 CFR part 63, subpart A. The EPA is also finalizing
amendments to the General Provisions tables contained within most
subparts of 40 CFR part 63 to account for the regulatory provisions we
are finalizing in the General Provisions of 40 CFR part 63, subpart A.
Finally, the EPA is finalizing changes to several individual NESHAP
intended to remove rule-specific OIAI provisions. For all comments not
discussed in this preamble, comment summaries and the EPA's responses
can be found in the Response to Comments document available in the
docket.
[[Page 73863]]
A. Final Amendments to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A: General Provisions
1. Applicability
The EPA is finalizing amendments to the applicability section of
the General Provisions of 40 CFR part 63.1 by adding a new provision 40
CFR 63.1(c)(6) to implement the plain language reading of the ``major
source'' and ``area source'' statutory definitions of section 112 of
the CAA and provide that a major source can be reclassified to area
source status at any time upon reducing its actual emissions of and
potential to emit HAP to below the MST of 10 tpy of any single HAP and
25 tpy of any combination of HAP. At proposal, this new applicability
provision also included regulatory language addressing the compliance
date with applicable NESHAP requirements for reclassification and
interactions with enforcement actions. We received comments on all
aspects of the new applicability provision. Below we discuss each
aspect of the proposed MM2A applicability provision and what we are
finalizing after considering public comments.
a. Reclassification Provision
The EPA proposed to amend 40 CFR 63.1 by adding a new paragraph
(c)(6). As proposed, this paragraph specifies that a major source can
become an area source at any time by limiting its PTE HAP to below the
major source thresholds established in 40 CFR 63.2, provided certain
conditions are met. We received comments in support of and against the
proposed text in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6) and comments requesting changes to
or clarification on the proposed provision. Comments against the
proposed reclassification provision based on the statutory text or
other legal issues (such as legal comments opposing the EPA's plain
language reading of CAA section 112 definitions of major and area
sources allowing sources to reclassify at any time) are addressed in
section IV of this preamble and in the Response to Comments document
available in the docket. The comments requesting changes to or
clarification on the new provision are summarized below.
Some commenters recommended that the EPA add language to the new
provision in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6) to specify that the provision applies to
sources that reclassify to area source status after being subject to
major source NESHAP requirements. The EPA disagrees that the language
only applies to reclassification by a major source after the source has
been subject to major source NESHAP requirements. The regulatory
language in this provision implements the EPA's plain language reading
of the definition of major and area sources in section 112 of the CAA,
as discussed in length in section IV of this preamble, allowing sources
to reclassify at any time. This provision allows for reclassification
to area source status regardless of whether the reclassification occurs
before or after the first substantive compliance date of a major source
NESHAP.
Other commenters stated that the proposed provision in 40 CFR
63.1(c)(6) could be read to require all types of sources to obtain PTE
limits in order to be reclassified to area source status. These
commenters stated that this could be problematic for sources that were
major at the first substantive compliance date of a particular NESHAP
but are no longer within the definition of ``major source'' at the time
of reclassification because the source's emissions of and PTE HAP are
below the MST even in the absence of a governmental restriction on
emissions in a PTE limit. The EPA agrees with the commenters that the
language in the proposed provision can be clarified and has amended the
language of 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6) in the final rule to read: ``A major
source may become an area source at any time upon reducing its
emissions of and potential to emit (PTE) hazardous air pollutants, as
defined in this subpart, to below the major source thresholds
established in 40 CFR 63.2, subject to the provisions in paragraphs
(c)(6)(i) and (ii) of this section.'' The provisions in 40 CFR
63.1(c)(6)(i) and (ii) as finalized in this action are discussed later
in this preamble.
In the final regulatory language of 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6), the EPA
replaced the phrase ``limiting its potential to emit (PTE) hazardous
air pollutants . . .'' with the phrase ``reducing its emissions of and
potential to emit (PTE) hazardous air pollutants . . .''. This updated
language removes the ambiguity in the proposed language and makes it
clear that PTE limits would be needed for area source reclassification
for sources with PTE HAP at or above the MST. In contrast, consistent
with the statutory definitions of ``major source'' and ``area source''
and the regulatory definition of PTE in 40 CFR 63.2, so called ``true''
area sources,\12\ which in this preamble means sources that do not have
the capacity to emit HAP at major source levels under their physical
and operational design (even if the source owner and regulatory agency
disregard any enforceable limitations), are not within the definition
of ``major source.'' These ``true'' area sources do not need to obtain
enforceable PTE limits to be reclassified to area source status.
Accordingly, sources that have permanently removed equipment, changed
their processes, or by other means currently do not have a maximum
capacity to emit HAP at major source levels are ``true'' area sources
(i.e., enforceable limits are not needed on the source's physical or
operational design to restrict the source's PTE HAP below MST) and do
not need to adopt PTE limits to be reclassified. Any source that adopts
a physical or operational limit on its maximum capacity to emit
(including requirements for the use of air pollution control equipment
or restrictions on the hours of operations or on the type or amount of
material combusted, stored, or processed) to limit its PTE HAP below
the MST is not a true area source. These are often referred to as
``synthetic'' area sources.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ This preamble follows the convention about the meaning of
these terms adopted in an EPA memorandum titled ``Potential to Emit
(PTE) Guidance for Specific Source Categories'' (April 14, 1998),
available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-07/documents/lowmarch.pdf.
\13\ We note that in the Oil and Natural Gas Federal
Implementation Plan (O&NG FIP) in Indian County, ``true area
sources'' include the reductions due to compliance with various
NESHAP and new source performance standards (NSPS) standards, which
are applicable requirements of the O&NG FIP. True minor sources in
the oil and natural gas production and natural gas processing
segments of the oil and natural gas sector are required to comply
with the O&NG FIP instead of obtaining a source-specific minor
source permit, unless a source chooses to opt out of the FIP and to
obtain a source-specific minor New Source Review (NSR) permit
instead under the ``Federal Minor New Source Review (NSR) Program in
Indian Country.'' See FIP for True Minor Sources in Indian Country
in the Oil and Natural Gas Production and Natural Gas Processing
Segments of the Oil and Natural Gas Sector. 81 FR 35944 (June 3,
2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Relatedly, commenters claimed that the MM2A proposal did not appear
to explain that the definition of ``potential to emit'' does not
require enforceable limitations for restrictions on HAP emissions that
are inherent in the physical or operational design of the production
process. Note that the EPA recognizes that, on a case-by-case basis, a
situation may warrant an assessment of whether a given device or
strategy should be considered as air pollution control equipment or as
an inherent part of the process.\14\ That said, the final rule is not
revising the EPA's view on how to determine ``the maximum capacity of a
stationary source to emit a pollutant under its physical and
operational design.'' Sources with questions about the proper way to
determine PTE HAP or whether they should obtain PTE limits for
reclassification to area source
[[Page 73864]]
status are encouraged to consult applicable permitting program
regulations and work with their corresponding regulatory authorities on
a determination that considers their situation. See also, 40 CFR
63.10(b)(3), which explains in detail the analysis and contents of the
records to be kept for applicability determinations made by a source
for purposes of 40 CFR part 63.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-07/documents/readymix2.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multiple commenters objected to the EPA's proposed viewpoint that a
major source that had been complying with a NESHAP as of the first
substantive compliance date of the standard, but reduced its PTE HAP
below the MST by complying with non-section 112 CAA requirements, would
be required to obtain HAP PTE limits to ensure that HAP emissions
remain below the MST. These commenters argued the EPA should make clear
in the final rule that a limitation on another pollutant or parameter
can be recognized as a limitation on the source's potential to emit HAP
if the limitation on the other pollutant emissions or parameter
results, as a practical matter, in a restriction on the source's HAP
emissions. The commenters noted that limits that qualify to reduce a
source's PTE HAP emissions do not need to be ``HAP PTE limits,'' i.e.,
a requirement need not place limits directly on a HAP to have the
effect of limiting a HAP. The commenters cited as example that volatile
organic compound (VOC) limits could reduce HAP emissions and further
stated that the EPA provided no explanation why requiring the source to
obtain HAP PTE limits is essential to ensure that the area source's HAP
emissions are effectively limited. The EPA recognizes that the proposal
may have caused confusion about whether the EPA recognizes HAP
reductions due to surrogate criteria pollutant controls for purposes of
reclassifying to area source status.\15\ That said, the EPA has
concluded that it does not need to revise the regulatory text to make
this specific point because the definition of PTE (as revised in this
final rule) allows for the effect of such limitations to count toward
limiting the PTE HAP. A source relying on the effect of non-HAP
enforceable limitation to constrain its PTE HAP below the MST may need
to show the regulatory authority processing the reclassification the
effect of such limitation on the source's PTE HAP to confirm that such
source has a PTE HAP that allows it to reclassify to area source
status.\16\ As explained before, the determination of a source's PTE
HAP under the PTE definition in 40 CFR 63.2 requires consideration of
any enforceable controls, including ``nested'' HAP usage limits in
permits intended as enforceable VOC limits, and other enforceable non-
HAP limitations within a permit that have the effect of reducing HAP
emissions. To the extent that a source's PTE considering controls
exceeds the MST, a source would need to obtain enforceable limitations
constraining its PTE HAP below the MST in order to be reclassified to
area source status. Finally, the revised language in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6)
that now states ``reducing emissions and its potential to emit (PTE)
hazardous air pollutants . . .'' (as opposed to the proposed language
stating ``limiting its potential to emit (PTE) hazardous air pollutants
. . .'') supports the EPA's conclusion that the PTE regulatory
definition means that enforceable limits on other pollutants can have
the effect of reducing PTE HAP and can be the basis for
reclassification. See also 40 CFR 63.10(b)(3) about the analysis and
record contents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See, e.g., January 25, 1995, memorandum titled ``Options
for Limiting the Potential to Emit (PTE) of a Stationary Source
Under Section 112 and Title V of the Clean Air Act (Act),'' also,
memorandum, ``Crediting of Maximum Achievable Control Technology
(MACT) Emission Reductions for New Source Review (NSR) Netting and
Offsets,'' available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-07/documents/netnoff.pdf. See, also, 81 FR 35944, explaining
that HAP compliance reductions of volatile organic HAP to meet MACT
may also result in emissions reductions of VOC.
\16\ The EPA expects that state and local and tribal agencies
will exercise care when drafting enforceable permit conditions in
the situation where the ``effect'' of criteria pollutant limits will
not be straight forward. See January 25, 1995, memorandum titled
``Options for Limiting the Potential to Emit (PTE) of a Stationary
Source Under Section 112 and Title V of the Clean Air Act (Act).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, some commenters asked the EPA to clarify what requirements
apply to sources that reclassified before the effective date of this
rule. These commenters asked the EPA to state in the final rule that
sources that reclassified to area source status prior to the MM2A final
rule would not be required to undertake any additional actions. To the
extent that sources have reclassified before the effective date of this
final rule, their ability to reclassify is governed by the plain
language reading of the statute. We discuss the notification and
recordkeeping requirements for sources that reclassified before the
effective date of this final rule later in this preamble. In contrast,
sources that reclassify after the effective date of this final rule are
governed by the plain language reading of the statute and by the
provisions being finalized in this final rule. In either case, a
reclassification is not a safe harbor for the source if the limits
taken do not effectively limit the HAP emissions and the source emits
HAP in excess of the MST.
b. Compliance Dates for Applicable Standards
In the proposed language of 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6), the EPA included
regulatory text addressing applicability of standards and other
requirements under 40 CFR part 63 for sources that reclassify to area
source status, including dates for compliance with standards and
notifications requirements. Because sources must comply with
requirements corresponding to their status, the proposed provision in
40 CFR 63.1(c)(6) specified, ``Until the PTE limitations become
effective, the source remains subject to major source requirements.
After the PTE limitations become effective, the source is subject to
any applicable requirements for area sources.'' In response to comments
and to clarify the requirements associated with applicability of NESHAP
requirements and the compliance dates for sources reclassifying to area
source status, both before and after compliance with applicable major
source NESHAP requirements, and for reclassified area sources that
subsequently become major sources again, the EPA is consolidating these
requirements in the final regulatory text at 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6)(i). The
final provision also addresses the notification requirements for these
sources. We discuss notification requirements below in section V.A.2 of
the preamble.
The final regulatory text in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6)(i)(A) addresses the
applicability of standards and compliance dates for sources
reclassifying to area source status either before or after being
subject to major source requirements under 40 CFR part 63. The final
regulatory text in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6)(i)(B) addresses the applicability
of standards and compliance dates for reclassified area sources that
subsequently become major sources again. These final provisions are
discussed below.
In this final rule, the EPA is updating the regulatory language in
40 CFR 63.1(c)(6)(i)(A) to include the applicability of standards and
compliance dates for sources reclassifying to area source status. The
final amended text in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6)(i)(A) reads as follows: ``A
major source reclassifying to area source status under this part
remains subject to any applicable major source requirements established
under this part until the reclassification becomes
[[Page 73865]]
effective. After the reclassification becomes effective, the source
must comply with any applicable area source requirements established
under this part immediately, provided the compliance date for the area
source requirements has passed. The owner or operator of a major source
that becomes an area source subject to newly applicable area source
requirements under this part must comply with the initial notification
pursuant to Sec. 63.9(b). The owner or operator of a reclassified
source must also provide to the Administrator notification of the
change in the information already provided under Sec. 63.9(b) per
Sec. 63.9(j).''
As stated in this provision, sources remain subject to any
applicable major source requirements under 40 CFR part 63 ``until the
reclassification becomes effective'' instead of the proposed language
``until the PTE limitations become effective.'' In the MM2A proposal,
the EPA explained that reclassification to area source status is a
voluntary action on the part of a source, and sources are required to
apply with their corresponding regulatory authority and follow the
corresponding authority's procedures to be reclassified to area source
status. This includes sources that, at the time of reclassification,
are no longer within the definition of ``major source'' because they
are true area sources (as described above in the preamble), because
they had already obtained PTE limits below the MST, or due to other
enforceable compliance obligations under a permit, permit by rule, or
State Implementation Plan (SIP). As explained elsewhere in this
preamble, such sources are area sources under the CAA section 112
definition, but as a result of our previous policy they may continue to
have enforceable permit conditions, including major source NESHAP
requirements, for example, until their title V permit is revised or
revoked in agreement with their permitting authority procedures.
Because reclassification to area source status currently occurs
under a regulatory authority's area or minor source program, the
reclassification of a source to area source status is effective when
the corresponding regulatory authority grants a source's request to be
considered an area source via a permit registration, permit by rule,
applicability determination, etc. (As explained in this preamble, 40
CFR part 63 separately requires notification of the applicability of a
standard and recordkeeping of information on the applicability
determination decision.) We expect that the process for sources to
reclassify to area source status for HAP will rely on existing programs
(e.g., minor source programs, title V permitting procedures, and/or
approved programs for issuing PTE limits under CAA section 112(l)).
Consistent with how regulation of area sources is currently implemented
under CAA programs, the EPA expects that determinations of area source
status or major source status, as requested by a source for
reclassification, will occur in a single action or concurrently with
permitting actions needed to reconcile the revised requirements for the
source under the newly acquired status or as appropriate for permit
closure or revocation. (A permitting authority program may have
simpler, less burdensome processes for specific groups of sources.) The
language finalized about the effective date of reclassification
equitably considers the current implementation mechanisms and sources
situation.
As proposed, the regulatory language in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6)(i) stated
that ``[a] major source that becomes an area source must meet all
applicable area source requirements promulgated under this part
immediately upon becoming an area source, provided the first
substantive compliance date for the area source standard has passed, .
. .'' Some commenters requested that the EPA include language in the
final rule providing that sources reclassifying to area source status
may meet the major source NESHAP requirements as a means of complying
with newly applicable area source NESHAP requirements. The EPA is not
including such language in the final rule. Any source that reclassifies
to area source status is no longer subject to major source NESHAP
requirements and is subject to area source NESHAP requirements instead.
That said, the area source is not precluded from streamlining the
applicable area source NESHAP requirements with permit terms from a
previously applicable major source NESHAP standard if compliance with
applicable area source NESHAP requirements is assured. Because the
reclassification to area source status is a voluntary action on the
part of the source, the source must evaluate the area source NESHAP
requirements that will become applicable to the source at the time of
the reclassification to area source status and be in a position to meet
such requirements at the time it reclassifies.
In the regulatory language of 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6)(i)(A), the EPA is
finalizing the proposed immediate compliance rule for major sources
that reclassify to area source status. These sources will be subject to
applicable area source NESHAP requirements in 40 CFR part 63
immediately upon reclassification to area source status, provided the
compliance date for the area source requirements has passed. In the
MM2A proposal, the EPA proposed to allow for additional time for
compliance with applicable area source NESHAP requirements for
particular situations. For reclassifications from major source to area
source status, the EPA proposed that additional time (not to exceed 3
years) may be granted by the EPA (or a delegated authority) in a
compliance schedule where an area source standard would apply to an
existing source upon reclassification and different emission points
would need controls or different emission controls would be necessary
to comply with the area source standard or other physical changes would
be needed to comply with the standard.
The EPA received many comments on the proposed immediate compliance
rule, compliance extension provisions, and the process for obtaining a
compliance extension. Some commenters agreed with the proposed
immediate compliance rule for sources that reclassify to area source
status, while others opposed the immediate compliance rule if the EPA
did not include provisions to obtain a compliance extension. Commenters
supporting the immediate compliance rule without compliance extension
provisions argued that sources should be aware of applicable
requirements and plan for timely compliance at the time they request
reclassification. These commenters opposed the proposed compliance
extension provision, noting that any provision to allow compliance at
periods later than 3 years from a standard's effective date was
unlawful and unnecessary. The commenters argued that CAA section
112(i)(3)(A) requires that compliance must be within 3 years of the
effective date of the standard; furthermore, CAA section 112(i)(3)(A)
requires compliance ``as expeditiously as practicable.'' The commenters
argued that just because physical changes may be required for a source
to comply with newly applicable area source NESHAP requirements, it
does not mean that compliance cannot be achieved immediately upon
reclassification. The commenters emphasized that CAA section 112(i)(3)
is clear on the compliance schedule for existing sources; that the
schedule is determined by the effective date of any emission standard,
limitation, or regulation promulgated under CAA section 112; and that
compliance has to be as expeditious as practicable, but in no event
later than 3 years after the
[[Page 73866]]
effective date of such standard. On the other hand, some commenters
stated that there may be a short period of time when a stationary
source needs to discontinue compliance with a major source NESHAP
requirement before complying with the area source NESHAP requirements
to conduct testing and verify monitoring protocols or to physically
install emission controls. These commenters argued that the rule should
recognize the need for such exceptions to the requirement to comply
immediately with the area source NESHAP requirements and that the
regulatory authority must be able to consider all the relevant factors
in allowing for a compliance extension. While the commenters stated
that a stationary source would want an exception to discontinue
compliance with major source NESHAP requirements for a short period of
time in order to come into compliance with the new area source NESHAP
requirements to which they will be subject immediately after
reclassification, the commenters did not provide supporting evidence or
concrete examples showing that there are real situations where such
compliance exception is needed.
The EPA agrees with the commenters that the statutory language in
CAA section 112(i)(3)(A) precludes the compliance extension as
proposed. For this reason, the EPA is not finalizing the proposed
compliance extension for sources reclassifying to area source status.
If a source reclassifies to area source status in a source category for
which there are applicable area source NESHAP requirements, and the
effective date of such requirements has passed, the source must comply
immediately upon reclassification. If the compliance date of the
applicable area source NESHAP requirements is in the future, the source
must comply by the future compliance date specified in the individual
subpart. Because reclassification is a voluntary action on the part of
the source, the immediate compliance requirement does not represent a
compliance issue because a source could delay their reclassification
until such time as they are able and equipped to meet the applicable
area source NESHAP requirements.
In the MM2A proposal, the EPA included in the proposed provision at
40 CFR 63.1(c)(6)(ii) regulatory language addressing the compliance
schedule for sources that reclassify between major and area source
status more than once. The EPA proposed that ``A major source subject
to standards under part 63 that subsequently becomes an area source,
and then later becomes a major source again by increasing its emissions
to at or above the major source thresholds, must comply with the
previous applicable major source requirements of this part immediately
upon becoming a major source again . . .'' The EPA also proposed a
compliance extension provision for these sources: If the previously
applicable standard has been revised since the source was last subject
to the standard and, in order to comply, the source must undergo a
physical change, install additional emission controls, and/or implement
new control measures, the source will have up to the same amount of
time to comply as the amount of time allowed for existing sources
subject to the revised standard. The EPA received multiple comments on
the proposed compliance schedule and compliance extension provision for
reclassified area sources reverting to major source status.
Some commenters argued that there was no need for the EPA to
address compliance timelines in the context of the MM2A rulemaking for
sources that reclassify to area source status and then revert back to
major source status. These commenters noted that the existing General
Provisions in 40 CFR 63.6(c)(5) already include compliance dates for
area sources that become major sources, and that by including
compliance dates within the provision in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6), the EPA was
creating disparate compliance schedule requirements. Several other
commenters agreed with the proposed immediate compliance rule for area
sources reverting to major source status, stating that sources should
be aware of applicable requirements and plan for timely compliance at
the time they request reclassification. These commenters opposed the
proposed compliance extension provision, noting that any provision to
allow compliance at periods later than 3 years from a standard's
effective date is unlawful and unnecessary. The commenters argued that
CAA section 112(i)(3)(A) requires that compliance must be within 3
years of the effective date of the standard. In addition, the
commenters pointed out that CAA section 112(i)(3)(A) does not allow
additional time for a source that reverts to major source status when
the applicable major source NESHAP has increased in stringency; thus,
there is no reason for the proposed extension. The commenters noted
that CAA section 112(g)(2) requires that any entity that modifies or
constructs a major source first secure a determination that applicable
maximum-achievable standards will be met. The commenters argued that
any source that proposes to increase its emissions to exceed the MST
should be required to plan sufficiently to comply with the applicable
major source NESHAP requirements before it increases its emissions.
These commenters stressed that it would be inappropriate to allow
stationary sources to prolong compliance with applicable standards, and
that allowing sources additional time for compliance could incentivize
sources to continually shift stationary source applicability status to
avoid complying with applicable NESHAP requirements. These commenters
objected to any compliance extension, stating that any extension or
consideration of special conditions would remove the protections in
existing rules, allowing the public and environment to be exposed to
increased HAP emissions.
Other commenters argued that the proposed immediate compliance
provisions for sources that revert back to their previous major source
status are onerous and seem to be designed to discourage sources from
opting to become area sources. These commenters supported the proposed
compliance extension provisions but noted that there is no
justification to conditioning any extension to the immediate compliance
requirement for these sources on an intervening change to the major
source standard. They argued that this appeared to be a backdoor
attempt to force sources opting to become area sources to continue
using major NESHAP add-on controls in case they might need to become a
major source again, and that this is something for which the EPA lacks
authority. Some commenters supported the immediate compliance rule if
appropriate exceptions are made in the final rule and it includes a
reasonable process for requesting an extension. The commenters
recommended that the compliance extensions be left to the air pollution
control agencies and that the EPA should not try to define what changes
would be eligible for a longer compliance period, thus, eliminating
unnecessary EPA oversight of the process for area sources and
simplifying the procedures for acquiring additional compliance time.
Finally, the commenters stated that a source that once was a major
source may, for example, maintain its area source status for 20 years
before seeking to become a major source again; for this source, many
things may have changed while it was an area source, including process
changes that render the previous compliance approach inapplicable or
[[Page 73867]]
require the source to comply in different ways.
The EPA agrees with the commenters that stated that the statutory
language in CAA section 112(i)(3)(A) is properly read to preclude the
proposed compliance extension for sources that revert back to their
previous major source status and are subject to major source
requirements for which the compliance date of such requirements has
passed. These sources must comply with the major source requirements
immediately, even if faced with the circumstances listed in the
proposal (needing to ``undergo a physical change, install additional
emissions controls and/or implement new control measures'' in order to
meet the applicable NESHAP requirements). In the circumstance where a
source is reverting back to major source status for which there are
applicable major source NESHAP requirements and the compliance date of
such requirements at the time of reclassification is still in the
future, the source needs to comply with such requirements by the future
compliance date specified in the individual subpart. In sum, a source
should not reclassify (in either direction) until it is ready to meet
the requirements that are imposed by the new classification.
For the reasons explained above, the final regulatory text included
in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6)(i)(B) addresses the applicability of standards and
compliance dates for reclassified area sources that subsequently become
major sources again. In this provision, the EPA is finalizing the
proposed immediate compliance rule for area sources that become major
sources again, if they were previously major sources under 40 CFR part
63. The EPA has amended the language to read as follows: ``An area
source that previously was a major source under this part and that
becomes a major source again must comply with the applicable major
source requirements established under this part immediately upon
becoming a major source again, provided the compliance date for the
major source requirements has passed, notwithstanding any other
provision within the applicable subparts. The owner or operator of a
source that becomes a major source again must comply with the initial
notification pursuant to Sec. 63.9(b). The owner or operator must also
provide to the Administrator any change in the information already
provided under Sec. 63.9(b) per Sec. 63.9(j).'' This updated final
provision in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6)(i)(B) for reclassified area sources that
subsequently become major sources again covers both situations of
sources that reclassify back to major source status: (1) Major sources
that reclassify to area source status prior to being subject to major
NESHAP requirements (including sources that reclassified under the OIAI
policy) and then return to major source status and (2) major sources
that reclassify to area source status after being subject to major
NESHAP requirements and then return to major source status. On the
other hand, the compliance dates for area sources that never operated
as major sources previously (including sources constructed with
enforceable controls or other type of enforceable PTE limits) but that
increase emissions or PTE and become major sources for the first time
are governed by the provisions in the individual NESHAP (which are not
being amended in this rule) and not the provisions applicable to
reclassified area sources that return to major source status that are
being finalized in this action. The EPA is also finalizing amendments
to 40 CFR 63.6(c)(1) to account for the immediate compliance rule as
included in the final revisions to 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6)(i)(A) and (B) as
discussed above.
Finally, while some commenters requested assurance that if sources
revert back to their previous major source status, sources will not be
considered new sources, others argued the EPA should expressly provide
that relaxation or elimination of a PTE limit that results in the
source becoming a major source requires that the source comply with CAA
section 112 NESHAP requirements for a new source. These commenters
asserted that as a result of a loophole in the existing 40 CFR part 63
regulations, some sources and states are currently under the impression
that a source can have its original PTE limit taken at the time of
construction relaxed or eliminated without triggering the requirement
to comply with major source NESHAP requirements that would have
otherwise applied to the source when it was built. This confusion could
have arisen from the text in 40 CFR 63.6(c)(5) stating that ``the owner
or operator of an area source that increases its emissions of (or its
potential to emit) hazardous air pollutants such that the source
becomes a major source shall be subject to relevant standards for
existing sources.'' As explained in section IV of this preamble, the
CAA section 112 definitions of ``new source'' and ``existing source''
dictate that the new source/existing source distinction is determined
by when the affected source commences construction or reconstruction
with respect to the date of proposal of the standard and say nothing
about the source's volume of emissions. For this reason, the EPA
disagrees that a source reclassifying to major source status after
having previously been subject to the major source standards would
necessarily be classified as an existing source. The EPA also disagrees
with commenters that a reclassifying source would necessarily be a new
source for purposes of determining which standard applies. Whether an
affected source is new or existing for purposes of compliance with an
applicable NESHAP is dictated by when the source commenced construction
or reconstruction in relation to when the applicable NESHAP was
proposed and not whether the status of the source is major or area.
Moreover, the regulatory text at 40 CFR 63.6(c)--Compliance dates
for existing sources--applies only to ``existing sources.'' Therefore,
the regulatory language at 40 CFR 63.6(c)(5) states that ``the owner or
operator of an [existing] area source that increases its emissions . .
. shall be subject to relevant standards for existing sources.'' The
intent of 40 CFR 63.6(b)(7) and (c)(5) was further explained in the
preamble for the March 23, 2001, rule that proposed revisions to 40 CFR
63.6(b)(7) and (c)(5) (66 FR 16328),\17\ ``[w]e are proposing to revise
63.6(b)(7) and (c)(5) to require new source MACT only on affected
sources that commenced construction or reconstruction after the
proposal date of the NESHAP . . . Affected sources at former area
sources that become major that have not constructed or reconstructed
after the proposal date of the NESHAP (emphasis added) would be subject
only to existing source MACT . . . .'' Again, each NESHAP provides the
dates that determine whether a source is a new source or an existing
source. A source's status of new or existing is determined by dates
given in each individual NESHAP, and that does not change when a source
reclassifies. If a major source reclassifies to area source status
after being subject to new major source NESHAP requirements and then
returns back to major source status, the sources that were originally
subject to new source requirements would once again be subject to new
source requirements. In light of these comments, the EPA is including
in the final rule amendments to 40 CFR 63.6(b)(7) and (c)(5) to reflect
the new or existing status of sources that become major sources as
being determined by
[[Page 73868]]
the dates provided in the applicable subparts and to also reflect the
immediate compliance rule as finalized in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6)(i)(B) for
reclassified area sources that revert back to major source status. The
amendments to 40 CFR 63.6(b)(7) read as follows: ``When an area source
increases its emissions of (or its potential to emit) hazardous air
pollutants such that the source becomes a major source, the portion of
the facility that meets the definition of a new affected source must
comply with all requirements of that standard applicable to new
sources. The source owner or operator must comply with the relevant
standard upon startup.'' The amendments to 40 CFR 63.6(c)(5) read as
follows: ``Except as provided in paragraph (b)(7) of this section, the
owner or operator of an area source that increases its emissions of (or
its potential to emit) hazardous air pollutants such that the source
becomes a major source and meets the definition of an existing source
in the applicable major source standard shall be subject to relevant
standards for existing sources. Except as provided in Sec.
63.1(c)(6)(i)(B), such sources must comply by the date specified in the
standards for existing area sources that become major sources. If no
such compliance date is specified in the standards, the source shall
have a period of time to comply with the relevant emission standard
that is equivalent to the compliance period specified in the relevant
standard for existing sources in existence at the time the standard
becomes effective.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ These provisions were finalized on April 5, 2002 (See 67 FR
16582).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Reclassifications and Enforcement Actions
In the MM2A proposal, the EPA included regulatory language in the
MM2A applicability provision in 40 CFR 63.1(c) to address the
interaction of the reclassification of sources and potential
enforcement actions. Specifically, we noted reclassification of a
source from major to area source status would not absolve a source of
prior liability for noncompliance. Although sources that are the
subject of an investigation or enforcement action may still seek area
source status for purposes of future applicability, such sources remain
liable for any previous or pending violations of the CAA that occurred
prior to the reclassification. Enforcement of major source requirements
could include penalties, mitigation for illegal emissions, and/or other
remedies to address noncompliance. Accordingly, a source cannot use its
new area source status as a defense for major source NESHAP violations
that occurred prior to its reclassification. Similarly, becoming a
major source does not absolve a source subject to an enforcement action
or investigation for area source violations from the consequences of
any actions occurring when the source was an area source.
Multiple commenters agreed with the premise that a major source
that reclassifies should not be absolved from potential enforcement
actions that occurred prior to the reclassification. However, some
commenters argued that if a major source is rightfully an area source
at the time of an alleged violation, then the source should not be
subject to enforcement as a major source. Other commenters argued that
it is also appropriate for the EPA to consider the misclassification of
a major source instead of the appropriate area source classification,
and the requirements for major sources versus area sources, and to
examine a past violation to determine if the source actually violated
the requirements of the classification under which the firm should have
been registered.
One commenter recommended that the EPA add language to 40 CFR
63.1(c)(6) that would allow for modification of an enforcement order
affecting a reclassified source if the enforcement order was based on
the enforcement authority's finding that the source was a major source
or based on the application of the OIAI policy. The commenter argued
that the EPA's proposed new language in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6) would leave
unclear whether it is the EPA's intent that: (1) Such a source can
never apply to the enforcement authority for relief from such
obligations (which often include obligations imposed pursuant to a
court's equity jurisdiction or that otherwise fall outside the universe
of obligations specified in the NESHAP) in exchange for accepting
restrictions on its PTE in order to become a synthetic HAP area source;
or (2) the enforcement authority can never enter into a modification of
the order, settlement, or decree that grants such relief. The commenter
argued that this lack of clarity could result in foreclosure of such
relief in future proceedings that are informed by the final rules,
depending on the EPA's posture at the time and the deference that is
sometimes given to agencies' interpretations of their own regulations.
The commenter argued that because the EPA has withdrawn the OIAI
policy on the grounds that it was inconsistent with ``the plain
language reading of the `major source' and `area source' definitions of
section 112'' of the CAA, then it stands to reason that: (1) No
historical application of the OIAI policy in the formulation of
enforcement orders and negotiation of settlement agreements and consent
decrees was ever lawful or appropriate; and (2) orders, agreements, and
decrees that were imposed or negotiated based materially on the OIAI
policy ought to be subject to retroactive review, on a case-by-case
basis and subject to the needs of the particular case, upon application
by the respondent for a modification of the instrument. Finally, a
commenter argued that the EPA should explicitly state in its
regulations that the consequence of violating PTE limitations is the
requirement to comply with the applicable major source NESHAP
requirements--in addition to an appropriate penalty for violating the
PTE limitations.
In the MM2A proposal, the EPA included regulatory language in the
proposed MM2A applicability provision in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6) stating that
reclassification from major source to area source does not affect a
source's liability or any enforcement investigations or enforcement
actions for a source's past conduct or violations of major source
requirements that occurred prior to the effective date of the source's
enforceable limitations (i.e., the reclassification). This rule
revision underscores the importance of a source's PTE in determining
NESHAP, 40 CFR part 63, applicability. The plain language reading of
the definitions of ``major'' and ``area'' source in section 112 of the
CAA as explained in the 2018 MM2A Memorandum and implemented through
this rulemaking does not change the Agency's position that a source may
take enforceable production and/or operational limits to effectively
constrain its PTE and, thereby, avoid applicability. Rather, it
eliminates the timing constraint imposed by the OIAI policy as to when
a source may take such limits to avoid applicability. If, before taking
such limits to avoid applicability, a source emitted a single HAP in an
amount of 10 tpy or greater, or emitted any collection of HAP in an
amount of 25 tpy or greater, or it is determined that the source has
(or had) a PTE that meets or exceeds these amounts, the source would be
considered a major source and subject to the requirements of 40 CFR
part 63 (as applicable) up and until the effectiveness of the limits.
The same holds true after taking such limits to avoid applicability.
That is, even after taking such limits, if a source emits a single HAP
in an amount of 10 tpy or greater, or emits any collection of HAP in an
amount of 25 tpy or greater, or it is determined that the source has
(or
[[Page 73869]]
had) a PTE that meets or exceeds these amounts, the source would be
considered a major source and subject to the requirements of 40 CFR
part 63 (as applicable). Now, as before, any time a source operates as
a major source, it must meet the applicable major source requirements
in 40 CFR part 63. Neither this rule, nor the 2018 MM2A Memorandum,
intends to allow a source that emits (or has the PTE) greater than the
MST to avoid compliance with applicable requirements for major sources.
Any source that operates without complying with the applicable
requirements is subject to enforcement. The revision proposed at 40 CFR
63.1(c)(6) underscores the EPA's position that unless, and until, a
source has enforceable production and/or operational limits that
effectively limit a source's PTE (and are not just chimeras that do not
really restrain an operator from emitting pollution in amounts equal to
or exceeding the major source thresholds), the source is a major source
and must comply with the major source requirements (as applicable). The
D.C. Cir. said as much in its review of the 2018 MM2A Memorandum,
California Communities Against Toxics, et al. v. EPA, 934 F.3d. 627,
638-639 (D.C. Cir. 2019), (``Major sources must obtain a permit in
order to operate, and unless and until that permit is amended or set
aside, the stringent requirements set forth therein must be complied
with while that equipment is operational. The [MM2A Memorandum]itself
does not revoke or amend a single permit.'')
Any order, settlement, or decree (collectively, agreements) issued
or entered into addressing a source's compliance with the requirements
of NESHAP, 40 CFR part 63, is not affected by this rule or the 2018
MM2A Memorandum. Those agreements were entered into based on the
specifics of each case. Reopening or modification of settlements
approved by, or orders issued by, federal courts is governed by the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (F. R. Civ. P. Rule 60). Nothing in
this final rule is intended to suggest that any of the prerequisites
for reopening any judicial or administrative settlement or modifying a
prior order of a court (including orders approving settlements) have
been met. There is no additional clarification needed regarding these
authorities. While the OIAI policy may have informed the contours of
those agreements, it did not (and, in fact, could not) change the
statutory basis for those enforcement actions. These agreements reflect
a mutual understanding of the parties that settlement is in the
interest of all involved after taking into account the legal and
factual circumstances at the time of the settlement. Accordingly, the
EPA is finalizing the regulatory language in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6)(ii)
addressing the interaction of the reclassification of sources with
enforcement actions as proposed.
d. Reclassifications and Operation of Add-On Pollution Control
Equipment
After the issuance of the MM2A Memorandum, some stakeholders were
concerned that if sources were to reclassify to area source status,
they could stop using the add-on emission control equipment or emission
reduction practices implemented for major source NESHAP compliance or
no longer maintain the same level of control efficiency as before. At
proposal, the EPA requested comments on whether facility owners or
operators of sources that reclassify will cease to properly operate
their add-on control devices where the operation of the add-on control
device is needed to restrict the PTE and appropriate monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting (MRR) are established as enforceable
conditions.
In the proposal, the EPA explained that a source seeking
reclassification because it has reduced its HAP emissions to below the
MST through use of add-on control devices or emission reduction
practices implemented for compliance with major source NESHAP
requirements will need to demonstrate to the regulatory authority
issuing the PTE limits the degree to which the add-on control devices
and emission reduction practices are needed to restrict the source's
PTE. In the absence of the applicability of the major source NESHAP
requirements, if the source relies on its existing NESHAP add-on
control devices and/or emission reduction practices to limit its HAP
PTE below the MST, the use of these control devices and/or emission
reduction practices must be made enforceable under a permitting
authority's legal mechanism. Alternatively, if a source intends to stop
using the add-on control device equipment or emission reduction
practices used to comply with a previously applicable major source
NESHAP requirement, the source must demonstrate that other physical
controls or operational limits that the source adopts will restrict the
source's actual emissions and maximum capacity to emit HAP below the
MST and that these limits are or can be made enforceable to ensure that
the source will not emit or have the potential to emit HAP at or above
the MST.
Some commenters argued that there is no reason to believe that
facility owners or operators would cease to properly operate their add-
on control devices where the operation of the control is needed to
restrict the PTE and appropriate MRR are established as enforceable
conditions. Similarly, some commenters asserted that sources that
achieve area source status through compliance with MACT have
significant disincentives to alter their control measures to increase
emissions thereafter. They argued that HAP emissions control devices
are not designed to achieve partial emissions reductions; rather, they
are designed to reduce emissions by a specified efficiency rate and a
source that already has invested in controls for the purpose of major
source MACT compliance is unlikely to cease using them or remove them
in favor of less-effective measures to limit its HAP emissions--
especially if the source's reclassification to area source status is
contingent upon compliance with an enforceable PTE limit.
On the other hand, other commenters expressed concern with the EPA
statement in the proposal saying that ``it has no reason to believe,
and does not anticipate'' that sources will cease operating their
control devices and hence increase emissions as a result of the MM2A
action. One commenter argued that the EPA has collected insufficient
data and included no explanation to support what the commenter called
an ``economically irrational conclusion.'' The commenter argued that
the EPA has not acknowledged the financial incentives to reduce usage
of expensive control devices.
Commenters arguing that sources will reduce control device
operation and emission monitoring if the major source NESHAP
requirements no longer apply stated the EPA must include in the final
rule conditions requiring the continued use of add-on controls and
conditions ensuring that monitoring and parametric limits are adequate
to meet the required destruction efficiencies needed for sources to
constrain their PTE and emissions at area source levels. These
commenters argued that without such requirements, sources that
reclassify are likely to operate the control device only part of the
year. They claim sources will make cost-saving business decisions to
turn off controls for several months a year or use less-effective
controls to remain just below the MST. Some commenters summarized, as
an example, the information collected by the EPA to justify the
monitoring requirements for flares in the NESHAP
[[Page 73870]]
for Petroleum Refineries and described how, without rigorous
monitoring, flare efficiency could be highly variable and substantially
lower than 98 percent. The commenters also argued that the EPA cannot
assume that other control devices, such as fabric filter baghouses and
electrostatic precipitators, would be as effective once the major
source NESHAP operating limits or monitoring requirements no longer
apply. The commenters argued that the EPA must require the facility to
periodically perform source tests to verify that the restriction
actually correlates with emissions that are below the MST. The
commenters further argued that without requirements ensuring proper
operation, maintenance, and monitoring of add-on controls, sources will
stop consistently operating the control devices that limit the release
of HAP and allow the sources to reclassify to area source status.
The EPA sees these comments as pertaining to the proposed
effectiveness criteria of PTE limits. In particular, the EPA may
consider provisions concerning the operation and monitoring of add-on
controls in the context of the criteria for ensuring that a PTE limit
used to reclassify from major source to area source status is
practicably enforceable. As discussed later in section VII of the
preamble, the EPA is not taking action on the proposed amendments to 40
CFR 63.2 at this time and is continuing to consider the comments
received on this aspect of the MM2A proposal. The EPA intends to take
final action on this aspect of the MM2A proposal in a separate final
action at a later date.
2. 40 CFR 63.9 Notification Requirements
In the MM2A proposal, the EPA included language in the
reclassification provision in 40 CFR 63.1(c)(6) specifying that sources
reclassifying must comply with the notification requirements of 40 CFR
63.9(b) and (j). The EPA also proposed to clarify the notification
requirements for sources reclassifying by amending 40 CFR 63.9(b) so
that an owner or operator of a facility must notify the Administrator
of any standards to which it becomes subject. The proposed amendment
covers situations where a source reclassifies from major to area source
status and where a source reclassifies from major to area and
subsequently reverts back to major source status. The EPA also proposed
to clarify that a source that reclassifies must notify the EPA of any
changes in the applicability of the standards to which the source was
subject per the notification requirements of 40 CFR 63.9(j).
Most of the commenters supported the proposed amendments to the
notification provisions in 40 CFR 63.9(b) and (j), but a few disagreed
that the established General Provisions require notification when going
from being subject to not being subject. Other commenters requested
that the EPA reduce the number of duplicative notifications and
simplify the regulatory authorities that must review 40 CFR 63.9(j).
Other commenters requested clarification between notification
provisions within individual NESHAP that allow for 120 days for
notification versus the 15-day notification in the General Provisions
in 40 CFR 63.9(b) and (j). These commenters asked the EPA to clarify
the differences between these requirements, harmonize the reporting
requirements, and minimize duplicative requirements. The EPA disagrees
that the General Provisions do not require a notification when a source
is no longer subject to a standard. The provisions of 40 CFR 63.9(j)
are applicable to a change in information already provided. The change
in a source's status from major to area (or vice versa) is a change in
the information provided that determined the initial status of the
source as subject to the major or area source standards. This is
different from the initial notification required by 40 CFR 63.9(b), as
that provides the relevant information to the Administrator of the
newly governed provisions and is required to be submitted, per 40 CFR
63.9(b)(2), no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject.
The notification of a change in information already required within 15
days is a result of the previously applicable standard. There are cases
for which there is no applicable area source standard; the notification
required by 40 CFR 63.9(j) is the only notification that would be
submitted in those cases. These requirements in two provisions do not
require harmonizing, as they are due to different NESHAP subparts being
applicable and are not duplicative.
The EPA is finalizing the reclassification provision in 40 CFR
63.1(c)(6) notification requirements as proposed for both major sources
that reclassify to area source status and area sources that revert back
to major source status. The EPA is also finalizing the proposed
amendments to 40 CFR 63.9(b) so that an owner or operator of a facility
must notify the Administrator of any standards to which it becomes
subject. Further, for clarity, the EPA has finalized at 40 CFR
63.9(j)(i)-(iv) the data elements that a reclassifying source must
provide in the notification of a ``change in information already
provided'' required under 40 CFR 63.9(j). Finally, the EPA is
clarifying that the notification requirement of 40 CFR 63.9(j) is an
existing requirement. Thus, the EPA requires any source that
reclassified after January 2018 (issuance of the 2018 MM2A Memorandum)
and before the effective date of this final rule that has not yet
provided the notification of a change in information per 40 CFR 63.9(j)
to provide such notification within 15 calendar days after the
effective date of this final rule.
For the notification requirements in 40 CFR 63.9(b) and (j), the
EPA also proposed to require sources that reclassify to submit the
notification electronically through CEDRI. The EPA proposed amending
the General Provisions to add 40 CFR 63.9(k) to include the CEDRI
submission procedures. Several commenters support using CEDRI for
notification of status changes. Some commenters requested the EPA to
clarify that the new requirements in 40 CFR 63.9(k) only apply when a
facility is reclassifying from a major source to an area source or from
an area source to a major source, so regulatory authorities could not
conclude that all notifications or reports should be done using CEDRI.
Some commenters strongly supported the Agency providing this
information to the public. While the EPA agrees that the provisions of
40 CFR 63.9(k) only apply when specifically directed there from another
provision, as stated in 40 CFR 63.9(k), ``[i]f you are required to
submit notifications or reports following the procedures specified in
this paragraph (k),'' (emphasis added), we do not believe that further
clarification within the regulatory language is necessary. We are
finalizing this provision as proposed requiring sources that reclassify
to submit the notification electronically through CEDRI. Additionally,
the EPA has clarified that sources that reclassify between January 25,
2018, and the effective date of this final rule also must submit the
notification through CEDRI. The EPA acknowledges the support for the
public availability of the notifications and notes that the submitted
notifications, along with any other notifications and reports submitted
through CEDRI, become available to the public through the WebFIRE
database (https://www.epa.gov/electronic-reporting-air-emissions/webfire) after time for review and approval by the regulatory agencies.
Multiple commenters recommended that the EPA should clarify CEDRI
reporting. One commenter indicated that notification is not delegable
and
[[Page 73871]]
needs to adjust the language in 40 CFR 63.13 that requires submittal of
information to Regional offices at specific addresses. The commenter
pointed out that the proposed CEDRI reporting makes this requirement
excessive and the regulatory text should be fixed to remedy the
requirement of reporting in triplicate (Regional offices, CEDRI,
Administrator/state). The commenter noted that the last sentence of 40
CFR 63.12(c) does not address this issue and should be deleted/altered
to avoid reporting in triplicate. Another commenter indicated that a
separate notification to state agencies should be sent directly to the
permitting agency. The commenter requested that the following paragraph
be added to 40 CFR 63.9(k):
``If a state or local permitting agency has received delegation
for a Part 63 standard that requires you to submit notifications or
reports and that permitting agency requires, by way of statute,
rule, policy, guidance, permit, or other mechanism, that such
notifications or reports must be submitted also to the permitting
agency, then such notifications and reports must be submitted to the
permitting agency as well as to CEDRI.''
The EPA agrees with the commenters that the language at 40 CFR
63.13 and 63.12(c) was not clear that submission to CEDRI, when
required by regulation, fulfills the obligation of submittal to the EPA
Regional office. Therefore, the EPA is finalizing at 40 CFR 63.13 a
clarifying statement that when required by 40 CFR part 63, the
submission of a report or notification to CEDRI fulfills the obligation
of reporting to the EPA Regional office. The EPA does not agree that
additional language to reflect that reporting to a delegated agency is
required in addition to reporting to CEDRI, as that is implicit in 40
CFR 63.12(c), which requires that all information required to be
submitted to the EPA be submitted to the delegated authority. The
manner of submission is at the discretion of the delegated authority,
but the reports and notifications that are required to be submitted to
the EPA electronically through CEDRI must be delivered to the EPA
through CEDRI. However, delegated authorities have the discretion to
consider the submission to CEDRI as meeting the requirement to submit
the report to them.
In the MM2A proposal, the EPA identified two broad circumstances in
which extensions of the timeframe for electronic submittal may be
provided. In both circumstances, the decision to accept the claim of
needing additional time to submit is within the discretion of the
Administrator, and submittal should occur as soon as possible. The EPA
provided these potential extensions to protect owners or operators from
noncompliance in cases where they cannot successfully submit a
notification by the submittal deadline for reasons outside of their
control. The situation where an extension may be warranted due to
outages of the EPA's Central Data Exchange or CEDRI that preclude an
owner or operator from accessing the system and submitting a required
notification is addressed in 40 CFR 63.9(k)(1). The situation where an
extension may be warranted due to a force majeure event, which 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 an owner or
operator from complying with the requirement to submit electronically
as required by this rule, is addressed in 40 CFR 63.9(k)(2). Examples
of such events are acts of nature, acts of war or terrorism, or
equipment failure or safety hazards beyond the control of the facility.
Finally, the EPA also proposed to amend 40 CFR 63.12(c) to specify that
a delegated authority may not exempt sources from reporting
electronically to the EPA when stipulated by this part.
One commenter recommended that the CEDRI late-notification language
in proposed 40 CFR 63.9(k)(1) and (2) should be stricken because air
pollution control agencies already have experience in using enforcement
discretion for addressing late notifications and that discretion should
not be codified or limited by regulation. The commenter also argued
that the full range of circumstances that could legitimately cause a
late notification cannot be covered by the regulation, and the
discretion to grant an extension should not be solely within the
discretion of the Administrator. Another commenter did not support the
proposed additional requirements detailing when late notifications are
forgiven for a force majeure event or federal EPA computer glitch but
not in other meritorious situations. Another commenter suggested that
time extensions for electronic reporting should be allowed for
circumstances other than CEDRI outage and force majeure events, which
allow for other situation-specific reasons that may impact the
reasonable ability of a facility to achieve timely electronic
reporting.
The EPA disagrees with the commenter that the reporting extension
allowance for force majeure and CEDRI outage should be stricken.
Granting an extension is at the discretion of the Administrator, which
is defined in 40 CFR 63.2 to be ``the Administrator of the United
States Environmental Protection Agency or his or her authorized
representative (e.g., a State that has been delegated authority to
implement the provisions of this part).'' The extension provision does
not remove the authority of an air pollution control agency to grant an
extension for those subparts for which they have been delegated
authority. Further, the EPA disagrees with the commenters that other
situations that are not included in these provisions are excluded from
obtaining an extension to their reporting deadline. The extension
provisions as proposed and finalized are limited to those circumstances
out of control of the facility and provide clear direction on the
process for requesting an extension. Facilities may still engage with
the Administrator on any delays in submittal not specifically covered
under the CEDRI outage or force majeure provisions. After consideration
of public comments, the EPA is finalizing the extension provisions as
proposed.
The electronic submittal of the notifications addressed in this
rulemaking will increase the usefulness of the notification; is in
keeping with current trends in data availability and transparency; will
further assist in the protection of public health and the environment;
will improve compliance by facilitating the ability of delegated state,
local, tribal, and territorial air agencies and the EPA to assess and
determine compliance and the applicability of major and area source
standards to a facility; and will ultimately reduce burden on regulated
facilities, delegated air agencies, and the EPA. Electronic submittal
also eliminates paper-based, manual processes, thereby saving time and
resources and providing data quickly and accurately to the affected
facilities, air agencies, the EPA, and the public. Moreover, electronic
reporting is consistent with the EPA's plan \18\ to implement Executive
Order 13563 and is in keeping with the EPA's Agency-wide policy \19\
developed in response to the White House's Digital Government
Strategy.\20\ For more information on the
[[Page 73872]]
benefits of electronic reporting, see the memorandum, ``Electronic
Reporting Requirements for New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP)
Rules,'' available in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0282.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ The EPA's ``Final Plan for Periodic Retrospective
Reviews,'' August 2011. Available at: https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OA-2011-0156-0154.
\19\ ``E-Reporting Policy Statement for EPA Regulations,''
September 2013. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/documents/epa-ereporting-policy-statement-2013-09-30.pdf.
\20\ ``Digital Government: Building a 21st Century Platform to
Better Serve the American People,'' May 2012. Available at: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/egov/digital-government/digital-government.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. 40 CFR 63.10 Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
In the MM2A proposal, the EPA proposed to amend the recordkeeping
requirements for applicability determinations in 40 CFR 63.10(b)(3) by
adding text to clarify that this requirement applies to an owner or
operator with an existing or new stationary source that is in a source
category regulated by a standard established pursuant to CAA section
112 but that is not subject to the relevant standard because of
enforceable limitations on the source's PTE. Specifically, the EPA
proposed removing the time limit for record retention in 40 CFR
63.10(b)(3) and requiring that the records be maintained until the
source becomes an affected major source subject to major source
requirements under 40 CFR part 63.
Many commenters supported the proposed amendment to remove the time
limit for record retention such that sources that obtain new
enforceable PTE limits are required to keep the required record of the
applicability determinations for as long as the source continues to be
an area source based on PTE limitations. While many commenters agreed
with the removal of time limit in 40 CFR 63.10(b)(3), some commenters
argued that major sources that reclassify to area sources should not be
subject to additional recordkeeping requirements that do not apply to
other area sources. These commenters argued that the EPA should not
revise the 5-year record requirement for the applicability
determinations because the EPA has not provided a proper justification
for adding this requirement for ``reclassified'' area sources. The
commenter noted that the EPA has not described any issue with respect
to compliance of PTE limits and emission-standard applicability that
arose from the existing 5-year recordkeeping requirement, nor has the
EPA explained why area source recordkeeping requirements should differ
based on temporal considerations. The commenters noted that title V
major sources are subject to a 5-year records requirement for all
applicability determinations used to support identification of
applicable requirements and application of the title V permit shield,
and this is consistent with the statute of limitations that generally
allows only a 5-year period to enforce against alleged violations. The
commenter argued that the EPA has not explained why area sources should
be subject to more stringent recordkeeping requirements. These
commenters stated that the change in the requirement would impose a
burden on the facility without additional environmental protection,
because 5 years is sufficient time considering that sources still need
to report annually that they are in compliance. Some commenters also
noted that if the EPA or an air pollution control agency has reason to
doubt any source's exempt status, they can take action under CAA
sections 113 and 114 or state/local/tribal ``Open Records'' analogs to
obtain the necessary information.
The EPA disagrees that the extended recordkeeping requirement as
proposed applies disproportionately to reclassifying area sources or
has any temporal consideration. The requirement to retain the
applicability determination applies to all area sources that require an
enforceable limitation on the source's potential to emit to not be
subject to a relevant standard or other requirement established
pursuant to CAA section 112. The requirement for an applicability
determination is only relevant to these sources; the applicability
determination itself, rather than the recordkeeping requirement, is the
determining factor. The extension of the recordkeeping requirement is
in the best interest of the source relying on an applicability
determination to avoid CAA section 112 major source requirements, as
many sources will rely on such determination for an extended period of
time that can last beyond the 5 years. The EPA disagrees with the
commenters that the revised record retention requirements are
unnecessary due to annual reporting requirements. While many sources
may have annual or semiannual reporting requirements after
reclassifying into an area source rule, there are some major source
NESHAP that do not have a corresponding area source standard. For these
sources, the retention of the applicability determination enables the
source to easily demonstrate that the major source standard does not
apply without the potential additional burden of re-creating the
applicability determination. The EPA agrees with the commenter that the
EPA under CAA sections 113 or 114, and air pollution control agencies
under their analogs, have the authority to request the necessary
information; however, the retention of the applicability determination
while the source continues to be an area source based upon that PTE
limit and applicability determination provides a lesser burden to
facilities compared to potentially re-creating the applicability
determination. For the reasons presented above, the EPA is finalizing
removing the time limit for record retention in 40 CFR 63.10(b)(3) and
requiring that the records be maintained for as long as the source
continues to be an area source based on PTE limitations.
Other commenters requested clarification as to whether the amended
recordkeeping requirement applies to sources that became area sources
prior to the first substantive compliance date of a NESHAP standard or
that reclassified after the 2018 MM2A Memorandum. In the preamble of
the MM2A proposal, the EPA stated that this amendment was directed to
sources that obtain new enforceable PTE limits. The EPA agrees that the
proposed language was unclear as to the applicability of the
recordkeeping provisions on sources with applicability determinations
preceding the date of proposal. We have amended the regulatory text in
40 CFR 63.10(b)(3) clarifying that the owner or operator must keep a
record of the applicability determination on site at the source for a
period of 5 years or until the source changes its operation to become
an affected source subject to the relevant standard or other
requirement established under this part, whichever comes first if the
determination is made prior to January 19, 2021. For a determination
made on or after January 19, 2021, the owner or operator must keep a
record of the applicability determination until the source changes its
operations to become an affected source subject to the relevant
standard or other requirement established under this part. The EPA
does, however, strongly recommend that all facilities retain their
applicability determination for the time that the source continues to
be an area source based upon that PTE limit and such applicability
determination.
In addition to the removal of the time limit for record retention,
the proposal amended the text that describes the record of the
applicability determination. In particular, the proposal clarified that
the record must include an ``emissions'' analysis (or other
information) that demonstrates the owner or operator's conclusion that
the source is not subject to major source requirements. The analysis
(or other
[[Page 73873]]
information) must be sufficiently detailed to allow the Administrator
to make an ``applicability'' finding for the source with regard to the
relevant standard or other requirements.
With regard to the analysis for applicability determinations, some
commenters expressed concern with the language that the applicability
determinations ``should be performed in accordance with EPA guidance
materials.'' The commenters stated that the language is vague and could
create binding requirements that are not legislative rules and have not
gone through required notice[hyphen]and[hyphen]comment rulemaking. The
commenter suggested that the EPA should indicate that this is a
recommendation rather than a requirement by stating: ``EPA recommends
that the analysis be performed in accordance with EPA guidance
materials . . . .'' The EPA disagrees that further clarification is
necessary regarding the use of guidance documents in this context, as
the use of EPA guidance materials was an element of the existing
provisions of 40 CFR 63.10(b)(3). However, to avoid creating the
impression of additional requirements being imposed due to the proposed
edits to the language, the EPA is retaining the sentence of 40 CFR
63.10(b)(3), which states: ``If relevant, the analysis should be
performed in accordance with EPA guidance materials published to assist
sources in making applicability determinations under CAA section 112,
if any,'' as currently exists in the existing provision without
finalizing the changes proposed to it.
The commenters also suggested that the EPA clarify the
applicability determination analysis for specific situations, and
others advised that additional guidance could be incorporated into the
regulation or the preamble to the final rule to recognize that sources
often need to use best engineering judgment to estimate emissions from
minor sources when assessing the PTE of a whole facility. The
commenters then recommended that the EPA indicate that the level of
detail and precision for potential to emit calculations can be lower
for operations that contribute a relatively small amount to total
facility HAP emissions. The wording in the proposed amendments are
intended to clarify and to promote better understanding of the current
recordkeeping requirements. The EPA did not propose a new view on how
to estimate PTE and, relatedly, on how to do major source applicability
determinations. In section VII of this preamble, we include references
to our PTE guidance that may be of help to parties with questions about
the EPA's views on these issues.
The EPA also proposed to amend the recordkeeping requirements for
records submitted through CEDRI by adding 40 CFR 63.10(g) to clarify
that the records submitted through CEDRI may be maintained in
electronic format. As proposed, this provision does not remove the
requirement for facilities to make records, data, and reports available
upon request by a delegated air agency or the EPA. We are not
finalizing the proposed addition of 40 CFR 63.10(g) because the
provision is redundant with 40 CFR 63.10(b)(1), which allows for
storage of records on computer.
B. Amendments to Individual NESHAP General Provisions Applicability
Tables
The EPA proposed to amend the General Provisions applicability
tables contained within most subparts of 40 CFR part 63 to add a
reference to a new reclassification provision contained in 40 CFR
63.1(c)(6) discussed in the section V.A of this preamble and add a
reference to reflect the proposed CEDRI submission procedures of 40 CFR
63.9(k) discussed above in section V.A of this preamble. We are
finalizing the amendments to the General Provisions applicability
tables as proposed. Additionally, the EPA identified four subparts
containing the General Provision applicability requirements which did
not properly reference the notification provisions. These subparts are
40 CFR part 63 subparts G, H, II, and YY. Accordingly, we are also
finalizing revisions to these applicability requirements of 40 CFR part
63 subparts G, H, II, and YY to account for the final amendments to the
General Provisions as described above in section V.A.
C. Amendments to Individual NESHAP
At proposal, the EPA identified one general category of regulatory
provisions in several NESHAP subparts that reflect the 1995 OIAI policy
that requires revision pursuant to this action. This category of
provisions addresses the date by which a major source can become an
area source. We proposed to revise the following provisions: 40 CFR
part 63, subpart QQQ at 63.1441; 40 CFR part 63, subpart QQQQQ at
63.9485; 40 CFR part 63, subpart RRRRR at 63.9581; and Table 2 of 40
CFR part 63, subpart WWWW. We solicited comment on whether there are
any other regulatory provisions in any of the individual subparts that
include OIAI provisions that should be revised pursuant to this action.
The EPA received comments regarding multiple provisions in 40 CFR part
63, subpart F at 63.100(b)(4); subpart I at 63.190(b)(7); subpart HH at
63.760(a)(1); and subpart HHH at 63.1270. The EPA reviewed the
provisions raised by commenters in these subparts and is including in
this final rule revisions to the provisions in subpart HH at
63.760(a)(1) and subpart HHH at 63.1270(a). The EPA is not making
changes with respect to the identified provisions in subparts F and I
at 63.100(b)(4) and 63.190(b)(7). The EPA sees these provisions as
expired exclusion provisions, not OIAI provisions, that do not prevent
a source from reclassifying to area source status.
At proposal, we also identified several area source NESHAP
containing notification provisions (i.e., initial notification)
applicable to existing sources for which the dates have passed. We
proposed to amend the following area source NESHAP that contain
notification requirements for existing sources with specific deadlines
that are in the past: 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHHHH at 63.11175; 40
CFR part 63, subpart XXXXXX at 63.11519; 40 CFR part 63, subpart YYYYYY
at 63.11529; 40 CFR part 63, subpart AAAAAAA at 63.11564; 40 CFR part
63, subpart BBBBBBB at 63.11585; 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCCC at
63.11603. Consistent with other area source NESHAP notification
requirements, we proposed that, for an existing source that
reclassifies from major to area source status, the notification shall
be submitted no later than 120 calendar days after the source becomes
subject to the relevant area source NESHAP requirements. Regarding
whether there are any other individual subparts that would warrant
modification because initial notification requirements are in the past,
commenters pointed at the initial notification requirements in many of
the major source NESHAP subparts. They stated that if an area source
were to revert back to major source status, these initial notification
requirements would have been in the past. The EPA reviewed the initial
notification provisions of all NESHAP subparts and is including in this
final rule amendments to the initial notification requirements within
most NESHAP subparts to include additional language so that the
notification shall be submitted no later than 120 calendar days after
the source becomes subject to the relevant NESHAP requirements. The EPA
is amending the initial notification requirements in the following
subparts: 40 CFR part 63, subpart G at 63.151(b)(2) (i), (ii) and (ii);
subpart H at 63.182(b)(2)(i), (ii), and (iii); subpart L at 63.311(a);
subpart M at 63.324(g); subpart N at 63.347(c)(1); subpart Q at
[[Page 73874]]
63.405(a)(1) and (2); subpart S at 63.455(a); subpart T at 63.468(a),
(b), (c), and (d); subpart Y at 63.567(b)(2) and (3); subpart DD at
63.697(a)(1); subpart EE Table 1; subpart HH at 63.77(c)(1); subpart JJ
Table 1; subpart KK at 63.830(b)(1)(i), subpart CCC at 63.1163(a)(3);
subpart PPP at 63.1434(d) and (e), and at 63.1439(e)(3)(ii)(B) and (C);
subpart QQQ at 63.1454(b); subpart UUU at 63.1574(b); subpart VVV at
63.1591(a)(1) and (2); subpart DDDD at 63.2280(b); subpart EEEE at
63.2382(b)(1) and (2); subpart FFFF at 63.2515(b); subpart GGGG at
63.2860(a); subpart IIII at 63.3110(b); subpart JJJJ at 63.3400(b)(1);
subpart KKKK at 63.3510(b); subpart MMMM at 63.3910(b); subpart NNNN at
63.4110(a)(1); subpart OOOO at 63.4310(b); subpart PPPP at 63.4510(b);
subpart QQQQ at 63.4710(b); subpart RRRR at 63.4910(b); subpart SSSS at
63.5180(b)(1); subpart TTTT at 63.5415(b); subpart UUUU, Table 7;
subpart XXXX at 63.6009(b); subpart YYYY at 63.6145(b); subpart ZZZZ at
63.6645(b) and (d), subpart AAAAA at 63.7130(b) and (c); subpart BBBBB
at 63.7189(b); subpart CCCCC at 63.7340; subpart DDDDD at 63.7545(b)
and (c), subpart EEEEE at 63.7750(b); subpart FFFFF at 63.7840(b);
subpart GGGGG at 63.7950(b) and (c); subpart HHHHH at 63.8070(b)(1);
subpart IIIII at 63.8252(b); subpart JJJJJ, Table 8; subpart KKKKK,
Table 9; subpart LLLLL at 63.8692(b), subpart MMMMM at 63.8816(b);
subpart NNNNN at 63.9045(b), subpart PPPPP at 63.9345(b)(1); subpart
QQQQQ at 63.9535(c); subpart RRRRR at 63.9640(b); subpart SSSSS at
63.9812(b); subpart TTTTT at 63.9930(b); subpart BBBBBB at 63.11086(e)
and Table 3; subpart CCCCCC at 63.11124(a)(1), (b)(1), and Table 3;
subpart HHHHHH at 63.11175(a); subpart PPPPPP at 63.11425(b) and (c);
subpart QQQQQQ at 63.11432(b) and (c); subpart RRRRRR at 63.11441(a);
subpart TTTTTT at 63.11469(a); subpart WWWWWW at 63.11509(a)(3);
subpart XXXXXX at 63.11519(a)(1); subpart YYYYYY at 63.11529 (a);
subpart AAAAAAA at 63.11564(a)(2); subpart BBBBBBB at 63.11585(b)(1);
and subpart CCCCCCC at 63.11603(a)(1).
VI. Other Considerations
A. PTE Determination
In the MM2A proposal, the EPA included a background discussion
associated with the HAP PTE determination. The discussion was intended
to provide context for evaluating whether the EPA should include in the
General Provisions to 40 CFR part 63 certain elements of the Federal
Minor New Source Review Program in Indian Country, which included
application content requirements in those rules as well as the proposed
hierarchy of acceptable data and methods a source seeking
reclassification would use to calculate and determine the source PTE.
We received many comments regarding PTE determinations, including
suggestions for clarification on how to do these calculations, which
are already addressed in guidance. See section VII of this preamble for
additional information regarding implementation of PTE limits and the
EPA guidance addressing related topics. Importantly, at this time, the
EPA is not taking final action on whether to include in the General
Provisions a hierarchy of data and methods for calculating PTE. The EPA
will continue to evaluate whether there is a need to issue guidance or
rulemaking for such hierarchy and methods in the future.
In the MM2A proposal, the EPA requested comments on whether it
would be appropriate to include in the General Provisions of 40 CFR
part 63 the minimum requirements for the information that a major
source of HAP must submit to its regulatory authority when seeking to
obtain PTE limitations to reclassify as area sources under section 112
of the CAA, similar to the information included in a synthetic minor
source permit application under Tribal Minor New Source Review. Most of
the industry and state commenters asserted that regulatory authorities
should retain authority to determine what a major source must submit to
reclassify. They argued that these requirements already exist in
federal, state, and local rules, and asking state and local governments
to add new regulatory requirements onto programs that already provide
for the creation and enforcement of synthetic minor limits would be an
unnecessarily burdensome administrative resource drain. The EPA agrees
with commenters that the addition of minimum requirements for the
information that a major source of HAP must submit to its regulatory
authority when seeking to obtain PTE limitations to reclassify as area
sources under section 112 of the CAA ignores that permitting
authorities already have permit application requirements under their
programs. Also, the EPA has reconsidered that permit application
requirements for PTE programs would be more appropriate under 40 CFR
part 63, subpart E and is not including such requirements in the final
rule. See section VII of this preamble. This position does not,
however, alter how the EPA will apply the policy that the Agency has
been following since 1995, which allows for any physical or operational
limitation on the capacity of the stationary source to emit a pollutant
(such as air pollution control equipment and restrictions on hours of
operation or on the type or amount of material combusted, stored, or
processed), to be treated as part of its design if the limitation or
the effect it would have on emissions is federally enforceable or
legally enforceable by a state or local permitting authority and
practicably enforceable.
B. Reclassification Process and Permitting
The proposal addressed questions from sources and permitting
authorities regarding permit process, mechanisms, and the requirements
for reclassifying to area source status for 40 CFR part 70 sources.
These questions were brought to our attention per our request in the
MM2A Memorandum about specific situations that may need to be
considered at proposal. The purpose of the discussion was to inform
stakeholders about our expectations on how the reclassification process
will work in those specific circumstances. The EPA did not propose
changes to any of the rules for the permitting programs or to their
interpretation. Below, we clarify the related proposal preamble
discussion, since it may have introduced ambiguity about our
interpretation of the regulations.
Stakeholders asked the EPA to clarify whether a reclassified source
continues to have an obligation to comply with the major source
requirements in their title V permit that were included solely to
comply with the OIAI policy. These scenarios consisted of sources that
no longer have the maximum capacity to emit HAP in amounts that exceed
major source thresholds because of physical or operational limitations
but whose title V permit still includes major source NESHAP
requirements. (Often, the operational limitations are enforceable
limitations the source has taken to avoid major source requirements in
the future, in agreement with the OIAI policy.) The proposal's preamble
acknowledged that in that case the source is an area source under the
CAA section 112 definition, but it still must comply with its title V
permit terms and conditions until the permit is revised or revoked in
agreement with the title V permitting authority that issued the permit.
The proposal's preamble advised that sources must follow the permitting
authority's procedures for permit modification or closure. We continue
to stand by our view that the permitting
[[Page 73875]]
authority will be in the best position to help a source decide on the
appropriate procedures under the specific program rules to reconcile
permitting obligations.
The preamble illustrated, with examples, how situations may differ
and that we expect those differences to require different procedures.
The proposal concluded that in a hypothetical situation when the major
source NESHAP permit terms are relied upon to demonstrate compliance
with some other applicable requirement (e.g., in the case of
streamlining the permit conditions), concurrently with their removal,
the permitting authority may need to reevaluate the MRR for applicable
requirements remaining in the permit and that the regulations in 40 CFR
part 71 would require a significant modification to add these
requirements to a title V permit. With regard to this advice,
commenters argued that the EPA misspoke in the proposal as to the
appropriate process for 40 CFR part 71 sources. The commenters argued
that revising the 40 CFR part 71 permit to reflect a change in
applicable requirements may not always require a significant
modification to a title V permit, and the EPA provided no explanation
in the proposal for this cursory conclusion relative to 40 CFR part 71.
The EPA first clarifies that the explanation in the proposal about the
procedures that apply to the changes in the scenarios presented reflect
the EPA's current view regarding the 40 CFR part 71 permitting
authority for a general case and does not imply that a particular
situation may not merit a different treatment based on the facts and
the 40 CFR part 71 regulations. The basis for the EPA conclusion in the
preamble is that removing non-applicable NESHAP requirements would
almost always involve significant changes to monitoring, recordkeeping,
and/or reporting, and, thus, the modification would not qualify as a
minor modification under 40 CFR 71.7(e)(1)(i)(2). This is especially
true if revised monitoring requirements must be added to substitute for
removed NESHAP monitoring requirements. However, we recognize that the
procedures will generally depend on the program regulations and the
facts of the situation. While the commenter does not provide a
compelling argument to change our view on the permit modification
procedures that would most likely apply for removing no-longer-
applicable requirements from a 40 CFR part 71 permit, a source is free
to show that in its situation the changes to existing monitoring,
reporting, or recordkeeping, etc., due to the removal of the no-longer-
applicable requirements are not significant. Importantly, the EPA did
not propose changes to, and this final rule does not make any changes
to, the 40 CFR part 70 or 71 rules and is not prejudging any future
proposed process for modifying any 40 CFR part 71 permits.
The EPA received multiple comments regarding the public notice and
comment procedures associated with reclassification. As discussed below
in section VII, the EPA is not taking action on the proposed
effectiveness criteria for PTE limits at this time and is continuing to
consider the comments received on this aspect of the MM2A proposal. The
EPA intends to take final action on this aspect of the MM2A proposal in
a separate final action at a later date. Notwithstanding this, on the
issue of public notice and comment procedures currently in use for
reclassifications, the EPA reiterates that, consistent with our long-
standing policy, regulatory agencies implement public notice and
comment procedures for state, local, and tribal programs as required
under their regulations and statutes. The authority under which the PTE
limits are issued contain issuance procedures, including any procedures
for public notice and comment. Importantly, regulatory authorities use
different issuing mechanisms depending on the complexity of the PTE
limits required for the situation and the pollutants addressed.
Typically, states issue enforceable PTE limits for individual sources
in a SIP construction permit or a synthetic minor type of operating
permit (e.g., operating permits other than title V permit). States can
also utilize less burdensome mechanisms for limiting PTE, such as
general permits for source categories, permits by rule, or registration
programs, as appropriate. Regardless of the mechanism used to issue an
enforceable PTE limit, the regulatory agency must follow the applicable
procedures for that mechanism, including providing for public notice
and comment when required.
Some commenters on the proposal asserted that the EPA had failed to
analyze federalism implications of the proposal. According to the
commenters, states also rely on title V permitting fees to support
permitting, monitoring, and enforcement of title V sources, and the EPA
had not considered how states will do so with the loss of title V funds
since area sources are frequently exempted from title V. The commenters
stated that the EPA had a duty to consult with state and local
governments for proposed rules with federalism implications and
substantial compliance costs. The EPA disagrees that this action
imposes substantial compliance costs to state and local governments. As
the EPA explained in section IV of this preamble, the OIAI policy
imposed a time constraint on the ability of a source to change its
status for purposes of applicability with CAA section 112 standards
that is not found in the statute. This action simply implements the
plain language reading of the statutory definitions of major source and
area source which contain no language fixing a source's status at any
particular point in time and contain no language suggesting a cutoff
date after which the source's status cannot change. This rule explains
what sources must do if and when they elect to reclassify and does not
change the standards established under CAA section 112 nor it changes
the permitting authority programs that are used for processing
reclassifications.
VII. Interim Ministerial Revision of 40 CFR Part 63 PTE Definition
The definition of PTE in 40 CFR 63.2 interprets the statutory term
``potential to emit'' found in the definition of a major source in
section 112 of the CAA and provides a legal mechanism for sources that
wish to restrain their emissions to avoid triggering major source
requirements. Under the PTE definition in 40 CFR 63.2 promulgated in
1994, any physical or operational limitation on the capacity of the
stationary source to emit a pollutant, including air pollution control
equipment and restrictions on hours of operation or on the type or
amount of material combusted, stored, or processed, shall be treated as
part of its design if the limitation or the effect it would have on
emissions is federally enforceable.\21\ In National Mining Association
(NMA) v. EPA, 59 F.3d 1351 (D.C. Cir. 1995), the D.C. Cir. remanded the
definition of ``potential to emit'' found in 40 CFR 63.2 to the EPA to
justify the requirement that physical or operational limits be
``federally enforceable.'' The NMA decision confirmed that the EPA has
an obligation to ensure that limits considered in determining a
source's PTE are effective, but it stated that the Agency had not
adequately explained how ``federal enforceability'' furthered
effectiveness. 59 F.3d at 1363-1365.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See 40 CFR 63.2 definition of ``federally enforceable''
available at https://ecfr.io/Title-40/se40.11.63_12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the MM2A proposal, the EPA proposed specific criteria that PTE
limits must meet for these limits to be effective. The EPA also
proposed to amend the definition of ``potential to
[[Page 73876]]
emit'' in 40 CFR 63.2 accordingly by removing the requirement for
federally enforceable PTE limits and requiring instead that HAP PTE
limits meet the effectiveness criteria of being both legally
enforceable and practicably enforceable. The EPA also proposed to amend
40 CFR 63.2 to include the definitions of ``legally enforceable'' and
``practicably enforceable'' described in the MM2A proposal. The EPA
then took comment on the effectiveness criteria and the proposed
amendments to 40 CFR 63.2.
The EPA received significant comments from many stakeholders on the
proposed effectiveness criteria and proposed amendments to 40 CFR 63.2.
One of the main concerns raised by stakeholders in their comments is
the interactions and effects of the proposed amendments with other CAA
programs, including prevention of significant deterioration (PSD), NSR,
SIP, and title V, and the impacts of the proposed amendments to
existing state, local, and tribal agency rules. The EPA is not taking
action on the proposed amendments to 40 CFR 63.2 at this time and is
continuing to consider the comments received on this aspect of the MM2A
proposal. The EPA intends to take final action on this aspect of the
MM2A proposal in a separate final action at a later date.
In the meantime, the EPA is making an interim ministerial revision
to the definition of ``potential to emit'' in 40 CFR 63.2.
Specifically, the Agency is removing the word ``federally'' from the
phrase ``federally enforceable'' in the definition of ``potential to
emit.'' A few points need to be made to explain what this interim
ministerial revision is and what it is not. First, this revision is not
the EPA's final decision and should not be read to suggest that the EPA
is leaning towards or away from any particular final action on this
aspect of the proposal. This revision is simply an interim revision to
cover the period of time while the EPA continues to consider the
comments on this aspect of the proposal and until the Agency takes
final action with respect to the proposed amendments concerning the
proposed effectiveness criteria and proposed amendments to 40 CFR 63.2.
Second, this revision is ministerial because it merely reflects the NMA
decision, which held that the EPA had not explained why a PTE limit had
to be ``federally enforceable'' to be considered as the basis for
reclassifying a major source to area source status. See NMA v. EPA, 59
F.3d at 1363-1365.\22\ Again, this revision does not represent a final
decision by the EPA or signal any direction that the EPA is intending
to take in a future final action. It simply makes a ministerial change
to the regulatory text that appears in the CFR to reflect the NMA
decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ The EPA notes that in two subsequent decisions, the D.C.
Cir. relied on the NMA decision and presented no additional legal
analysis. In Chemical Manufacturers Assoc, v. EPA, 70 F.3d 637 (D.C.
Cir. 1995), the D.C. Cir. reviewed a ``federally enforceable''
limitation in the PTE definition in the PSD and NSR regulations and
both vacated and remanded the federal enforceability requirement in
those provisions with a three sentence decision that provided no
additional analysis and simply referenced the NMA decision:
``Petitioners challenge regulations of the Environmental Protection
Agency that define the term ``potential to emit'' to exclude
controls and limitations on a source's maximum emissions capacity
unless those controls are federally enforceable. We recently decided
a similar challenge in National Mining Association v. EPA, 313 U.S.
App. D.C. 363, 59 F.3d 1351 (D.C. Cir. 1995). Accordingly, it is
ordered and adjudged that the regulations are vacated and the case
is remanded to the Environmental Protection Agency for
reconsideration in light of National Mining Association.'' In Clean
Air Implementation Project v. EPA, No 96-1224 1996 WL 393118 (D.C.
Cir., Jun. 28, 1996) (CAIP), the D.C. Cir. also vacated and remanded
the federal enforceability requirement in the title V (40 CFR part
70) regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, this interim ministerial revision does not alter any
rights or legal consequences and simply preserves the status quo that
has been in effect since the late 1990s. This revision will not change
how the EPA will apply the transitional policy that the Agency has been
following since 1995. By removing the word ``federally,'' the EPA hopes
to avoid any ongoing confusion about how the transitional policy is
applied. This transitional policy allows for any physical or
operational limitation on the capacity of the stationary source to emit
a pollutant (such as air pollution control equipment and restrictions
on hours of operation or on the type or amount of material combusted,
stored, or processed) to be treated as part of its design if the
limitation or the effect it would have on emissions is federally
enforceable or legally enforceable by a state or local permitting
authority and practicably enforceable.
For implementing reclassifications in the interim, state programs
may use PTE guidance they have developed for their programs and/or may
also continue to rely on the EPA PTE guidance. As noted in the proposal
preamble, there is a substantial body of EPA guidance and
administrative decisions relating to PTE and PTE limits.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ There is a substantial body of EPA guidance and
administrative decisions relating to PTE and PTE limits. E.g., see
generally, Terrell E. Hunt and John S. Seitz, ``Limiting Potential
to Emit in New Source Permitting'' (June 13, 1989); John S. Seitz,
``Options for Limiting the Potential to Emit (PTE) of a Stationary
Source Under Section 112 and Title V of the Clean Air Act'' (January
25, 1995); Kathie Stein, ``Guidance on Enforceability Requirements
for Limiting Potential to Emit through SIP and Sec. 112 Rules and
General Permits'' (January 25, 1995); John Seitz and Robert Van
Heuvelen, ``Release of Interim Policy on Federal Enforceability of
Limitations on Potential to Emit'' (January 22, 1996); ``In the
Matter of Orange Recycling and Ethanol Production Facility, Pencor-
Masada Oxynol, LLC,'' Order on Petition No. II-2001-05 (April 8,
2002) at 4-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VIII. Summary of Cost, Environmental, and Economic Impacts
In this section, the EPA summarizes the findings of several
analyses that we conducted to assess the cost, environmental, and
economic impacts of the final rule. It is important to restate that the
final rule does not require any source to reclassify to area source
status. Each source must assess its own circumstances to determine
whether it is feasible and advantageous to undergo the reclassification
process. The unique nature of each source's decision process makes it
difficult for the EPA to determine the number and type of sources that
may choose to reclassify under this rule. Because of this, the EPA can
only present illustrative analyses concerning the impacts of this final
rule.
For the final rule analyses, based on comments received on the data
used for the overall analyses for the MM2A proposal, the EPA updated
the MM2A database, removed double counting of facilities, and expanded
the number of source categories evaluated for cost, environmental, and
economic impacts. The updated MM2A database contains data from the 2017
National Emissions Inventory (NEI), data collected to conduct residual
risk and technology reviews (RTR) under sections 112(d)(6) and 112(f)
of the CAA (henceforth referred to as RTR modeling file data), and data
from the EPA's Enforcement and Compliance History On-line (ECHO)
database. The EPA used the RTR modeling file data and NEI data to
estimate the number of facilities in each of 74 source categories and
the number of sources within those facilities that could be eligible to
reclassify from major to area source status. We used the ECHO data to
estimate the number of facilities in 27 additional source categories
for which we did not have RTR modeling file data, and we then used an
extrapolation methodology to approximate the number of facilities
within these 27 source categories that could be eligible to reclassify
from major to area source status.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ There are about 114 major source categories subject to
NESHAP. The EPA determined that 13 source categories are not
impacted by this rule and did not include these categories in the
costs or impacts analyses. For the remaining categories, 74 were
analyzed using RTR modeling file data while 27 were analyzed using
an extrapolation approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73877]]
As a result of updates to the MM2A database, the number of
facilities estimated to be subject to major source NESHAP has been
reduced from 7,920 at proposal to 7,187. The detailed methods applied
to update the MM2A database and estimate the number of facilities
subject to major source NESHAP for purposes of the final rule analyses
are described in the TSM titled ``Documentation of the Data for
Analytical Evaluations and Summary of Industries Potentially Impacted
by the Final Rule titled Reclassification of Major Sources as Area
Sources Under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act,'' which is included in
the docket for this action.
A. Analytical Scenarios
The potential costs and cost savings presented in the final cost
memorandum and RIA are the result of an illustrative assessment. It is
unknown how many major sources would choose to take enforceable PTE
limits to levels below the MST and reclassify to area source status. If
a source voluntarily chooses to reclassify to area source status, it
will no longer be subject to previously applicable major source NESHAP,
which may result in compliance cost savings for the source. However,
the source will be required to comply with any applicable area source
NESHAP in response to reclassification, which could result in some
compliance costs. Facilities will also have costs associated with
applying to modify the facility's operating permit when they reclassify
from major to area source status. Regulatory agencies will also have
costs to process those applications. Overall, the sum of costs and cost
savings of all actions taken to reclassify under this rule is expected
to be a net annual cost savings.
To illustrate the potential emissions changes, costs, and economic
impacts of the final rule, we analyzed the same three illustrative
analytical scenarios as at proposal. The primary analytical scenario
analyzes the sources with actual emissions below 75 percent of the MST
(7.5 tpy of a single HAP or 18.75 tpy of all combined HAP). Alternative
scenario 1 analyzes facilities with actual emissions below 50 percent
of the MST (5 tpy for a single HAP and 12.5 tpy for all HAP).
Alternative scenario 2 analyzes sources with actual emissions between
75 percent and 125 percent of the MST (12.5 tpy for a single HAP and
31.25 tpy for all HAP).
The primary analytical scenario considers that sources will
normally build a compliance margin into their operations to ensure that
their emissions remain below the MST and they do not revert to major
source status. Some commenters suggested that the EPA should conduct
its analyses based on the assumption that all sources will emit up to
the MST, or the Agency should analyze a scenario with a smaller
compliance margin (i.e., at 90 percent of the MST). The appropriate
compliance margin to apply is specific to each facility and its
operating experience. Some reclassified sources may choose to operate
10 percent below the MST while others may choose to maintain a larger
compliance margin to ensure they do not jeopardize their area source
status. In addition, some facilities operating slightly above the MST
may opt for reclassification to area source status by taking PTE
limitations and reducing emissions to a level below the MST. Therefore,
we provide illustrative analyses of potential changes in costs and
emissions at various compliance margins. The level of actual emissions
relative to the MST at which facilities may consider participating in
the MM2A reclassification process is actually a continuous line from
some level below the MST to a reasonable level above the MST, and our
illustrative analyses include three points on this continuous line to
estimate the potential impacts of different compliance margins on
participation under this final rule. In this section, we present the
primary illustrative scenario and two alternative scenarios, one above
and one below the primary scenario.
While different compliance margins could be evaluated, the EPA has
greater confidence in the primary illustrative scenario where sources
at or below 75 percent of the MST can maintain emissions below the MST
and thus may be more likely to opt for reclassification. Sources in the
MM2A database operating between 50 and 75 percent of the MST, and those
operating between 75 and 125 percent of the MST, are also addressed in
our analyses, in the first and second alternative scenarios,
respectively. These alternative scenarios address the impacts of
sources at alternative compliance margins as suggested by commenters.
In addition to these analytical scenarios, the updates to the MM2A
database detailed in the TSM titled ``Documentation of the Data for
Analytical Evaluations and Summary of Industries Potentially Impacted
by the Final Rule titled Reclassification of Major Sources as Area
Sources Under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act'' presents the
incremental count of facilities at 90 and 100 percent of the MST to
illustrate a comparison of the difference between the number of
facilities in the database operating in the primary scenario and these
alternative views suggested by commenters.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See the Response to Comments document for a detailed
rationale for the selection of analytical scenarios for the final
rule and the EPA's reasoning for not evaluating impacts at 90
percent of the MST.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Cost Analysis
For the illustrative cost analysis conducted for the final rule,
the EPA analyzed: (1) Facilities with actual emissions below each
analytical threshold, (2) the costs that we estimated to be incurred by
the facilities associated with permitting actions necessary to obtain
area source status, (3) the costs that we estimated to be incurred by
permitting authorities associated with permitting actions necessary to
process permit applications for facilities requesting reclassification,
and (4) cost-savings estimates based solely on estimated reductions in
labor burden related to MRR requirements that would either no longer
apply or would change based on the specific requirements in the major
source NESHAP rules and any area source NESHAP rules that apply to a
particular source category. As part of the overall analysis of the 125-
percent alternative scenario, we examined the potential control costs
for major sources in eight source categories that may opt to further
reduce HAP emissions in order to reclassify to area source status.
Details of this potential control cost analysis are presented in the
TSM titled ``Analysis of Illustrative 125% Scenario for MM2A Final--
Potential Cost Impacts from HAP Major Sources Reducing Emissions as
part of Reclassifying to HAP Area Sources'' which is available in the
docket for this action. The details of the cost analysis are presented
in the TSM titled ``Documentation of the Compliance Cost Savings
Analysis for the Final Rulemaking Reclassification of Major Sources as
Area Sources Under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act'' and also are
summarized in the RIA. All of these documents are available in the
docket for this action.
The illustrative cost analysis presents estimates of the final
rule's net costs (or savings) over two time periods. The first estimate
assumes that all potential reclassifications that might occur as a
result of this rulemaking with take place within 1 year of promulgation
(i.e., by 2021). The second estimate assumes that not all the
reclassifications will occur within 1 year after the MM2A rule is
finalized, and instead are assumed to occur over a more extended period
of time.
[[Page 73878]]
For the first illustrative cost analysis, Year 1 costs include the
cost for each facility to apply for and obtain an area source or
synthetic minor permit or a title V permit modification and for the
regulatory agencies to review and approve those applications and issue
the permits. These permitting costs to the facilities and state
agencies are one-time costs and occur only in Year 1 when a facility
reclassifies. Then, in Year 2 and beyond, facilities do not incur the
cost to process a reclassification and the net costs (or savings) are
the sum of the projected annual cost savings from not having to comply
with the major source NESHAP MRR requirements and the estimated cost of
compliance with applicable area source NESHAP requirements. These
projected savings are expected to continue for each reclassified
facility each year beyond the second year, for there is no time
specified for review of reclassifications under the CAA. The permitting
costs to the facilities and the permitting costs to the regulatory
agencies are not included in the second year because it is assumed the
permitting changes are all completed in the year the source submits an
application for reclassification and no action is needed in subsequent
years in relation to this action.
However, based on the number of potential reclassifications
discussed in this analysis, we can confidently conclude that not all of
the reclassifications will occur in the first year after the rule is
issued. The timing of a reclassification is influenced by several
considerations, including time for facilities to determine whether it
is in their best interest to reclassify, time to prepare applications
for reclassification, and time for permitting authorities to review
applications and process reclassification requests. There is also time
allotted for the EPA to review determinations by permitting authorities
and for public participation in the process. Therefore, it is
reasonable to assume that not all the reclassifications will occur
within 1 year after the MM2A rule is finalized, and instead the
reclassifications assessed in the cost analysis are assumed to occur
over a more extended period of time. To illustrate the spread of costs
over time, the EPA also presents a 5-year outlook of costs and cost
savings.
A summary of the results of the potential costs and cost savings
across different types of source categories from the illustrative cost
analysis for Year 1 and Year 2 and beyond is presented in Table 2.
Results are presented for the 74 source categories evaluated using RTR
modeling data and the 27 source categories that were evaluated using
the extrapolation approach.
Table 2--Illustrative Net Costs (or Cost Savings) of Final MM2A Rule for the Primary Analytical Scenario
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Potential net
annual costs (or
Total number of Facilities with cost savings) in
Source category coverage facilities actual emissions 2017$ for Year 1
subject to major below 75 percent 2 4 and Year 2 3
source NESHAP of the MST 1 4 and beyond
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source categories with RTR data (74 categories)........ 4,068 1,614 $10,147,526
(56,137,515)
Extrapolated source categories (24 categories) \5\..... 1,294 266 1,680,049
(9,030,684)
Industrial, commercial, and institutional boilers and 1,821 687 4,319,300
process heaters (3 categories) \5\.................... (25,456,533)
--------------------------------------------------------
Total (101 source categories)...................... 7,183 2,567 16,146,875
(90,624,732)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Results are for sources with actual emissions below 75 percent of the MST (i.e., 7.5 tpy for one HAP and
18.75 tpy for combined HAP).
\2\ Costs incurred by sources and permitting authority assumed in year 1.
\3\ Year 2 impacts are also representative of annual impacts to all reclassified major sources in all subsequent
years in the future. Numbers in parenthesis are negative and reflect cost savings.
\4\ The analytic timeline begins in 2021 and continues thereafter for an indefinite period. Year 1 impacts are
those for 1 year after reclassification of a major source with reclassifications beginning in 2021, and year 2
impacts are those for the second year after reclassification of a major source and annually afterwards.
\5\ Extrapolated using the EPA's ECHO data.
Table 3 presents the illustrative potential cost (or cost savings)
impact of the final rule over time for the primary analytical scenario.
We present the impacts over a 5-year outlook that assumes all sources
in our analysis will reclassify over that timeframe and that the
reclassifications will be evenly distributed over that period.
Table 3--Illustrative Net Costs (or Cost Savings) of the Final MM2A Rule Over Time for the Primary Analytical Scenario *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distribution of costs (or cost savings) over a 5-year period ($2017)
Source category coverage ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2021 2022 2023 2024 2025+
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source categories with RTR data (74 categories).......... $2,536,882 $(11,497,497) $(25,531,875) $(39,566,254) $(56,137,515)
Extrapolated Source Categories (24 categories)........... 420,012 (1,837,658) (4,095,329) (6,353,000) (9,030,684)
[[Page 73879]]
Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and 1,079,825 (5,284,308) (11,648,441) (18,012,574) (25,456,533)
Process Heaters (3 categories)..........................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total (101 Source categories)........................ 4,036,719 (18,619,464) (41,275,647) (63,931,830) (90,624,732)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* These results reflect the aggregate of costs and cost savings for all facilities by year of impact.
Estimates for 2025 are also representative of all subsequent years.
The EPA also calculated the PV of the illustrative cost savings for
the main illustrative scenario. The PV is the value of a stream of
impacts over time, discounted to the current (or nearly current) year.
The PV of the cost savings for the primary illustrative scenario is
$0.86 billion (in 2017 dollars) at a discount rate of 7 percent, which
is discounted to 2020. At a discount rate of 3 percent, the PV is $1.50
billion (in 2017 dollars), again discounted to 2020. Another measure of
the annual cost savings to complement the estimates in Table 2 is the
EAV. This annual impact estimate is calculated consistent with the PV.
The EAV is $67 million (2017 dollars) at a 7-percent discount rate for
the primary scenario. At a 3-percent discount rate, the EAV is $75
million (2017 dollars). The PVs and EAVs for each alternative scenario
and discount rate in 2017 and 2016 dollars can be found in the RIA for
the final rule.
C. Environmental Analysis
At proposal, to assess the potential environmental emissions
impacts associated with the reclassification of sources, the EPA
reviewed permits and other information for 34 sources that had
reclassified to area source status consistent with the EPA's plain
language reading of the CAA section 112 definitions of ``major'' and
``area'' source since January 2018. The review of these
reclassifications provided a representation of the potential real-world
impacts on emissions by looking at the facts and circumstances of
actual reclassification actions. In addition to the evaluation of the
reclassification actions, at proposal the EPA also performed an
illustrative assessment for six source categories: Wood Furniture
Manufacturing Operations, Surface Coating of Metal Cans, Surface
Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products, Wet-Formed
Fiberglass Mat Production, Hydrochloric Acid Production, and Non-
Gasoline Organic Liquids Distribution. The analysis of these six source
categories was informative in some respects but was only illustrative
and speculative in nature and only presented a range of possible
outcomes dependent on the assumptions that we made in the assessment.
The EPA received numerous comments on the emissions analyses presented
at proposal. Many commenters argued that the EPA had failed to
adequately assess the effects of the rule on HAP emissions and did not
perform any health impact analysis. These commenters argued the EPA did
not include enough source categories in the emissions analysis at
proposal to draw reasonable conclusions. Commenters also opined that
the analysis of the actual reclassifications relied on a small sample,
and a few speculated that we had ``cherry picked'' permits to review.
For the final rule, the EPA expanded the emissions impact analysis
in several ways to address these comments. We enhanced the MM2A
database to include more source categories with detailed data and
improved the methodology for analysis based on public comments. We also
expanded the review of reclassification actions to include the review
of 35 additional reclassifications received from March 2019 through
February 2020.\26\ This allowed us to more than double the number of
reclassifications reviewed for the final rule. The details and results
of the analysis of 69 reclassification actions are summarized below and
presented in detail in the Review of Reclassification Actions TSM for
the final rule, which is available in the docket for this action.\27\
The EPA received several comments on the permit reviews completed for
the proposal; we have considered the input from commenters in the
review of the reclassifications included in the final analysis.
Finally, we also expanded the illustrative analysis of impacts on the
program from the six source categories reviewed at proposal to 72
source categories. The 72 source categories included in the
illustrative analysis represent a broad array of the sources subject to
major source NESHAP requirements and the types of sources that could
seek reclassification to area source status under this final rule. We
discuss the reclassification actions reviewed and the illustrative
analyses of source categories in detail below. Our analysis indicates
that 68 of the 69 sources that have reclassified will not increase
emissions. In addition to this review of actual reclassification
actions, the EPA also prepared an illustrative analysis for 72 source
categories in the major source NESHAP program (114 total) to evaluate
the potential emissions impacts. After consideration of the information
and data available for the illustrative emissions analysis, we found
that 65 source categories will not change emissions as a result of the
rule. For the other seven source categories, there was a potential for
(but not a certainty of) emissions increases based on conservative
assumptions that are likely to overstate the change in emissions at
some facilities. As is discussed throughout this preamble and in the
TSMs and RIA, any analysis of impacts includes uncertainties, and each
subsequent level of analysis compounds the uncertainties to a much
greater level. Given the compounding of uncertainty and illustrative
nature of the analysis, further quantification of effects of these
emissions increases would not be reliable or informative. Instead, we
present a qualitative discussion of benefits and disbenefits in the
benefits/disbenefits subsection of impacts below. Further information
of the analyses and findings are presented below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ The EPA obtained information about these reclassifications
through the normal course of business with the permitting
authorities that notify us of permitting actions within their
jurisdictions.
\27\ See TSM titled ``Review of Reclassification Actions for the
Final Rulemaking ``Reclassification of Major Sources as Area Sources
under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act'' available in the docket of
this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To assess the potential for emissions impacts for the 69
reclassified sources, the EPA focused its review on the
[[Page 73880]]
enforceable conditions associated with the PTE limitations applicable
to the emission units previously subject to major source NESHAP
requirements. The EPA review focused on whether these emission units at
these facilities continue to have enforceable conditions that are
either the same as or consistent with the previous applicable major
source NESHAP compliance obligations. Summaries of the permit reviews
and emissions evaluations are presented in the Review of
Reclassification Actions TSM, which is available in the docket for this
action.
The EPA's findings from its review of permits for the
reclassifications indicate that of the 69 sources that reclassified to
area source status, 68 achieved and maintain area source status by
operating the emission controls or continuing to implement the
practices they used to comply with the major source NESHAP
requirements; we expect no emissions increases due to reclassification
for these sources. While permitting authorities could allow for changes
in the enforceable conditions or practices that the sources used to
comply with major source NESHAP requirements that could lead to
emissions increases, this happened for only one source out of the 69
actual reclassifications. Below is an overview of the EPA's findings
from the permit reviews for these 69 reclassifications.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ The analysis of the actual reclassifications includes
representation of some of the source categories subject to major
source NESHAP requirements. While the actual reclassifications
demonstrate a cross-section of the types of industries that have
reclassified, we are unable to determine if this cross-section of
industries is representative of all types of sources that may seek
reclassification in the future. The illustrative emissions analysis
includes a broader selection of source categories across similar
sectors of the economy as these actual reclassifications (i.e.,
chemical, energy, combustion, coatings, and heavy industry/
manufacturing). While the illustrative analysis is representative
with respect to a broader selection of industries in the major
source program, we are unable to definitively determine whether the
sources within those categories will seek reclassification. Thus, we
cannot make a determination of the representativeness of the actual
reclassifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of the 69 sources that have reclassified, 45 sources are in a
coating type source category; 11 are chemical sources; six are fuel
combustion/boiler sources; five are oil and gas sources and two are
heavy industry sources. (See Tables 3 and 4 of Review of
Reclassification Actions TSM available in the docket for this action).
Of the 69 reclassifications reviewed, 14 sources are classified as true
area sources because these sources are no longer physically or
operationally able to emit HAP above the MST. Of the 55 sources with
enforceable PTE limitations, 15 sources had obtained those enforceable
PTE limitations before January 2018 (pre-existing PTE limitations)
while 40 obtained the PTE limitations after January 2018 in order to
reclassify to area source status (new PTE limitations).
Of the 45 coating sources reviewed, 39 used compliant materials
(low-HAP/no-HAP) to meet applicable major source requirements before
reclassification, and their continued use of compliant materials is an
enforceable condition after reclassification. Five sources relied on
the use of regenerative thermal oxidizers (RTOs) to meet applicable
major source requirements and maintain enforceable conditions requiring
the operation of the RTOs after reclassification. As described in
detail in the TSM, the EPA does not expect emissions increases from
these sources due to reclassification to area source status. Finally,
one source used compliant materials to meet applicable major source
requirements, but after reclassification requested a change to use a
HAP-containing formulation with accompanying process limitations to
maintain area source status. Had the change in formulation happened
while the source was a major source, the source would have had to use
an add-on control device to comply with the applicable NESHAP. For this
source, the change in formulation after reclassification could lead to
emissions increases of 4.3 tpy of xylene or 18.75 tpy of combined HAP.
Of the 11 chemical sources reviewed, four sources are miscellaneous
organic chemical manufacturing facilities; these relied on a variety of
control technologies (including RTOs, scrubbers, and flares) and work
practices to maintain compliance before reclassifying and continue to
have enforceable conditions requiring the control technologies after
reclassification. Three sources are gasoline distribution sources that
relied on vapor collection and vapor flare/vapor combustion to meet
applicable major source requirements before reclassification, and these
controls are enforceable conditions to maintain compliance after
reclassification. Three sources are off-site waste recovery facilities
that relied on control technologies such as vapor balance/recovery
systems, condensers, and scrubbers to meet applicable major source
requirements before reclassification. All these sources continue to
rely on the same (or additional) requirements as enforceable conditions
to maintain compliance after reclassification and the EPA does not
expect emissions increases due to reclassification to area source
status. Finally, one source is a former hazardous waste combustor and
cement facility that until 2015 fueled its cement kiln using collected
hazardous and non-hazardous waste, using various control technologies
to maintain compliance. This facility permanently removed all equipment
associated with Portland cement manufacturing and took on a new primary
role as a hazardous waste storage/transfer facility, using throughput
limits and a carbon adsorption system to maintain compliance.
Of the six combustion/boiler sources reviewed, four made permanent
operational changes (ceased combustion of coal and/or ceased operation
of boilers) allowing the sources to reclassify to area source status.
Another source had material and operational limitations prior to
reclassification, both of which continue to be enforceable conditions
after reclassification, and one source took additional operational
restrictions on the usage of natural gas as the mechanism to constrain
their emissions and PTE and reclassify to area source status. Three of
these sources had emissions above MST before reclassifying; the
reclassification of these three sources resulted in a HAP reduction of
56.9 tpy single HAP and 78.8 tpy total HAP.
All five oil and gas production and transmission sources reviewed
relied on the use of control technologies (oxidation catalyst [enclosed
combustion device] and flares) to meet applicable major source
requirements before reclassification, and their continued use is an
enforceable condition to maintain compliance after reclassification.
One of these sources took additional restrictions on the amount of gas
vented to the atmosphere to reclassify to area source status. Also, the
reclassification of this facility prevented additional emissions that
would have occurred if the source had remained a major source. As
described in detail in the TSM, the EPA does not expect emissions
increases from these sources due to reclassification to area source
status.
Of the two heavy industry sources reviewed, one is a lime
manufacturing plant and the other is a flexible polyurethane foam
fabrication facility. The lime manufacturing facility, after
reclassification, remains subject to other regulatory requirements,
including PM emission limitations, the use of a baghouse, and monitored
opacity as an operating limit via operation of a continuous opacity
monitoring system. The flexible polyurethane foam fabrication facility
relied on compliant
[[Page 73881]]
materials, control technology (carbon adsorption systems), work
practices, and operational limitations to meet applicable major source
standards before reclassification and continues to rely on these as
enforceable conditions to maintain compliance after reclassification.
See the Review of Reclassification Actions TSM available in the docket
for the detailed permit reviews and emissions evaluations.
In response to comments, for the final rule's illustrative
emissions impact analysis, we have also updated the assessment
conducted at proposal for six source categories and expanded our
assessment to numerous additional source categories. We identified
several source categories that are unlikely to experience a change in
emissions as a result of MM2A. We also conducted an in-depth analysis
of potential changes in emissions upon reclassification for many source
categories where we have information. We also reviewed the updated
operating permits for a variety of industrial processes to interpret
likely response to the final MM2A rule. The details and results of the
emissions analysis are summarized below and presented in detail in the
illustrative emissions impact analysis TSM titled, ``Documentation of
the Emissions Analysis for the Final Rule Reclassification of Major
Sources as Area Sources Under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act,'' which
is available in the docket for this action.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See TSM, ``Documentation of the Illustrative Emissions
Analysis for the Final Rule Reclassification of Major Sources as
Area Sources Under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act,'' available in
the docket of this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA considered many factors in assessing the potential
emissions impacts from the various NESHAP source categories if
facilities in these source categories were to reclassify to area source
status. These factors include backstop measures from regulatory and
technological limits, as well as limitations on growth for economic
reasons. As for regulatory reasons, the EPA assessed, if sources were
to reclassify, whether they would be subject to the same NESHAP
requirements as before reclassification (which would be the case where
the area source requirements are the same as the major source
requirements), whether new area source NESHAP requirements will be
applicable and how they impact emissions, whether there are NSPS
requirements that apply to the source and control emissions at the same
levels as the major source NESHAP requirements, and whether there are
PSD/NSR/SIP requirements the effect of which will continue to control
HAP emissions to the same extent. As for the technological and economic
reasons, the EPA reviewed whether the measures used by the source to
reduce emissions could be reversed or discontinued if sources were to
reclassify to area source status. This includes, but is not limited to,
changes in coating/adhesive formulations, fuel combustion technologies,
and some level of backstop for emissions from add-on control
technologies. Commenters stated that there are also other factors that
will prevent emissions increases, including environmental management
systems with which sources are engaged that require them to identify
environmental impacts, set performance objectives, implement of
standards for training and work practices, audit implementation of such
standards, and take corrective action when deviations occur. Other
commenters also mentioned that many sources are also required to meet
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standards that
incentivize efficient operations to minimize waste and energy usage,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements that protect
workers from exposures to HAP and other pollutants, and toxics release
inventory requirements. The commenters pointed out that these
regulatory requirements continue to apply even if the source
reclassifies, providing additional incentives for sources to not
increase emissions. The EPA agrees with the commenters in that
environmental management systems, even though they are voluntary and
not regulatory in nature, will also provide additional incentive for
some sources to maintain compliance with environmental legal
obligations and not increase emissions.
Based on the EPA's illustrative analysis of potential emissions
impacts from the 72 source categories, 65 source categories will either
not be impacted by MM2A or are unlikely to experience any emissions
changes for the reasons discussed in the above paragraph. After
considering the information available for this illustrative analysis,
we found that some facilities in seven source categories represented by
detailed information from RTR modeling files in the MM2A database could
increase emissions if they were to reclassify and were allowed to
reduce operation of adjustable add-on controls. These facilities
represent 7.9 percent of the facilities illustrated in the primary
analytical scenario (i.e., 128 facilities out of a total of 1,614
facilities in the primary analytical scenario), and 3.1 percent of all
the facilities included in the analysis of the 72 source categories
(i.e., 128 facilities out of a total of 4,068 facilities operating in
72 source categories). Several of the source categories have only one
or two facilities impacted, while three source categories have several
facilities impacted. The facilities that we were able to assess are
located in several states and are not clustered in close proximity to
each other. The EPA was unable to evaluate the source categories
included in the extrapolated approach used for the cost assessment due
to insufficient information. Under alternative scenario 2, we
determined that some facilities operating between 75 and 125 percent of
the MST might opt to decrease emissions to reclassify to area source
status as a result of the MM2A rule.
The EPA made several conservative assumptions when estimating the
potential effect on emissions resulting from sources reclassifying from
area to major source status. By ``conservative,'' we mean that these
assumptions are likely to result in an overestimate of emissions
changes. We detail these assumptions in the TSM referenced above.\30\
Based on these conservative assumptions, the potential change in
emissions in the illustrative analyses for seven source categories
could be an increase ranging from 919 tpy to 956 tpy of HAP across the
NESHAP program under the primary scenario.\31\ In
[[Page 73882]]
addition, we also include an alternative set of assumptions in the
coatings sector to reflect the findings from the review of
reclassification permits that shows one facility could increase
emissions. For this alternative coating scenario, we extrapolate those
findings to other facilities in the coatings sector using a percentage
that represents the portion of the reclassified facilities that might
increase emissions (i.e., 2.3 percent of the reclassified coatings
facilities are assumed to increase emissions). Using this alternative
assumption, we estimate a potential emissions increase of 302 tpy of
combined HAP. The total range of potential emissions increases is,
therefore, 919 tpy to 1258 tpy. Again, it is important to note that
this is likely an overestimate of actual emissions increases, as we
explain in more detail in the technical support memorandum. Under the
alternative scenario 2, we estimate a potential reduction in HAP
emissions of 183 tpy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ In general, the change in emissions is measured as the
difference between PTE with compliance with the major source NESHAP
and 75 percent of the MST (the maximum emissions assumed with a
compliance margin for the primary scenario). Where the EPA does not
have information on the PTE, we estimated the potential change in
emissions as the difference between actual emissions and 75 percent
of the MST. However, in some cases it is inappropriate to assume
changes from minimal amounts of HAP (i.e. less than 1 tpy) up 75
percent of the MST as it represents a 100 times to 1,000 times
increase in emissions (and production to the extent that production
and emissions correlate). Given the production capacities at
existing facilities along with economic constraints on growth, it is
highly unlikely a facility would seek to increase emissions (and
hence production) by 100-times to 1,000-times. Most mature
industries will not experience tremendous economic growth, and some
may experience a declining rate of production that impacts growth.
Therefore, we assume a conservative measure of increase for
facilities operating at very low levels of HAP of 10 times (e.g., a
facility operating at 0.5 tpy with not information on PTE would
increase to 5 tpy). The measure for emission change in these
instances could be higher or lower, but we selected 10 times to
demonstrate a conservatively high level of potential emissions
increase.
\31\ The EPA also identified some facilities in the primary
scenario that have an estimated PTE that is above the MST, yet their
actual emissions are well below 75 percent of the MST. If these
facilities opt to reclassify by taking a limit on their PTE down to
a level below the MST, they will forego allowable emissions under
the major source program (i.e., the reduction in PTE that the
facility must take to modify their PTE to down to 18.75 tpy). This
reduction in emissions can be viewed as foregone emissions under
PTE. For the facilities analyzed where PTE (or allowable emissions)
were identified, the foregone allowable emissions totals a reduction
of about -227 tpy. Therefore, the potential change in emissions for
the seven source categories with potential increases is a net change
in emissions of 692-729 tpy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to approximating the response to the MM2A rule, we
present information regarding the magnitude of potential changes in HAP
emissions and discuss changes in health impacts for benefit categories
of criteria pollutants. The combination of these evaluations represents
our assessment of benefits as defined in Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) Circular A-4. Based on the results of the EPA's analysis
of the reclassifications of 69 sources and the illustrative emissions
analysis of 72 source categories, this final rule may potentially
result in both emission reductions and increases from a broad array of
affected sources. For the 69 sources that have already reclassified, we
conclude there are no potential emissions increases (except for one
source as discussed in section VIII above) and, therefore, no health
impacts associated with nearly all of the known reclassification
actions. For the one facility with a potential for an emissions
increase, the change in emissions would be modest and is not likely to
result in significant health impacts. Because the sources that the EPA
has identified as having a potential for some level of emissions change
(given the uncertainties stated throughout this preamble) are located
across the United States, we do not observe a concentration of
emissions changes in any particular location. However, to understand
the potential impact of this rulemaking on tribal and environmental
justice communities, we conducted two analyses on the 69 sources that
have reclassified to area source status as described above (from which
we found only one facility that could increase emissions).
In the first analysis, we looked at sources that were within 50
miles of an area of Indian country. Of the 69 sources that we analyzed,
30 are within 50 miles of at least one area of Indian country. Eleven
of these are within 10 miles of an area of Indian country and three are
in Indian country. However, after reviewing the reclassification of
these sources, only one of these sources could have an increase in
emissions. The potential increase will be minimal because the source
has limited its emissions of and PTE HAP below the MST. Therefore, the
EPA expects there will be no additional impact from reclassification to
most areas of Indian country.
Second, we conducted a demographic analysis of the populations
within 5 miles of these same 69 sources. We then compared the average
concentrations of low-income and minority populations within that 5-
mile radius and compared them to the national average to determine if
these populations will be disproportionality impacted. In this
analysis, we found that the 5-mile radius around 13 of the 69 sources
has a minority population above the national average, and the area
surrounding 39 sources has a low-income population above the national
average. Although these results would suggest that low-income
populations may be more impacted by this rule, as stated above, only
one of these sources could have an increase in emissions. Therefore,
the EPA expects there will be no additional impact to most of these
communities.
Based on the results of the EPA's analysis of the reclassifications
of 69 sources and the illustrative emissions impact analysis of 72
source categories, this final rule could result in both emissions
reductions and increases from a broad array of sources located in
different geographic areas. Uncertainties in estimating the number of
sources that will seek reclassification, and the resulting permit
conditions that will impact emissions are discussed at length in this
section of this preamble. Therefore, we illustrate impacts using
certain assumptions to allow readers to better understand the potential
impacts of the MM2A rule associated with HAP pollutants. However,
changes in HAP emissions may also impact other pollutants as well.
Benefits/disbenefits. Although the illustrative emissions analysis
suggests that there may be both emissions increases and decreases, we
are uncertain of the magnitude and geographic distribution of the
changes in emissions resulting from this rulemaking across the broad
array of sources that could reclassify. As discussed in the docket of
this final rule, the emissions from different sources will be impacted
in different ways, and small changes in certain non-HAP pollutants,
such as fine particulate matter, can lead to significant changes in
monetized benefits/disbenefits. Due to the voluntary nature of this
action, we are unable to quantify changes in non-HAP emissions across
these sources. In place of quantitative estimates of the number and
economic value of the non-HAP pollutant changes, we instead discuss
potential impacts in qualitative terms. Similar uncertainties related
to the potential distribution of changes in HAP emissions resulting
from this rulemaking also exist. As such, we also present a qualitative
assessment of the potential impacts to human health and the environment
from changes in selected HAP emissions. For more information on the
qualitative characterization of benefits/disbenefits, please refer to
the benefits analysis included in the RIA for this final action.
D. Economic Analysis
The economic impact analysis (EIA), an analysis that is included in
the RIA, focuses on impacts at an industry level, and impacts are only
calculated for the scenario that includes facilities with actual
emissions below 75 percent of the MST. As part of the EIA, the EPA
considered the impact of this rulemaking on small entities (small
businesses, governments, and nonprofit organizations). Impacts are
calculated as compliance costs (savings, in this instance) as a
percentage of sales for businesses, and of budgets for other
organizations. For informational purposes, the RIA includes the Small
Business Administration's definition of small entities by affected
industry categories (defined as North American Industry Classification
System) and potential burden reductions from title V and other
permitting programs. Since this rule significantly lessens the
regulatory burden that resulted from the OIAI policy, no compliance
costs are directly imposed upon industry categories as a result of this
rule. We do, however, consider the potential costs some sources may
incur to show
[[Page 73883]]
compliance with applicable area source NESHAP after they reclassify to
area source status. These avoided costs accrue because some
reclassified sources will not be required to obtain or maintain a title
V permit or continue meeting major source administrative requirements
under section 112 of the CAA. Some of the facilities benefitting from
this action are owned by small entities, and these entities may
experience a more beneficial impact than the large entities that will
also experience a reduction in costs from the burden reductions that
would take place as a result of this rule.
The results of the EIA for the primary scenario show that the
annual cost savings per sales for all affected industries is around
0.05 percent, using the median of these annual cost savings per sales
estimates calculated by industry, with sales averaging approximately
$9.3 billion per affected industry, to determine average impact. The
details of the EIA and impacts on employment, as well as results of the
EIA for the other two alternative scenarios, are presented in the RIA
of the final rule, which is available in the docket for this action.
IX. 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 and 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is an economically significant regulatory action that
was submitted to OMB for review. Any changes made in response to OMB
recommendations have been documented in the docket. The EPA prepared an
analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated with this
action. This analysis, the RIA for the final MM2A rule, is available in
the docket and is summarized in section I of this preamble.
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
This action is considered an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory
action. Details on the estimated potential net cost savings of this
final rule can be found in the EPA's analysis of the potential costs
and benefits associated with this action (see the RIA for the final
rule, which is in the docket for this action).
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose any new information-collection burden
under the PRA. Specifically, this rule requires the electronic
reporting of the one-time notification already required in 40 CFR
63.9(j) in the case where the facility is notifying of a change in
major source status. OMB has previously approved the information
collection activities contained in the existing regulations. These
amendments would neither require additional reports nor require that
additional content be added to already required reports. Therefore,
this action would not impose any new information-collection burden.
Furthermore, approval of an Information Collection Request (ICR) is not
required in connection with these final amendments. This is because the
General Provisions do not themselves require any reporting and
recordkeeping activities, and no ICR was submitted in connection with
their original promulgation or their subsequent amendment. Any
recordkeeping and reporting requirements are imposed only through the
incorporation of specific elements of the General Provisions in the
individual NESHAP, which are promulgated for particular source
categories that have their own ICRs.
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. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no
net burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule.
Small entities that are subject to major source NESHAP requirements
would not be required to take any action under this final rule; any
action a source takes to reclassify as an area source would be
voluntary. We expect that sources that reclassify will experience cost
savings that will outweigh any additional cost of achieving area source
status. The only cost that would be incurred by regulatory authorities
would be the cost of reviewing a sources' application for area source
status and issuing enforceable PTE limits, as appropriate. No small
government jurisdictions operate their own air pollution control
permitting agencies, so none would be required to incur costs under the
final rule. In addition, any costs associated with the reclassification
of major sources as area sources (i.e., application reviews and PTE
issuance) are expected to be offset by reduced reporting and
recordkeeping obligations for sources that no longer must meet major
source NESHAP requirements.
Based on the considerations above, we have, therefore, concluded
that this action will relieve regulatory burden for all regulated small
entities that reclassify to area source status. We also note that a
small-entity analysis, prepared at the discretion of the EPA and
reflecting the relief in regulatory burden, was prepared for this final
rule and is included in the RIA, which is available in the public
docket for this rulemaking. The results of this small-entity analysis
show relatively small reductions in burden estimate annual costs (about
0.10 percent) as a percentage of sales using the median estimate as the
average of impacts.
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. This action imposes
no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments or the
private sector. Since the impacts of this action are merely
illustrative of potential outcomes, it precludes identifying additional
costs to states as an unfunded mandate.
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 federal 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. There are two tribes that
currently implement title V permit programs and one that implements an
approved TIP for minor source permitting, the latter of which also has
a major source. As a result, these tribes may have additional permit
actions if sources in their jurisdiction seek reclassification to area
source status. Any tribal government that owns or operates a source
subject to major
[[Page 73884]]
source NESHAP requirements would not be required to take action under
this final rule; the reclassification provisions in the final rule
would be strictly voluntary. In addition, achieving area source status
would result in reduced burden on any source that no longer must meet
major source NESHAP requirements. Under the final rule, a tribal
government with an air pollution control agency to which we have
delegated CAA section 112 authority would be required to review permit
applications and to modify permits as necessary. However, any burden
associated with the review and modification of permits will be offset
by reduced Agency oversight obligations for sources no longer required
to meet major source requirements.
For sources located within Indian country, where the EPA is the
reviewing authority, unless the EPA has approved a non-federal minor
source permitting program or a delegation of the Federal Indian Country
Minor NSR Rule, the Federal Indian Country Minor NSR Rule at 40 CFR
49.151 through 49.165 provides a mechanism for an otherwise major
source to voluntarily accept restrictions on its PTE to become a
synthetic source, among other provisions. The Federal Indian Country
Minor NSR Rule applies to sources located within the exterior
boundaries of an Indian reservation or other lands as specified in 40
CFR part 49, collectively referred to as ``Indian country.'' See 40 CFR
49.151(c) and 49.152(d). This mechanism may also be used by an
otherwise major source of HAP to voluntarily accept restrictions on its
PTE to become a synthetic area HAP source. The EPA's FIP program, which
includes the Federal Indian Country Minor NSR Rule, provides additional
options for particular situations, such as general permits for specific
source categories, to facilitate minor source emissions management in
Indian country. Existing sources in Indian country may have PTE limits
that preceded the EPA's FIP for minor sources and, for that reason,
were issued in a 40 CFR part 71 permit or FIP permitting provision
applicable to the Indian reservation.
At proposal, the EPA specifically solicited comment from tribal
officials and, consistent with EPA policy, offered to consult with the
potentially impacted tribes and other tribes upon their request. On
June 27, 2019, the EPA sent consultation letters to four tribes that
may be impacted by this action. The EPA also gave an overview of the
proposed action on a call with the National Tribal Air Association on
June 27, 2019, and held an informational webinar for tribes on July 24,
2019. In addition, we sent consultation letters to the 573 federally
recognized tribes on September 27, 2019, and held an informational call
with one tribe on October 21, 2019. The EPA did not receive any
requests for tribal consultation on this action.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it implements the plain reading of the
definitions of major source and area source as established by Congress
in section 112 of the CAA.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. We have concluded that this final
action is not likely to have any adverse energy effects.
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)
because it does not establish an environmental health or safety
standard. The final amendments to the General Provisions are procedural
changes and do not impact the technology performance nor level of
control of the NESHAP governed by the General Provisions.
L. Determination Under CAA Section 307(d)
Pursuant to CAA section 307(d)(1)(V), the Administrator determines
that this action is subject to the provisions of CAA section 307(d).
Section 307(d)(1)(V) of the CAA provides that the provisions of CAA
section 307(d) apply to ``such other actions as the Administrator may
determine.''
M. 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 a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63
Environmental protection, Area sources, General provisions,
Hazardous air pollutants, Major sources, Potential to emit.
Andrew Wheeler,
Administrator.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR
part 63 as follows:
PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES
0
1. The authority citation part 63 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart A--General Provisions
0
2. Amend Sec. 63.1 by adding paragraph (c)(6) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.1 Applicability.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(6) A major source may become an area source at any time upon
reducing its emissions of and potential to emit hazardous air
pollutants, as defined in this subpart, to below the major source
thresholds established in Sec. 63.2, subject to the provisions in
paragraphs (c)(6)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) A major source reclassifying to area source status is subject
to the applicability of standards, compliance dates and notification
requirements specified in (c)(6)(i)(A) of this section. An area source
that previously was a major source and becomes a major source again is
subject to the applicability of standards, compliance dates, and
notification requirements specified in (c)(6)(i)(B) of this section:
(A) A major source reclassifying to area source status under this
part remains subject to any applicable major source requirements
established under this part until the reclassification becomes
effective. After the reclassification becomes effective, the source is
subject to any applicable area
[[Page 73885]]
source requirements established under this part immediately, provided
the compliance date for the area source requirements has passed. The
owner or operator of a major source that becomes an area source subject
to newly applicable area source requirements under this part must
comply with the initial notification requirements pursuant to Sec.
63.9(b). The owner or operator of a major source that becomes an area
source must also provide to the Administrator any change in the
information already provided under Sec. 63.9(b) per Sec. 63.9(j).
(B) An area source that previously was a major source under this
part and that becomes a major source again is subject to the applicable
major source requirements established under this part immediately upon
becoming a major source again, provided the compliance date for the
major source requirements has passed, notwithstanding any provision
within the applicable subparts. The owner or operator of an area source
that becomes a major source again must comply with the initial
notification pursuant to Sec. 63.9(b). The owner or operator must also
provide to the Administrator any change in the information already
provided under Sec. 63.9(b) per Sec. 63.9(j).
(ii) Becoming an area source does not absolve a source subject to
an enforcement action or investigation for major source violations or
infractions from the consequences of any actions occurring when the
source was major. Becoming a major source does not absolve a source
subject to an enforcement action or investigation for area source
violations or infractions from the consequences of any actions
occurring when the source was an area source.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec. 63.2 by revising the definition ``Potential to emit'' to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Potential to emit means the maximum capacity of a stationary source
to emit a pollutant under its physical and operational design. Any
physical or operational limitation on the capacity of the stationary
source to emit a pollutant, including air pollution control equipment
and restrictions on hours of operation or on the type or amount of
material combusted, stored, or processed, shall be treated as part of
its design if the limitation or the effect it would have on emissions
is enforceable.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec. 63.6 by revising paragraphs (b)(7) and (c)(1) and (5) to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.6 Compliance with standards and maintenance requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(7) When an area source increases its emissions of (or its
potential to emit) hazardous air pollutants such that the source
becomes a major source, the portion of the facility that meets the
definition of a new affected source must comply with all requirements
of that standard applicable to new sources. The source owner or
operator must comply with the relevant standard upon startup.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) After the effective date of a relevant standard established
under this part pursuant to section 112(d) or 112(h) of the Act, the
owner or operator of an existing source shall comply with such standard
by the compliance date established by the Administrator in the
applicable subpart(s) of this part, except as provided in Sec.
63.1(c)(6)(i). Except as otherwise provided for in section 112 of the
Act, in no case will the compliance date established for an existing
source in an applicable subpart of this part exceed 3 years after the
effective date of such standard.
* * * * *
(5) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(7) of this section, the
owner or operator of an area source that increases its emissions of (or
its potential to emit) hazardous air pollutants such that the source
becomes a major source and meets the definition of an existing source
in the applicable major source standard shall be subject to relevant
standards for existing sources. Except as provided in paragraph Sec.
63.1(c)(6)(i)(B), such sources must comply by the date specified in the
standards for existing area sources that become major sources. If no
such compliance date is specified in the standards, the source shall
have a period of time to comply with the relevant emission standard
that is equivalent to the compliance period specified in the relevant
standard for existing sources in existence at the time the standard
becomes effective.
* * * * *
0
5. Amend Sec. 63.9 by revising paragraphs (b)(1)(ii) and (j) and
adding paragraph (k) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.9 Notification requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) If an area source subsequently becomes a major source that is
subject to the emission standard or other requirement, such source
shall be subject to the notification requirements of this section. Area
sources previously subject to major source requirements that become
major sources again are also subject to the notification requirements
of this paragraph and must submit the notification according to the
requirements of paragraph (k) of this section.
* * * * *
(j) Change in information already provided. Any change in the
information already provided under this section shall be provided to
the Administrator within 15 calendar days after the change. The owner
or operator of a major source that reclassifies to area source status
is also subject to the notification requirements of this paragraph. The
owner or operator may use the application for reclassification with the
regulatory authority (e.g., permit application) to fulfill the
requirements of this paragraph. A source which reclassified after
January 25, 2018, and before January 19, 2021, and has not yet provided
the notification of a change in information is required to provide such
notification no later than February 2, 2021, according to the
requirements of paragraph (k) of this section. Beginning January 19,
2021, the owner or operator of a major source that reclassifies to area
source status must submit the notification according to the
requirements of paragraph (k) of this section. A notification of
reclassification must contain the following information:
(1) The name and address of the owner or operator;
(2) The address (i.e., physical location) of the affected source;
(3) An identification of the standard being reclassified from and
to (if applicable); and
(4) Date of effectiveness of the reclassification.
(k) Electronic submission of notifications or reports. If you are
required to submit notifications or reports following the procedure
specified in this paragraph (k), you must submit notifications or
reports to the EPA via CEDRI, which can be accessed through the EPA's
Central Data Exchange (CDX) (https://cdx.epa.gov/). The notification or
report must be submitted by the deadline specified. 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
[[Page 73886]]
be CBI. Although we do not expect persons to assert a claim of CBI, if
persons wish to assert a CBI, submit a complete notification or report,
including information claimed to be CBI, to the EPA. 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 earlier in this paragraph (k). All CBI claims must be
asserted at the time of submission. Furthermore, under section 114(c)
of the Act 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.
(1) If you are required to electronically submit a notification or
report by this paragraph (k) through CEDRI in the EPA's CDX, you may
assert a claim of EPA system outage for failure to timely comply with
the electronic submittal requirement. To assert a claim of EPA system
outage, you must meet the requirements outlined in paragraphs (k)(1)(i)
through (vii) of this section.
(i) You must have been or will be precluded from accessing CEDRI
and submitting a required notification or report within the time
prescribed due to an outage of either the EPA's CEDRI or CDX systems.
(ii) The outage must have occurred within the period of time
beginning 5 business days prior to the date that the notification or
report is due.
(iii) The outage may be planned or unplanned.
(iv) 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.
(v) You must provide to the Administrator a written description
identifying:
(A) The date(s) and time(s) when CDX or CEDRI was accessed and the
system was unavailable;
(B) A rationale for attributing the delay in submitting beyond the
regulatory deadline to EPA system outage;
(C) Measures taken or to be taken to minimize the delay in
submitting; and
(D) The date by which you propose to submit, or if you have already
met the electronic submittal requirement in this paragraph (k) at the
time of the notification, the date you submitted the notification or
report.
(vi) The decision to accept the claim of EPA system outage and
allow an extension to the reporting deadline is solely within the
discretion of the Administrator.
(vii) In any circumstance, the notification or report must be
submitted electronically as soon as possible after the outage is
resolved.
(2) If you are required to electronically submit a notification or
report by this paragraph (k) through CEDRI in the EPA's CDX, you may
assert a claim of force majeure for failure to timely comply with the
electronic submittal requirement. To assert a claim of force majeure,
you must meet the requirements outlined in paragraphs (k)(2)(i) through
(v) of this section.
(i) 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
notification or 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).
(ii) 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 submitting through CEDRI.
(iii) You must provide to the Administrator:
(A) A written description of the force majeure event;
(B) A rationale for attributing the delay in reporting beyond the
regulatory deadline to the force majeure event;
(C) Measures taken or to be taken to minimize the delay in
reporting; and
(D) The date by which you propose to submit the notification or
report, or if you have already met the electronic submittal requirement
in this paragraph (k) at the time of the notification, the date you
submitted the notification or report.
(iv) The decision to accept the claim of force majeure and allow an
extension to the submittal deadline is solely within the discretion of
the Administrator.
(v) In any circumstance, the reporting must occur as soon as
possible after the force majeure event occurs.
0
6. Amend Sec. 63.10 by revising paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.10 Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) If an owner or operator determines that his or her existing or
new stationary source is in the source category regulated by a standard
established pursuant to section 112 of the Act, but that source is not
subject to the relevant standard (or other requirement established
under this part) because of enforceable limitations on the source's
potential to emit, or the source otherwise qualifies for an exclusion,
the owner or operator must keep a record of the applicability
determination. The applicability determination must be kept on site at
the source for a period of 5 years after the determination, or until
the source changes its operations to become an affected source subject
to the relevant standard (or other requirement established under this
part), whichever comes first if the determination is made prior to
January 19, 2021. The applicability determination must be kept until
the source changes its operations to become an affected source subject
to the relevant standard (or other requirement established under this
part) if the determination was made on or after January 19, 2021. The
record of the applicability determination must be signed by the person
making the determination and include an emissions analysis (or other
information) that demonstrates the owner or operator's conclusion that
the source is unaffected (e.g., because the source is an area source).
The analysis (or other information) must be sufficiently detailed to
allow the Administrator to make an applicability finding for the source
with regard to the relevant standard or other requirement. If
applicable, the analysis must be performed in accordance with
requirements established in relevant subparts of this part for this
purpose for particular categories of stationary sources. If relevant,
the analysis should be performed in accordance with EPA guidance
materials published to assist sources in making applicability
determinations under section 112 of the Act, if any. The requirements
to
[[Page 73887]]
determine applicability of a standard under Sec. 63.1(b)(3) and to
record the results of that determination under this paragraph (b)(3) of
this section shall not by themselves create an obligation for the owner
or operator to obtain a title V permit.
* * * * *
0
7. Amend Sec. 63.12 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.12 State authority and delegations.
* * * * *
(c) All information required to be submitted to the EPA under this
part also shall be submitted to the appropriate state agency of any
state to which authority has been delegated under section 112(l) of the
Act, provided that each specific delegation may exempt sources from a
certain federal or state reporting requirement. Any information
required to be submitted electronically by this part via the EPA's
CEDRI may, at the discretion of the delegated authority, satisfy the
requirements of this paragraph. The Administrator may permit all or
some of the information to be submitted to the appropriate state agency
only, instead of to the EPA and the state agency with the exception of
federal electronic reporting requirements under this part. Sources may
not be exempted from federal electronic reporting requirements.
0
8. Amend Sec. 63.13 by revising paragraph (a) introductory text to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.13 Addresses of State air pollution control agencies and EPA
Regional Offices.
(a) All requests, reports, applications, submittals, and other
communications to the Administrator pursuant to this part shall be
submitted to the appropriate Regional Office of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency indicated in the following list of EPA Regional
offices. If a request, report, application, submittal, or other
communication is required by this part to be submitted electronically
via the EPA's CEDRI then such submission satisfies the requirements of
this paragraph (a).
* * * * *
Subpart F--National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air
Pollutants From the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry
0
9. Amend table 3 to subpart F of part 63 by adding in numerical order
an entry for Sec. 63.1(c)(6), revising the entry for Sec. 63.9(j),
and adding in numerical order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as
follows:
Table 3 to Subpart F of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to
Subparts F, G, and H a to Subpart F
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to
Reference subparts F, G, Comment
and H
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6).................... Yes..............
* * * * * * *
63.9(j)....................... Yes.............. Only as related to
change to major
source status.
63.9(k)....................... Yes.............. Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Wherever subpart A specifies ``postmark'' dates, submittals may be
sent by methods other than the U.S. Mail (e.g., by fax or courier).
Submittals shall be sent by the specified dates, but a postmark is not
necessarily required.
* * * * *
Subpart G--National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air
Pollutants From the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing
Industry for Process Vents, Storage Vessels, Transfer Operations,
and Wastewater
0
10. Amend Sec. 63.151 by revising paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (iii)
to read as follows:
Sec. 63.151 Initial notification.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) For an existing source, the Initial Notification shall be
submitted within 120 calendar days after the date of promulgation, or
no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later.
(ii) For a new source that has an initial start-up 90 calendar days
after the date of promulgation of this subpart or later, the
application for approval of construction or reconstruction required by
Sec. 63.5(d) of subpart A shall be submitted in lieu of the Initial
Notification. The application shall be submitted as soon as practicable
before construction or reconstruction is planned to commence (but it
need not be sooner than 90 calendar days after the date of promulgation
of this subpart). For a new source that reclassifies to major source
status after January 19, 2021 and greater than 90 days after the
initial start-up, the source shall submit the initial notification
required by Sec. 63.9(b) no later than 120 days after the source
becomes subject to this subpart.
(iii) For a new source that has an initial start-up prior to 90
calendar days after the date of promulgation, the Initial Notification
shall be submitted within 90 calendar days after the date of
promulgation of this subpart, or no later than 120 days after the
source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later. The
application for approval of construction or reconstruction described in
Sec. 63.5(d) of subpart A is not required for these sources.
* * * * *
0
11. Amend table 1A to subpart G by revising the entry for Sec. 63.9 to
read as follows:
Table 1A to Subpart G of Part 63--Applicable 40 CFR Part 63 General
Provisions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR part 63, subpart A, provisions applicable to subpart G
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(a)(2), (b)(4)(i),\a\ (b)(4)(ii), (b)(4)(iii), (b)(5),\a\
(c), (d), (j), and (k).
[[Page 73888]]
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The notifications specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(4)(i) and (b)(5) shall
be submitted at the times specified in 40 CFR part 65.
* * * * *
Subpart H--National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Equipment Leaks
0
12. Amend Sec. 63.182 by revising paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (iii)
to read as follows:
Sec. 63.182 Reporting requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) For an existing source, the Initial Notification shall be
submitted within 120 calendar days after the date of promulgation or no
later than 120 calendar days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later.
(ii) For a new source that has an initial start-up 90 days after
the date of promulgation of this subpart or later, the application for
approval of construction or reconstruction required by Sec. 63.5(d) of
subpart A of this part shall be submitted in lieu of the Initial
Notification. The application shall be submitted as soon as practicable
before the construction or reconstruction is planned to commence (but
it need not be sooner than 90 days after the date of promulgation of
the subpart that references this subpart). For a new source that
reclassifies to major source status after January 19, 2021 and greater
than 90 days after the initial start-up, the source shall submit the
initial notification required by Sec. 63.9(b) no later than 120 days
after the source becomes subject to this subpart.
(iii) For a new source that has an initial start-up prior to 90
days after the date of promulgation of the applicable subpart, the
Initial Notification shall be submitted within 90 days after the date
of promulgation of the subpart that references this subpart, or no
later than 120 calendar days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
13. Amend table 4 to subpart H by revising entry for Sec. 63.9 to read
as follows:
Table 4 to Subpart H of Part 63--Applicable 40 CFR Part 63 General
Provisions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR part 63, subpart A, provisions applicable to subpart H
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(a)(2), (b)(4)(i),\a\ (b)(4)(ii), (b)(4)(iii), (b)(5),\a\
(c), (d), (j) and (k).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The notifications specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(4)(i) and (b)(5) shall
be submitted at the times specified in 40 CFR part 65.
Subpart J--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production
0
14. Amend Sec. 63.215 by revising paragraph (b) introductory text and
adding paragraph (b)(4) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.215 What General Provisions apply to me?
* * * * *
(b) The provisions in subpart A of this part also apply to this
subpart as specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section.
* * * * *
(4) The specific notification procedure of Sec. 63.9(j) and (k)
relating to a change in major source status.
Subpart L--National Emission Standards for Coke Oven Batteries
0
15. Amend Sec. 63.311 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.311 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
(a) General requirements. After the effective date of an approved
permit in a state under part 70 of this chapter, the owner or operator
shall submit all notifications and reports required by this subpart to
the state permitting authority except a source that reclassifies to an
area source must follow the notification procedures of Sec. 63.9(j)
and (k). Use of information provided by the certified observer shall be
a sufficient basis for notifications required under Sec. 70.5(c)(9) of
this chapter and the reasonable inquiry requirement of Sec. 70.5(d) of
this chapter.
* * * * *
Subpart M--National Perchloroethylene Air Emission Standards for
Dry Cleaning Facilities
0
16. Amend Sec. 63.324 by adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.324 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
* * * * *
(g) Each owner or operator of a dry cleaning facility that
reclassifies from a major source to an area source must follow the
procedures of Sec. 63.9(j) and (k) to provide notification of the
change in status.
Subpart N--National Emission Standards for Chromium Emissions From
Hard and Decorative Chromium Electroplating and Chromium Anodizing
Tanks
0
17. Amend Sec. 63.347 by revising paragraph (c)(1) introductory text
to read as follows:
Sec. 63.347 Reporting requirements.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) The owner or operator of an affected source that has an initial
startup before January 25, 1995, shall notify the Administrator in
writing that the source is subject to this subpart. The notification
shall be submitted no later than 180 calendar days after January 25,
1995, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to
this subpart,
[[Page 73889]]
whichever is later, and shall contain the following information:
* * * * *
0
18. Amend table 1 to subpart N of part 63 by adding in numerical order
entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart N of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to
Subpart N
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to
General provisions reference subpart N Comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6).................... Yes..............
* * * * * * *
63.9(k)....................... Yes.............. Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart O--Ethylene Oxide Emissions Standards for Sterilization
Facilities
0
19. Amend Sec. 63.360 in table 1 of Sec. 63.360 by adding in
numerical order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read
as follows:
Sec. 63.360 Applicability.
* * * * *
Table 1 of Sec. 63.360--General Provisions Applicability to Subpart O
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to sources Applies to sources
Reference using 10 tons in using 1 to 10 tons in Comment
subpart O \a\ subpart O \a\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6)........................... Yes
* * * * * * *
63.9(k).............................. Yes Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ See definition.
* * * * *
Subpart Q--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Industrial Process Cooling Towers
0
20. Amend Sec. 63.405 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) introductory text,
(a)(2), and (b)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.405 Notification requirements.
(a) * * *
(1) In accordance with Sec. 63.9(b) of subpart A, owners or
operators of all affected IPCT's that have an initial startup before
September 8, 1994, shall notify the Administrator in writing. The
notification, which shall be submitted not later than 12 months after
September 8, 1994, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes
subject to this subpart, whichever is later, shall provide the
following information:
* * * * *
(2) In accordance with Sec. 63.9(b) of subpart A, owners or
operators of all affected IPCT's that have an initial startup on or
after September 8, 1994, shall notify the Administrator in writing that
the source is subject to the relevant standard no later than 12 months
after initial startup or no later than 120 days after the source
becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later. The notification
shall provide all the information required in paragraphs (a)(1)(i)
through (iv) of this section.
(b) * * *
(1) In accordance with Sec. 63.9(h) of subpart A, owners or
operators of affected IPCT's shall submit to the Administrator a
notification of compliance status within 60 days of the date on which
the IPCT is brought into compliance with Sec. 63.402 of this subpart
and not later than 18 months after September 8, 1994, or no later than
120 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is
later.
* * * * *
0
21. Amend table 1 to subpart Q of part 63 by revising the entry for
Sec. 63.9 to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart Q of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to
Subpart Q
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to
Reference subpart Q Comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.9(a), (b)(1), (b)(3), (c), Yes.............. Sec. 63.9(k) only
(h)(1), (h)(3), (h)(6), (j), as specified in
and (k). 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73890]]
Subpart R--National Emission Standards for Gasoline Distribution
Facilities (Bulk Gasoline Terminals and Pipeline Breakout Stations)
0
22. Amend table 1 to subpart R of part 63 by adding in numerical order
entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart R of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to
Subpart R
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to
Reference subpart R Comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6).................... Yes..............
* * * * * * *
63.9(k)....................... Yes.............. Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart S--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
From the Pulp and Paper Industry
0
23. Amend Sec. 63.455 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.455 Reporting requirements.
(a) Each owner or operator of a source subject to this subpart
shall comply with the reporting requirements of subpart A of this part
as specified in Table 1 to subpart S of part 63 and all the following
requirements in this section. The initial notification report specified
under Sec. 63.9(b)(2) of subpart A of this part shall be submitted by
April 15, 1999, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes
subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
24. Amend table 1 to subpart S of part 63 by adding in numerical order
entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart S of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to
Subpart S a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to
Reference subpart S Comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6).................... Yes..............
* * * * * * *
63.9(k)....................... Yes.............. Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Wherever subpart A specifies ``postmark'' dates, submittals may be
sent by methods other than the U.S. Mail (e.g., by fax or courier).
Submittals shall be sent by the specified dates, but a postmark is not
required.
Subpart T--National Emission Standards for Halogenated Solvent
Cleaning
0
25. Amend Sec. 63.468 by revising the introductory text of paragraphs
(a), (b), (c), and (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.468 Reporting requirements.
(a) Each owner or operator of an existing solvent cleaning machine
subject to the provisions of this subpart shall submit an initial
notification report to the Administrator no later than August 29, 1995,
or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later. This report shall include the information
specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this section.
* * * * *
(b) Each owner or operator of a new solvent cleaning machine
subject to the provisions of this subpart shall submit an initial
notification report to the Administrator. New sources for which
construction or reconstruction had commenced and initial startup had
not occurred before December 2, 1994, shall submit this report as soon
as practicable before startup but no later than January 31, 1995, or no
later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart,
whichever is later. New sources for which the construction or
reconstruction commenced after December 2, 1994, shall submit this
report as soon as practicable before the construction or reconstruction
is planned to commence or for sources which reclassify to major source
status, no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart. This report shall include all of the information required in
Sec. 63.5(d)(1) of subpart A (General Provisions), with the revisions
and additions in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3) of this section.
* * * * *
(c) Each owner or operator of a batch cold solvent cleaning machine
subject to the provisions of this subpart shall submit a compliance
report to the Administrator. For existing sources, this report shall be
submitted to the Administrator no later than 150 days after the
compliance date specified in Sec. 63.460(d), or no later than 120 days
after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
For new sources, this report shall be submitted to the Administrator no
later than 150 days after startup or May 1, 1995, or no later than 120
days after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is
[[Page 73891]]
later. This report shall include the requirements specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this section.
* * * * *
(d) Each owner or operator of a batch vapor or in-line solvent
cleaning machine complying with the provisions of Sec. 63.463 shall
submit to the Administrator an initial statement of compliance for each
solvent cleaning machine. For existing sources, this report shall be
submitted to the Administrator no later than 150 days after the
compliance date specified in Sec. 63.460(d), or no later than 120 days
after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
For new sources, this report shall be submitted to the Administrator no
later than 150 days after startup or May 1, 1995, or no later than 120
days after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is
later. This statement shall include the requirements specified in
paragraphs (d)(1) through (6) of this section.
* * * * *
0
26. Amend appendix B to subpart T of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Appendix B to Subpart T of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to Subpart T
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart T
Reference -------------------------------------------------- Comments
BCC BVI
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6)........................... Yes.................... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
63.9(k).............................. Yes.................... Yes.................... Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Subpart U--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant
Emissions: Group I Polymers and Resins
0
27. Amend table 1 to subpart U of part 63 by adding in numerical order
an entry for Sec. 63.1(c)(6), revising the entry for Sec. 63.9(j),
and adding in numerical order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as
follows:
Table 1 to Subpart U of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to
Subpart U Affected Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Reference U Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6)............... Yes...............
* * * * *
Sec. 63.9(j).................. Yes............... For change in
major source
status only.
Sec. 63.9(k).................. Yes............... Only as specified
in Sec.
63.9(j).
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Subpart W--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Epoxy Resins Production and Non-Nylon Polyamides Production
0
28. Amend table 1 to subpart W of part 63 by adding in numerical order
entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart W of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to Subpart W
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart W
------------------------------------------------------------
WSR alternative
standard, and BLR
Reference equipment leak Comment
BLR WSR standard (40 CFR
part 63, subpart
H)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6)............... Yes............... Yes............... Yes...............
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k).................. Yes............... Yes............... Yes............... Only as specified
in Sec.
63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73892]]
Subpart X--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
From Secondary Lead Smelting
0
29. Amend table 1 to subpart X of part 63 by adding in numerical order
an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart X of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to
Subpart X
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Reference X Comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
63.9(k)......................... Yes............... Only as specified
in 63.9(j).
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Subpart Y-National Emission Standards for Marine Tank Vessel
Loading Operations
0
30.Amend Sec. 63.567 by revising paragraphs (b)(2) introductory text
and (b)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.567 Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) Initial notification for sources with startup before the
effective date. The owner or operator of a source with initial startup
before the effective date shall notify the Administrator in writing
that the source is subject to the relevant standard. The notification
shall be submitted not later than 365 days after the effective date of
the emissions standards or no later than 120 days after the source
becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later, and shall provide
the following information:
* * * * *
(3) Initial notification for sources with startup after the
effective date. The owner or operator of a new or reconstructed source
or a source that has been reconstructed such that it is subject to the
emissions standards that has an initial startup after the effective
date but before the compliance date, and for which an application for
approval of construction or reconstruction is not required under Sec.
63.5(d) of subpart A of this part and Sec. 63.566 of this subpart, or
a sources which reclassifies to major source status after the effective
date, shall notify the Administrator in writing that the source is
subject to the standard no later than 365 days, 120 days after initial
startup, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to
this subpart, whichever occurs before notification of the initial
performance test in Sec. 63.9(e) of subpart A of this part. The
notification shall provide all the information required in paragraph
(b)(2) of this section, delivered or postmarked with the notification
required in paragraph (b)(4) of this section.
* * * * *
0
31. Amend table 1 of Sec. 63.560 by adding in numerical order entries
for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.560 Applicability and designation of affected sources.
* * * * *
Table 1 to Sec. 63.560--General Provisions Applicability to Subpart Y
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to
Reference affected sources Comment
in subpart Y
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
63.1(c)(6)...................... Yes...............
* * * * *
63.9(k)......................... Yes............... Only as specified
in Sec.
63.9(j).
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart AA--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants From Phosphoric Acid Manufacturing Plants
0
32. Amend appendix A to subpart AA of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Appendix A to Subpart AA of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A) to Subpart
AA
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR citation Requirement Applies to subpart AA Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... ....................... Yes.................... None.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... ....................... Yes.................... Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart BB--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants From Phosphate Fertilizers Production Plants
0
33. Amend appendix A to subpart BB of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
[[Page 73893]]
Appendix A to Subpart BB of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A) to Subpart
BB
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR citation Requirement Applies to subpart BB Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... ....................... Yes.................... None.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... ....................... Yes.................... Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart CC-National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
From Petroleum Refineries
0
34. Amend appendix to subpart CC of part 63 in table 6 by adding in
numerical order an entry for Sec. 63.1(c)(6) revising the entry for
Sec. 63.9(j), and adding in numerical order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k)
to read as follows:
Appendix to Subpart CC of Part 63-Tables
* * * * *
Table 6--General Provisions Applicability to Subpart CC a
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to
Reference subpart CC Comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6).................... Yes..............
* * * * * * *
63.9(j)....................... Yes.............. .....................
63.9(k)....................... Yes.............. Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Wherever subpart A specifies ``postmark'' dates, submittals may be
sent by methods other than the U.S. Mail (e.g., by fax or courier).
Submittals shall be sent by the specified dates, but a postmark is not
required.
* * * * *
Subpart DD--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants From Off-Site Waste and Recovery Operations
0
35. Amend Sec. 63.697 by revising paragraph (a)(1) introductory text
to read as follows:
Sec. 63.697 Reporting requirements.
(a) * * *
(1) The owner or operator of an affected source must submit notices
to the Administrator in accordance with the applicable notification
requirements in 40 CFR 63.9 as specified in Table 2 of this subpart.
For the purpose of this subpart, an owner or operator subject to the
initial notification requirements under 40 CFR 63.9(b)(2) must submit
the required notification on or before October 19, 1999, or no later
than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart,
whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
36. Amend table 2 to subpart DD of part 63 by adding in numerical order
an entry for Sec. 63.1(c)(6) in numerical order, revising the entry
for Sec. 63.9(j), and adding in numerical order an entry for Sec.
63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart DD of Part 63--Applicability of Paragraphs in Subpart
A of This Part 63--General Provisions to Subpart DD
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to
Subpart A reference subpart DD Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6).................... Yes..............
* * * * * * *
63.9(j)....................... Yes.............. For change in major
source status only.
63.9(k)....................... Yes.............. Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73894]]
* * * * *
Subpart EE-National Emission Standards for Magnetic Tape
Manufacturing Operations
0
37. Amend table 1 to subpart EE of part 63 by revising the entry for
63.9(b)(2) and adding in numerical order entries for Sec. Sec.
63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart EE of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to
Subpart EE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to
Reference subpart EE Comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6).................... Yes..............
* * * * * * *
63.9(b)(2).................... Yes.............. Sec. 63.753(a)(1)
requires submittal
of the initial
notification at
least 1 year prior
to the compliance
date or as specified
in Sec.
63.9(b)(2); Sec.
63.753(a)(2) allows
a title V or part 70
permit application
to be substituted
for the initial
notification in
certain
circumstances.
* * * * * * *
63.9(k)....................... Yes.............. Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart GG-National Emission Standards for Aerospace Manufacturing
and Rework Facilities
0
38. Amend table 1 to subpart GG of part 63 by adding in numerical order
entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart GG of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to
Subpart GG
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to
Reference affected sources Comment
in subpart GG
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6).................... Yes..............
* * * * * * *
63.9(k)....................... Yes.............. Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart HH--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants From Oil and Natural Gas Production Facilities
0
39. Amend Sec. 63.760 by revising paragraph (a)(1) introductory text
to read as follows:
Sec. 63.760 Applicability and designation of affected source.
(a) * * *
(1) Facilities that are major or area sources of hazardous air
pollutants (HAP) as defined in Sec. 63.761. Emissions for major source
determination purposes can be estimated using the maximum natural gas
or hydrocarbon liquid throughput, as appropriate, calculated in
paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section. As an alternative
to calculating the maximum natural gas or hydrocarbon liquid
throughput, the owner or operator of a new or existing source may use
the facility's design maximum natural gas or hydrocarbon liquid
throughput to estimate the maximum potential emissions. Other means to
determine the facility's major source status are allowed, provided the
information is documented and recorded to the Administrator's
satisfaction in accordance with Sec. 63.10(b)(3). A facility that is
determined to be an area source, but subsequently increases its
emissions or its potential to emit above the major source levels, and
becomes a major source, must comply with all provisions of this subpart
applicable to a major source starting on the applicable compliance date
specified in paragraph (f) of this section. Nothing in this paragraph
is intended to preclude a source from limiting its potential to emit
through other appropriate mechanisms that may be available through the
permitting authority.
* * * * *
0
40. Amend Sec. 63.775 by revising paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.775 Reporting requirements.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) The initial notifications required under Sec. 63.9(b)(2) not
later than January 3, 2008, or no later than 120 days after the source
becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later. In addition to
submitting your initial notification to the addressees specified under
Sec. 63.9(a), you must also submit a copy of the initial notification
to the EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. Send your
notification via email to Oil
[[Page 73895]]
and Gas [email protected] or via U.S. mail or other mail delivery service
to U.S. EPA, Sector Policies and Programs Division/Fuels and
Incineration Group (E143-01), Attn: Oil and Gas Project Leader,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.
* * * * *
0
41. Amend appendix to subpart HH of part 63 in table 2 by adding in
numerical order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read
as follows:
Appendix to Subpart HH of Part 63--Tables
* * * * *
Table 2 to Subpart HH of Part 63--Applicability of 40 CFR Part 63
General Provisions to Subpart HH
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to
General provisions reference subpart HH Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6)............... Yes...............
* * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k).................. Yes............... Only as specified
in Sec.
63.9(j).
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart II--National Emission Standards for Shipbuilding and Ship
Repair (Surface Coating)
0
42. Amend table 1 to subpart II of part 63 by removing the entry for
Sec. 63.9(i)-(j) and adding in its place Sec. 63.9(i)-(k).
The addition reads as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart II of Part 63--General Provisions of Applicability to
Subpart II
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to
Reference subpart II Comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.9(i)-(k)................... Yes.............. Sec. 63.9(k) only
as specified in Sec.
63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart JJ--National Emission Standards for Wood Furniture
Manufacturing Operations
0
43. Amend table 1 to subpart JJ of part 63 by revising the entry for
Sec. 63.9(b) and adding in numerical order entries for Sec. Sec.
63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart JJ of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to
Subpart JJ
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to
Reference subpart JJ Comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6).................... Yes..............
* * * * * * *
63.9(b)....................... Yes.............. Existing sources are
required to submit
initial notification
report within 270
days of the
effective date or no
later than 120 days
after the source
becomes subject to
this subpart,
whichever is later.
* * * * * * *
63.9(k)....................... Yes.............. Only as specified in
63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart KK--National Emission Standards for the Printing and
Publishing Industry
0
44. Amend Sec. 63.830 by revising (b)(1)(i) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.830 Reporting requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Initial notifications for existing sources shall be submitted
no later than one year before the compliance date specified in Sec.
63.826(a), or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject
to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
45. Amend table 1 to subpart KK of part 63 by adding in numerical order
entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
[[Page 73896]]
Table 1 to Subpart KK of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to
Subpart KK
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to
General provisions reference subpart KK Comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6)............. Yes..............
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)................ Yes.............. Only as specified in
63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart LL--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants
0
46. Amend appendix A to subpart LL of part 63 adding in numerical order
entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Appendix A to Subpart LL of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference sections(s) Requirement Applies to subpart LL Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6)........................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
63.9(k).............................. Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart MM--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Chemical Recovery Combustion Sources at Kraft, Soda,
Sulfite, and Stand-Alone Semichemical Pulp Mills
0
47. Amend table 1 to subpart MM of part 63 by adding in numerical order
entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart MM of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to Subpart MM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General provisions reference Summary of requirements Applies to subpart MM Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6)........................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
63.9(k).............................. Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart YY--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Source Categories: Generic Maximum Achievable
Control Technology Standards
0
48. Amend Sec. 63.1100 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.1100 Applicability.
* * * * *
(b) Subpart A requirements. The following provisions of subpart A
of this part (General Provisions), Sec. Sec. 63.1 through 63.5, and
Sec. Sec. 63.12 through 63.15, apply to owners or operators of
affected sources subject to this subpart. For sources that reclassify
from major source to area source status, the applicable provisions of
Sec. 63.9(j) and (k) apply. Beginning no later than the compliance
dates specified in Sec. 63.1102(c), for ethylene production affected
sources, Sec. Sec. 63.7(a)(4), (c), (e)(4), and (g)(2) and
63.10(b)(2)(vi) also apply.
* * * * *
[[Page 73897]]
Subpart CCC--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Steel Pickling--HCl Process Facilities and
Hydrochloric Acid Regeneration Plants
0
49. Amend Sec. 63.1163 by revising paragraph (a)(3) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.1163 Notification requirements.
(a) * * *
(3) As required by Sec. 63.9(b)(3) of subpart A of this part, the
owner or operator of a new or reconstructed affected source, or a
source that has been reconstructed such that it is an affected source,
that has an initial startup after the effective date and for which an
application for approval of construction or reconstruction is not
required under Sec. 63.5(d) of subpart A of this part, shall notify
the Administrator in writing that the source is subject to the
standards no later than 120 days after initial startup, or no later
than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart,
whichever is later. The notification shall contain the information
specified in Sec. Sec. 63.9(b)(2)(i) through (v) of subpart A of this
part, delivered or postmarked with the notification required in Sec.
63.9(b)(5) of subpart A of this part.
* * * * *
0
50. Amend table 1 to subpart CCC of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.9(j) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart CCC of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions
(40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A) to Subpart CCC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Reference CCC Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
63.9(j)......................... Yes...............
63.9(k)......................... Yes............... Only as specified
in Sec.
63.9(j).
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart DDD--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Mineral Wool Production
0
51. Amend table 1 to subpart DDD of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart DDD of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A) to Subpart
DDD of Part 63
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General provisions citation Requirement Applies to subpart DDD? Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... ....................... Yes.................... Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart EEE--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants from Hazardous Waste Combustors
0
52. Amend table 1 to subpart EEE of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart EEE of Part 63--General Provisions Applicable to
Subpart EEE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Reference EEE Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
63.9(k)......................... Yes............... Only as specified
in Sec.
63.9(j).
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart GGG--National Emission Standards for Pharmaceuticals
Production
0
53. Amend table 1 to subpart GGG of part 63 is amended by adding in
numerical order an entry for Sec. 63.1(c)(6), revising the entry for
Sec. 63.9(j), and adding in numerical order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k)
to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart GGG of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to Subpart GGG
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General provisions reference Summary of requirements Applies to subpart GGG Comments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6)........................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
63.9(j).............................. Change in information Yes.................... For change in major
provided. source status only.
63.9(k).............................. Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73898]]
Subpart HHH--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants From Natural Gas Transmission and Storage Facilities
0
54. Amend Sec. 63.1270 by revising paragraph (a) introductory text to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.1270 Applicability and designation of affected source.
(a) This subpart applies to owners and operators of natural gas
transmission and storage facilities that transport or store natural gas
prior to entering the pipeline to a local distribution company or to a
final end user (if there is no local distribution company), and that
are major sources of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emissions as
defined in Sec. 63.1271. Emissions for major source determination
purposes can be estimated using the maximum natural gas throughput
calculated in either paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section and
paragraphs (a)(3) and (4) of this section. As an alternative to
calculating the maximum natural gas throughput, the owner or operator
of a new or existing source may use the facility design maximum natural
gas throughput to estimate the maximum potential emissions. Other means
to determine the facility's major source status are allowed, provided
the information is documented and recorded to the Administrator's
satisfaction in accordance with Sec. 63.10(b)(3). A compressor station
that transports natural gas prior to the point of custody transfer or
to a natural gas processing plant (if present) is not considered a part
of the natural gas transmission and storage source category. A facility
that is determined to be an area source, but subsequently increases its
emissions or its potential to emit above the major source levels
(without obtaining and complying with other limitations that keep its
potential to emit HAP below major source levels), and becomes a major
source, must comply with all applicable provisions of this subpart
starting on the applicable compliance date specified in paragraph (d)
of this section. Nothing in this paragraph is intended to preclude a
source from limiting its potential to emit through other appropriate
mechanisms that may be available through the permitting authority.
* * * * *
0
55. Amend table 2 to subpart HHH of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Appendix: Table 2 to Subpart HHH of Part 63-Applicability of 40 CFR part
63 General Provisions to Subpart HHH
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to
General provisions Reference subpart HHH Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6)............... Yes...............
* * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k).................. Yes............... Only as specified
in Sec.
63.9(j).
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart III--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Flexible Polyurethane Foam Production
0
56. Amend table 1 to subpart III of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart III of Part 63--Applicability General Provisions (40
CFR Part 63, Subpart A) to Subpart III
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to Subpart
Subpart A reference III Comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k).................. Yes............... Only as specified
in Sec.
63.9(j).
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart JJJ--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutant Emissions: Group IV Polymers and Resins
0
57. Amend table 1 to subpart JJJ of part 63 is amended by adding in
numerical order an entry for Sec. 63.1(c)(6), revising the entry for
Sec. 63.9(j), and adding in numerical order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k)
to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart JJJ of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart JJJ Affected Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to Subpart
Reference JJJ Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6)................. Yes..................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(j).................... Yes.................. For change in major source status only.
Sec. 63.9(k).................... Yes.................. Only as specified in Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart LLL--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants From the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry
0
58. Amend table 1 to subpart LLL of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
[[Page 73899]]
Table 1 to Subpart LLL of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Requirement Applies to subpart LLL Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6)........................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
63.9(k).............................. Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart MMM--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Pesticide Active Ingredient Production
0
59. Amend table 1 to subpart MMM of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.1(c)(6), revising the entry for Sec.
63.9(j), and adding in numerical order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to
read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart MMM of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to
Subpart MMM
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to
Reference to subpart A subpart MMM Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6)............. Yes..............
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(j)................ Yes.............. For change in major
source status only,
Sec. 63.1368(h)
specifies procedures
for other
notification of
changes.
Sec. 63.9(k)................ Yes.............. Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart NNN--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing
0
60. Amend table 1 to subpart NNN of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart NNN of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A) to Subpart
NNN
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General provisions citation Requirement Applies to subpart NNN? Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... ....................... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Yes.................... Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart OOO--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutant Emissions: Manufacture of Amino/Phenolic Resins
0
61. Amend table 1 to subpart OOO of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.1(c)(6), revising the entry for Sec.
63.9(j), and adding in numerical order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to
read as follows:
[[Page 73900]]
Table 1 to Subpart OOO of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart OOO Affected Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Reference OOO Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6)........................ Yes..................
* * * * * * *
63.9(j)........................... Yes.................. For change in major source status only.
63.9(k)........................... Yes.................. Only as specified in Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart PPP--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutant Emissions for Polyether Polyols Production
0
62. Amend Sec. 63.1434 by revising paragraphs (d) and (e) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.1434 Equipment leak provisions.
* * * * *
(d) When the HON equipment leak Initial Notification requirements
contained in Sec. Sec. 63.182(a)(1) and 63.182(b) are referred to in
40 CFR part 63, subpart H, the owner or operator shall comply with the
Initial Notification requirements contained in Sec. 63.1439(e)(3), for
the purposes of this subpart. The Initial Notification shall be
submitted no later than June 1, 2000, or no later than 120 days after
the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later, for
existing sources.
(e) The HON equipment leak Notification of Compliance Status
required by Sec. Sec. 63.182(a)(2) and 63.182(c) shall be submitted
within 150 days (rather than 90 days) of the applicable compliance date
specified in Sec. 63.1422 for the equipment leak provisions. The
Initial Notification shall be submitted no later than June 1, 2000, or
no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later, for existing sources.
* * * * *
0
63. Amend Sec. 63.1439 by revising paragraphs (e)(3)(ii)(B) and (C) to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.1439 General recordkeeping and reporting provisions.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) For a new source that has an initial start-up on or after
August 30, 1999, the application for approval of construction or
reconstruction required by the General Provisions in Sec. 63.5(d)
shall be submitted in lieu of the Initial Notification. The application
shall be submitted as soon as practical before construction or
reconstruction is planned to commence (but it need not be sooner than
August 30, 1999). For a new source that reclassifies to major source
status after January 19, 2021, and greater than 90 days after the
initial start-up, the source shall submit the initial notification
required by 63.9(b) no later than 120 days after the source becomes
subject to this subpart.
(C) For a new source that has an initial start-up prior to August
30, 1999, the Initial Notification shall be submitted no later than
August 30, 1999, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes
subject to this subpart, whichever is later. The application for
approval of construction or reconstruction described in the General
Provisions' requirements in Sec. 63.5(d) is not required for these
sources.
* * * * *
0
64. Amend table 1 to subpart PPP of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.1(c)(6), revising the entry for Sec.
63.9(j), and adding in numerical order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to
read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart PPP of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart PPP Affected Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Reference PPP Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.1(c)(6)........................ Yes..................
* * * * * * *
63.9(j)........................... Yes.................. For change in major source status only.
63.9(k)........................... Yes.................. Only as specified in Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart QQQ--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Primary Copper Smelting
0
65. Revise Sec. 63.1441 to read as follows:
Sec. 63.1441 Am I subject to this subpart?
You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a primary
copper smelter that is (or is part of) a major source of hazardous air
pollutant (HAP) emissions and your primary copper smelter uses batch
copper converters as defined in Sec. 63.1459. Your primary copper
smelter is a major source of HAP if it emits or has the potential to
emit any single HAP at the rate of 10 tons or more per year or any
combination of HAP at a rate of 25 tons or more per year.
0
66. Amend Sec. 63.1454 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.1454 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start your affected
source before June 12,
[[Page 73901]]
2002, you must submit your initial notification not later than October
10, 2002, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to
this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
Subpart RRR--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Secondary Aluminum Production
0
67. Amend appendix A to subpart RRR of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Appendix A to Subpart RRR of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to Subpart RRR
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Requirement Applies to subpart RRR Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart TTT--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Primary Lead Smelting
0
68. Amend table 1 to subpart TTT of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart TTT of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to Subpart TTT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference Applies to subpart TTT Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
63.9(k)............................... Yes...................... Only as specified in 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart UUU--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Petroleum Refineries: Catalytic Cracking Units,
Catalytic Reforming Units, and Sulfur Recovery Units
0
69. Amend Sec. 63.1574 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.1574 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you startup your new
affected source before April 11, 2002, you must submit the initial
notification no later than August 9, 2002, or no later than 120 days
after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
70. Amend table 44 to subpart UUU of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
* * * * *
Table 44 to Subpart UUU of Part 63--Applicability of NESHAP General Provisions to Subpart UUU
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Subject Applies to subpart UUU Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73902]]
Subpart VVV--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Publicly Owned Treatment Works
0
71. Amend Sec. 63.1591 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) to read
as follows:
Sec. 63.1591 What are my notification requirements?
(a) * * *
(1) If you have an existing Group 1 or Group 2 POTW treatment
plant, you must submit an initial notification by October 26, 2018, or
no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later.
(2) If you have a new Group 1 or Group 2 POTW treatment plant, you
must submit an initial notification upon startup, or when the source
becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
72. Amend table 1 to subpart VVV of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart VVV of Part 63--Applicability of 40 CFR Part 63 General Provisions to Subpart VVV
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General provisions reference Applicable to subpart VVV Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6)..................... Yes......................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)........................ Yes...................... Only as specified in Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart XXX--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Ferroalloys Production: Ferromanganese and
Silicomanganese
0
73. Amend table 1 to subpart XXX of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart XXX of Part 63--General Provisions Applicability to Subpart XXX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference Applies to subpart XXX Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)........................ Yes...................... Only as specified in Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart DDDD--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Plywood and Composite Wood Products
0
74. Amend Sec. 63.2280 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.2280 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) You must submit an Initial Notification no later than 120
calendar days after September 28, 2004, 120 calendar days after initial
startup, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to
this subpart, whichever is later, as specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2).
Initial Notifications required to be submitted after August 13, 2020,
for affected sources that commence construction or reconstruction after
September 6, 2019, and on and after August 13, 2021, for all other
affected sources submitting initial notifications required in Sec.
63.9(b) must be submitted following the procedure specified in Sec.
63.2281(h), (k), and (l).
* * * * *
0
75. Amend table 10 to subpart DDDD of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 10 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart DDDD
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to this
Applies to this subpart on and
subpart before after August 13,
Citation Subject Brief description August 13, 2021, 2021, except as
except as noted in noted in footnote
footnote ``1'' to ``1'' to this
this table table
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k).................. Electronic Electronic Yes, only as Yes, only as
reporting reporting specified in Sec. specified in Sec.
procedures. procedures. 63.9(j). 63.9(j).
[[Page 73903]]
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart EEEE--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Organic Liquids Distribution (Non-Gasoline)
0
76. Amend Sec. 63.2382 by revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) to read
as follows:
Sec. 63.2382 What notifications must I submit and when and what
information should be submitted?
* * * * *
(b) Initial Notification. (1) If you startup your affected source
before February 3, 2004, you must submit the Initial Notification no
later than 120 calendar days after February 3, 2004, or no later than
120 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is
later.
(2) If you startup your new or reconstructed affected source on or
after February 3, 2004, you must submit the Initial Notification no
later than 120 days after initial startup, or no later than 120 days
after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
77. Amend table 12 to subpart EEEE of part 63 by revising the entry for
Sec. 63.9(j) and adding in numerical order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k)
to read as follows:
Table 12 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions
to Subpart EEEE
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brief Applies to
Citation Subject description subpart EEEE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(j)....... Change in Must submit Yes for change
Previous within 15 days to major
Information. after the source status,
change. other changes
are reported
in the first
and subsequent
compliance
reports.
Sec. 63.9(k)....... Electronic Procedure to Yes, only as
reporting report specified in
procedures. electronically Sec.
for 63.9(j).
notification
in Sec.
63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart FFFF--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Miscellaneous Organic Chemical Manufacturing
0
78. Amend Sec. 63.2515 by designating the text of paragraph (b)
introductory text after the subject heading as paragraph (b)(1) and
revising newly designated paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.2515 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you startup your affected
source before November 10, 2003, you must submit an initial
notification not later than 120 calendar days after November 10, 2003,
or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
79. Amend table 12 to subpart FFFF of part 63 by revising the entry for
Sec. 63.9(j) and adding in numerical order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k)
to read as follows:
Table 12 to Subpart FFFF of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions
to Subpart FFFF
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Subject Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(j)........... Change in previous Yes, for change in major
information. source status,
otherwise Sec.
63.2520(e) specifies
reporting requirements
for process changes.
Sec. 63.9(k)........... Electronic Yes, as specified in
reporting Sec. 63.9(j).
procedures.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73904]]
Subpart GGGG--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Solvent Extraction for Vegetable Oil Production
0
80. Amend Sec. 63.2860 by revising paragraph (a) introductory text to
read as follows:
Sec. 63.2860 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(a) Initial notification for existing sources. For an existing
source, submit an initial notification to the agency responsible for
these NESHAP no later than 120 days after the effective date of this
subpart, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to
this subpart, whichever is later. In the notification, include the
items in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section:
* * * * *
0
81. Amend Sec. 63.2870 in table 1 to Sec. 63.2870 by adding in
numerical order entries for Sec. 63.9(j) and (k) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.2870 What Parts of the General Provisions apply to me?
* * * * *
Table 1 to Sec. 63.2870--Applicability of 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A, to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart GGGG
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General provisions Brief description of
citation Subject of citation requirement Applies to subpart Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(j)........... Notification Change in previous Yes.................
requirements. information.
Sec. 63.9(k)........... Notification Electronic reporting Yes................. Only as specified
requirements. procedures. in Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart HHHH--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Wet-Formed Fiberglass Mat Production
0
82. Amend table 2 to subpart HHHH of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart HHHH of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A) to Subpart
HHHH
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Requirement Applies to subpart HHHH Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart IIII--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks
0
83. Amend Sec. 63.3110 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3110 What notifications must I submit?
* * * * *
(b) You must submit the Initial Notification required by Sec.
63.9(b) for a new or reconstructed affected source no later than 120
days after initial startup, 120 days after the source becomes subject
to this subpart, or 120 days after June 25, 2004, whichever is later.
For an existing affected source, you must submit the Initial
Notification no later than 1 year after April 26, 2004, or no later
than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart,
whichever is later. Existing sources that have previously submitted
notifications of applicability of this rule pursuant to section 112(j)
of the CAA are not required to submit an Initial Notification under
Sec. 63.9(b) except to identify and describe all additions to the
affected source made pursuant to Sec. 63.3082(c). If you elect to
include the surface coating of new other motor vehicle bodies, body
parts for new other motor vehicles, parts for new other motor vehicles,
or aftermarket repair or replacement parts for other motor vehicles in
your affected source pursuant to Sec. 63.3082(c) and your affected
source has an initial startup before February 20, 2007, then you must
submit an Initial Notification of this election no later than 120 days
after initial startup or February 20, 2007, or no later than 120 days
after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
84. Amend table 2 to subpart IIII of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
[[Page 73905]]
Table 2 to Subpart IIII of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart IIII of Part 63
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to subpart
Citation Subject IIII Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart JJJJ--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Paper and Other Web Coating
0
85. Amend Sec. 63.3400 by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.3400 What notifications and reports must I submit?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Initial notification for existing affected sources must be
submitted no later than 1 year before the compliance date specified in
Sec. 63.3330(a), or no later than 120 days after the source becomes
subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
86. Amend table 2 to subpart JJJJ of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart JJJJ of Part 63--Applicability of 40 CFR Part 63
General Provisions to Subpart JJJJ
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to
General provisions reference subpart JJJJ Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6)............. Yes..............
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)................ Yes.............. Only as specified in
Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart KKKK--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Metal Cans
0
87. Amend Sec. 63.3510 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3510 What notifications must I submit?
* * * * *
(b) Initial Notification. You must submit the Initial Notification
required by Sec. 63.9(b) for a new or reconstructed affected source no
later than 120 days after initial startup, no later than 120 days after
the source becomes subject to this subpart, or 120 days after November
13, 2003, whichever is later. For an existing affected source, you must
submit the Initial Notification no later than November 13, 2004, or no
later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart,
whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
88. Amend table 5 to subpart KKKK of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 5 to Subpart KKKK of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart KKKK
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to subpart
Citation Subject KKKK Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73906]]
Subpart MMMM--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and
Products
0
89. Amend Sec. 63.3910 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.3910 What notifications must I submit?
* * * * *
(b) Initial notification. You must submit the initial notification
required by Sec. 63.9(b) for a new or reconstructed affected source no
later than 120 days after initial startup, 120 days after January 2,
2004, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to
this subpart, whichever is later. For an existing affected source, you
must submit the initial notification no later than 1 year after January
2, 2004, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to
this subpart, whichever is later. If you are using compliance with the
Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks NESHAP (subpart
IIII of this part) as provided for under Sec. 63.3881(d) to constitute
compliance with this subpart for any or all of your metal parts coating
operations, then you must include a statement to this effect in your
initial notification, and no other notifications are required under
this subpart in regard to those metal parts coating operations. If you
are complying with another NESHAP that constitutes the predominant
activity at your facility under Sec. 63.3881(e)(2) to constitute
compliance with this subpart for your metal parts coating operations,
then you must include a statement to this effect in your initial
notification, and no other notifications are required under this
subpart in regard to those metal parts coating operations. If you own
or operate an existing loop slitter or flame lamination affected
source, submit an initial notification no later than 120 days after
April 14, 2003, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes
subject to this subpart.
* * * * *
0
90. Amend table 2 to subpart MMMM of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart MMMM of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart MMMM of Part 63
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to subpart
Citation Subject MMMM Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart NNNN--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Large Appliances
0
91. Amend Sec. 63.4110 by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.4110 What notifications must I submit.
(a) * * *
(1) You must submit the Initial Notification required by Sec.
63.9(b) for an existing affected source no later than July 23, 2003, or
no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart. For a new or reconstructed affected source, you must submit
the Initial Notification no later than 120 days after initial startup,
November 20, 2002, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes
subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
92. Amend table 2 to subpart NNNN of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart NNNN of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart NNNN
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to subpart
Citation Subject NNNN Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73907]]
Subpart OOOO--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics and Other
Textiles
0
93. Amend Sec. 63.4310 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4310 What notifications must I submit?
* * * * *
(b) Initial Notification. You must submit the Initial Notification
required by Sec. 63.9(b) for a new or reconstructed affected source no
later than 120 days after initial startup, 120 days after May 29, 2003,
or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later. For an existing affected source, you must
submit the Initial Notification no later than 1 year after May 29,
2003, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to
this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
94. Amend table 3 to subpart OOOO of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 3 to Subpart OOOO of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart OOOO
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to subpart
Citation Subject OOOO Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart PPPP--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Surface Coating of Plastic Parts and Products
0
95. Amend Sec. 63.4510 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4510 What notifications must I submit?
* * * * *
(b) Initial notification. You must submit the initial notification
required by Sec. 63.9(b) for a new or reconstructed affected source no
later than 120 days after initial startup, 120 days after April 19,
2004, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to
this subpart, whichever is later. For an existing affected source, you
must submit the initial notification no later than 1 year after April
19, 2004, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to
this subpart, whichever is later. If you are using compliance with the
Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks NESHAP (subpart
IIII of this part) as provided for under Sec. 63.4481(d) to constitute
compliance with this subpart for any or all of your plastic parts
coating operations, then you must include a statement to this effect in
your initial notification, and no other notifications are required
under this subpart in regard to those plastic parts coating operations.
If you are complying with another NESHAP that constitutes the
predominant activity at your facility under Sec. 63.4481(e)(2) to
constitute compliance with this subpart for your plastic parts coating
operations, then you must include a statement to this effect in your
initial notification, and no other notifications are required under
this subpart in regard to those plastic parts coating operations.
* * * * *
0
96. Amend table 2 to subpart PPPP of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart PPPP of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart PPPP of Part 63
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to subpart
Citation Subject PPPP Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart QQQQ--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Wood Building Products
0
97. Amend Sec. 63.4710 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4710 What notifications must I submit?
* * * * *
(b) Initial Notification. You must submit the Initial Notification
required by Sec. 63.9(b) for a new or reconstructed affected source no
later than 120 days after initial startup, 120 days after May 28, 2003,
or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later. For an existing affected source, you must
submit the Initial Notification no later than 120 days after May 28,
2003, or no
[[Page 73908]]
later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart,
whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
98. Amend table 4 to subpart QQQQ of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 4 to Subpart QQQQ of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart QQQQ of Part 63
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to subpart
Citation Subject QQQQ Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart RRRR--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Metal Furniture
0
99. Amend Sec. 63.4910 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.4910 What notifications must I submit?
* * * * *
(b) Initial Notification. You must submit the Initial Notification
required by Sec. 63.9(b) for a new or reconstructed affected source no
later than 120 days after initial startup, 120 days after May 23, 2003,
or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later. For an existing affected source, you must
submit the Initial Notification no later than 1 year after May 23,
2003, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to
this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
100. Amend table 2 to subpart RRRR of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart RRRR of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart RRRR
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Subject Applicable to subpart Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart SSSS--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Metal Coil
0
101. Amend Sec. 63.5180 by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.5180 What reports must I submit
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Submit an initial notification for an existing source no later
than 2 years after June 10, 2002, or no later than 120 days after the
source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
102. Amend table 2 to subpart SSSS of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart SSSS of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart SSSS
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to subpart
General provisions reference SSSS Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6)..................... Yes......................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)........................ Yes...................... Only as specified in Sec. 63.9(j).
[[Page 73909]]
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart TTTT--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Leather Finishing Operations
0
103. Amend Sec. 63.5415 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.5415 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your affected
source before February 27, 2002, you must submit an Initial
Notification not later than June 27, 2002, or no later than 120 days
after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
104. Amend table 2 to subpart TTTT of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.9(j) and (k) to read as follows:
Table 2 to Subpart TTTT of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart TTTT
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject of Brief description
General provisions citation citation of requirement Applies to subpart Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(j).................. Notification Change in previous Yes...............
requirements. information.
Sec. 63.9(k).................. Notification Electronic Yes............... Only as specified
requirements. reporting in Sec.
procedures. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart UUUU--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Cellulose Products Manufacturing
0
105. Amend table 7 to subpart UUUU of part 63 by revising entry 4 to
read as follows:
Table 7 to Subpart UUUU of Part 63--Notifications
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you . . . then you must . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
4. start up your affected source before submit an initial notification
June 11, 2002. no later than 120 days after
June 11, 2002, or no later
than 120 after the source
becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later,
as specified in Sec.
63.9(b)(2).
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
106. Amend table 8 to subpart UUUU of part 63 by revising entry 7 to
read as follows:
[[Page 73910]]
Table 8 to Subpart UUUU of Part 63--Reporting Requirements
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
You must submit a compliance report,
which must contain the following and you must submit the report
information . . . . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
7. the report must contain any changes ...............................
in information already provided, as
specified in Sec. 63.9(j), except
changes in major source status must be
reported per Sec. 63.9(j);
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
107. Table 10 to subpart UUUU of part 63 is amended by revising the
entry for Sec. 63.9(j) and adding an entry for Sec. 63.9(k), in
numerical order, to read as follows:
Table 10 to Subpart UUUU of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart UUUU
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Subject Brief description Applies to subpart UUUU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(j)....................... Change in previous Must submit within 15 Yes, except the
information. days of the change. notification for all
but change in major
source status must be
submitted as part of
the next semiannual
compliance report, as
specified in Table 8
to this subpart.
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Procedure for Yes, as specified in
procedures. electronically Sec. 63.9(j).
reporting the
notification required
by Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart VVVV--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Boat Manufacturing
0
108. Amend table 8 to subpart VVVV of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 8 to Subpart VVVV of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A) to Subpart
VVVV
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Requirement Applies to subpart VVVV Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart WWWW--National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Reinforced Plastic Composites Production
0
109. Amend table 2 to subpart WWWW of part 63 by revising entry 1 to
read as follows:
[[Page 73911]]
Table 2 to Subpart WWWW of Part 63--Compliance Dates for New and
Existing Reinforced Plastic Composites Facilities
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you must
If your facility is . . . And . . . comply by this
date . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. An existing source......... a. Is a major source April 21, 2006.
on or before the
publication date of
this subpart.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
110. Amend table 15 to subpart WWWW of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 15 to Subpart WWWW of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions (Subpart A) to Subpart WWWW of Part 63
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject to the
The general provisions reference That addresses And applies to subpart following additional
WWWW of part 63 information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes.................... .......................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart XXXX--National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Rubber Tire Manufacturing
0
111. Amend Sec. 63.6009 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.6009 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you startup your affected
source before July 9, 2002, you must submit an Initial Notification not
later than November 6, 2002, or no later than 120 days after the source
becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
112. Amend table 17 to subpart XXXX of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 17 to Subpart XXXX of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to This Subpart XXXX
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to subpart XXXX?
Brief description ---------------------------------------
Citation Subject of applicable Using a control Not using a
sections device control device
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k).................. Notification...... Electronic Yes, as specified Yes, as specified
reporting in Sec. 63.9(j). in Sec.
procedures. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart YYYY--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Stationary Combustion Turbines
0
113. Amend Sec. 63.6145 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.6145 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your new or
reconstructed stationary combustion turbine before March 5, 2004, you
must submit an Initial Notification not later than 120 calendar days
after March 5, 2004, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes
subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
114. Amend table 7 to subpart YYYY of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
[[Page 73912]]
Table 7 to Subpart YYYY of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart YYYY
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Requirement Applies to subpart YYYY Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart ZZZZ--National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines
0
115. Amend Sec. 63.6645 by revising paragraphs (b) and (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.6645 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your
stationary RICE with a site rating of more than 500 brake HP located at
a major source of HAP emissions before the effective date of this
subpart, you must submit an Initial Notification not later than
December 13, 2004, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes
subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
(d) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your
stationary RICE with a site rating of equal to or less than 500 brake
HP located at a major source of HAP emissions before the effective date
of this subpart and you are required to submit an initial notification,
you must submit an Initial Notification not later than July 16, 2008,
or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
116. Amend table 8 to subpart ZZZZ of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
* * * * *
Table 8 to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart ZZZZ
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General provisions citation Subject of citation Applies to subpart Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart AAAAA--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Lime Manufacturing Plants
0
117. Amend Sec. 63.7130 by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.7130 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your affected
source before January 5, 2004, you must submit an initial notification
not later than 120 calendar days after January 5, 2004, or no later
than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart,
whichever is later.
(c) If you startup your new or reconstructed affected source on or
after January 5, 2004, you must submit an initial notification not
later than 120 calendar days after you start up your affected source,
or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
118. Amend table 8 to subpart AAAAA of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 8 to Subpart AAAAA of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart AAAAA
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Am I subject to this
Citation Summary of requirement requirement? Explanations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73913]]
Subpart BBBBB--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Semiconductor Manufacturing
0
119. Amend Sec. 63.7189 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.7189 What applications and notifications must I submit and
when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your affected
source before May 22, 2003, you must submit an Initial Notification not
later than 120 calendar days after May 22, 2003, or no later than 120
days after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is
later.
* * * * *
Subpart CCCCC--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Coke Ovens: Pushing, Quenching, and Battery Stacks
0
120. Amend Sec. 63.7340 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.7340 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you startup your affected
source before April 14, 2003, you must submit your initial notification
no later than August 12, 2003, or no later than 120 days after the
source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
Subpart DDDDD--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and
Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters
0
121. Amend Sec. 63.7545 by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.7189 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you startup your affected
source before January 31, 2013, you must submit an Initial Notification
not later than 120 days after January 31, 2013, or no later than 120
days after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is
later.
(c) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(4) and (5), if you startup your
new or reconstructed affected source on or after January 31, 2013, you
must submit an Initial Notification not later than 15 days after the
actual date of startup of the affected source. For a new or
reconstructed affected source that has reclassified to major source
status, you must submit an Initial Notification not later 120 days
after the source becomes subject to this subpart.
* * * * *
Subpart EEEEE--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Iron and Steel Foundries
0
122. Amend Sec. 63.7750 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.7750 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your iron and
steel foundry before April 22, 2004, you must submit your initial
notification no later than August 20, 2004, or no later than 120 days
after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
Subpart FFFFF--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Integrated Iron and Steel Manufacturing Facilities
0
123. Amend Sec. 63.7840 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.7840 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you startup your affected
source before May 20, 2003, you must submit your initial notification
no later than September 17, 2003, or no later than 120 days after the
source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
Subpart GGGGG--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Site Remediation
0
124. Amend Sec. 63.7950 by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.7950 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your affected
source before October 8, 2003, you must submit an Initial Notification
not later than 120 calendar days after October 8, 2003, or no later
than 120 calendar days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later.
(c) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(3), if you start up your new or
reconstructed affected source on or after the effective date, you must
submit an Initial Notification no later than 120 calendar days after
initial startup, or no later than 120 calendar days after the source
becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
125. Amend table 3 to subpart GGGGG of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 3 to Subpart GGGGG of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart GGGGG
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Subject Brief description GGGGG
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Electronic reporting Yes.
procedures. procedures for
notifications per Sec.
63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73914]]
Subpart HHHHH--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Miscellaneous Coating Manufacturing
0
126. Amend Sec. 63.8070 by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.8070 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you have an existing
affected source on December 11, 2003, you must submit an initial
notification not later than 120 calendar days after December 11, 2003,
or no later than 120 calendar days after the source becomes subject to
this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
127. Amend table 10 to subpart HHHHH of part 63 by revising the entry
for Sec. 63.9(j) and adding in numerical order an entry for Sec.
63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 10 to Subpart HHHHH of Part 63--Applicability of General
Provisions to Subpart HHHHH
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Subject Explanation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(j)................ Change in Yes, for change in
previous major source status,
information. otherwise Sec.
63.8075(e)(8)
specifies reporting
requirements for
process changes.
Sec. 63.9(k)................ Electronic Yes, as specified in
reporting Sec. 63.9(j).
procedures.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart IIIII--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Mercury Emissions From Mercury Cell Chlor-Alkali Plants
0
128. Amend Sec. 63.8252 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.825 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your affected
source before December 19, 2003, you must submit an Initial
Notification no later than 120 calendar days after December 19, 2003,
or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
129. Amend table 10 to subpart IIIII of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 10 to Subpart IIIII of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart IIIII
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Subject IIIII Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart JJJJJ--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Brick and Structural Clay Products Manufacturing
0
130. Amend table 8 to subpart JJJJJ of part 63 by revising entry 1 to
read as follows:
[[Page 73915]]
Table 8 to Subpart JJJJJ of Part 63--Deadlines for Submitting Notifications
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you . . . You must . . . No later than . . . As specified in . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Start up your affected source Submit an Initial June 22, 2016, or no later Sec. 63.9(b)(2).
before December 28, 2015. Notification. than 120 days after the
source becomes subject to
this subpart, whichever is
later.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
131. Amend table 10 to subpart JJJJJ of part 63 adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 10 to Subpart JJJJJ of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart JJJJJ
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Subject Brief description JJJJJ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.9(k)..................... Electronic reporting Electronic reporting Yes.
procedures. procedures for
notifications per Sec.
63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart KKKKK--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing
0
132. Amend table 9 to subpart KKKKK of part 63 by revising entry 1 to
read as follows:
Table 9 to Subpart KKKKK of Part 63--Deadlines for Submitting Notifications
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you . . . You must . . . No later than . . . As specified in . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Start up your affected source Submit an Initial June 22, 2016, or no Sec. 63.9(b)(2).
before December 28, 2015. Notification. later than 120 days
after the source
becomes subject to
this subpart,
whichever is later.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
133. Amend table 11 to subpart KKKKK of part 63 adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 11 to Subpart KKKKK of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart KKKKK
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Subject Brief description KKKKK?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Electronic reporting Yes.
procedures. procedures for
notifications per Sec.
63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73916]]
Subpart LLLLL--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Asphalt Processing and Asphalt Roofing Manufacturing
0
134. Amend Sec. 63.8692 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.8692 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your affected
source before April 29, 2003, you must submit an Initial Notification
not later than 120 calendar days after April 29, 2003, or no later than
120 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is
later.
* * * * *
0
135. Amend table 7 to subpart LLLLL of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 7 to Subpart LLLLL of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart LLLLL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Subject Brief description LLLLL
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)..................... Electronic reporting Electronic reporting Yes.
procedures. procedures for
notifications per Sec.
63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart MMMMM--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Flexible Polyurethane Foam Fabrication Operations
0
136. Amend Sec. 63.8816 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.8816 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) If you own or operate an existing loop slitter or flame
lamination affected source, submit an initial notification no later
than 120 days after April 14, 2003, or no later than 120 days after the
source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
137. Amend table 7 to subpart MMMMM of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 7 to Subpart MMMMM of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart MMMMM
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Requirement MMMMM Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart NNNNN--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Hydrochloric Acid Production
0
138. Amend Sec. 63.9045 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.9045 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your affected
source before April 17, 2003, you must submit an Initial Notification
not later than 120 calendar days after April 17, 2003, or no later than
120 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is
later.
* * * * *
0
139. Amend table 7 to subpart NNNNN of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 7 to Subpart NNNNN of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart NNNNN
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Requirement NNNNN Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73917]]
Subpart PPPPP--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Engine Test Cells/Stands
0
140. Amend Sec. 63.9345 by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.9345 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your new or
reconstructed affected source before the effective date of this
subpart, you must submit an Initial Notification not later than 120
calendar days after May 27, 2003, or no later than 120 days after the
source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
141. Amend table 7 to subpart PPPPP of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and 63.9(k) to read as follows:
* * * * *
Table 7 to Subpart PPPPP of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart PPPPP
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Subject Brief description PPPPP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Applicability.......... Reclassification....... Yes.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Notifications.......... Electronic reporting Yes, only as specified
procedures. in Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart QQQQQ--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Friction Materials Manufacturing Facilities
0
142. Amend Sec. 63.9485 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.9485 Am I subject to this subpart?
(a) You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a
friction materials manufacturing facility (as defined in Sec. 63.9565)
that is (or is part of) a major source of hazardous air pollutants
(HAP) emissions. Your friction materials manufacturing facility is a
major source of HAP if it emits or has the potential to emit any single
HAP at a rate of 9.07 megagrams (10 tons) or more per year or any
combination of HAP at a rate of 22.68 megagrams (25 tons) or more per
year.
* * * * *
0
143. Amend Sec. 63.9535 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.9535 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(c) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your affected
source before October 18, 2002, you must submit your initial
notification no later than 120 calendar days after October 18, 2002, or
no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
144. Amend table 1 to subpart QQQQQ of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
* * * * *
Table 1 to Subpart QQQQQ of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart QQQQQ
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Subject QQQQQ? Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart RRRRR--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Taconite Iron Ore Processing
0
145. Revise Sec. 63.9581 to read as follows:
Sec. 63.9581 Am I subject to this subpart?
You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a taconite
iron ore processing plant that is (or is part of) a major source of
hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions. Your taconite iron ore
processing plant is a major source of HAP if it emits or has the
potential to emit any single HAP at a rate of 10 tons or more per year
or any combination of HAP at a rate of 25 tons or more per year.
0
146. Amend Sec. 63.9640 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.9640 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your affected
source before October 30, 2003, you must submit your initial
notification no later than 120 calendar days after October 30, 2003, or
no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
0
147. Amend table 2 to subpart RRRRR of part 63 by adding in numerical
order entries for Sec. 63.1(c)(6) and Sec. 63.9(k) to read as
follows:
* * * * *
[[Page 73918]]
Table 2 to Subpart RRRRR of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart RRRRR of Part 63
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Subject RRRRR Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.1(c)(6).................... Reclassification....... Yes....................
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart SSSSS--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Refractory Products Manufacturing
0
148. Amend Sec. 63.9812 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.9812 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your affected
source before April 16, 2003, you must submit an Initial Notification
no later than 120 calendar days after April 16, 2003, or no later than
120 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is
later.
* * * * *
0
149. Amend table 11 to subpart SSSSS of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
* * * * *
Table 11 to Subpart SSSSS of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart SSSSS
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Subject Brief description SSSSS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Notifications.......... Electronic reporting Yes, only as specified
procedures. in Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart TTTTT--National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Primary Magnesium Refining
0
150. Amend Sec. 63.9930 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.9930 What notifications must I submit and when?
* * * * *
(b) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you start up your affected
source before October 10, 2003, you must submit your initial
notification no later than 120 calendar days after October 10, 2003, or
no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
Subpart WWWWW--National Emission Standards for Hospital Ethylene
Oxide Sterilizers
0
151. Amend table 1 to subpart WWWWW of part 63 by removing the entry
for Sec. 63.9(d)-(j) and adding in numerical order entries for
Sec. Sec. 63.9(d)-(i) and 63.9(j)-(k).
The additions read as follows:
* * * * *
Table 1 to Subpart WWWWW of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart WWWWW
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Subject WWWWW Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(d)-(i)................... Other notifications.... No.....................
Sec. 63.9(j)-(k)................... Change in information Yes....................
already submitted
Electronic reporting.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73919]]
Subpart BBBBBB--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Source Category: Gasoline Distribution Bulk
Terminals, Bulk Plants, and Pipeline Facilities
0
152. Amend Sec. 63.11086 by revising paragraph (e) introductory text
to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11086 What requirements must I meet of my facility is a bulk
gasoline plant?
* * * * *
(e) You must submit an Initial Notification that you are subject to
this subpart by May 9, 2008, or no later than 120 days after the source
becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later unless you meet the
requirements in paragraph (g) of this section. The Initial Notification
must contain the information specified in paragraphs (e)(1) through (4)
of this section. The notification must be submitted to the applicable
EPA Regional Office and the delegated state authority, as specified in
Sec. 63.13.
* * * * *
0
153. Amend table 3 to subpart BBBBBB of part 63 by revising the entry
for Sec. 63.9(b) and adding in numerical order an entry for Sec.
63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 3 to Subpart BBBBBB of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Subject Brief description BBBBBB
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(b) (1)-(2), (4)-(5).... Initial Notifications. Submit notification within Yes.
120 days after effective
date, or no later than 120
days after the source
becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is
later; notification of
intent to construct/
reconstruct, notification
of commencement of
construction/
reconstruction,
notification of startup;
contents of each.
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)..................... Notifications......... Electronic reporting Yes, only as specified
procedures. by Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart CCCCCC--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Source Category: Gasoline Dispensing Facilities
0
154. Amend Sec. 63.11124 by revising paragraphs (a)(1) introductory
text and (b)(1) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11124 What notifications must I submit and when?
(a) * * *
(1) You must submit an Initial Notification that you are subject to
this subpart by May 9, 2008, or no later than 120 days after the source
becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later, or at the time you
become subject to the control requirements in Sec. 63.11117, unless
you meet the requirements in paragraph (a)(3) of this section. If your
affected source is subject to the control requirements in Sec.
63.11117 only because it loads gasoline into fuel tanks other than
those in motor vehicles, as defined in Sec. 63.11132, you must submit
the Initial Notification by May 24, 2011, or no later than 120 days
after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
The Initial Notification must contain the information specified in
paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section. The notification
must be submitted to the applicable EPA Regional office and delegated
state authority as specified in Sec. 63.13.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) You must submit an Initial Notification that you are subject to
this subpart by May 9, 2008, or no later than 120 days after the source
becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later, or at the time you
become subject to the control requirements in Sec. 63.11118. If your
affected source is subject to the control requirements in Sec.
63.11118 only because it loads gasoline into fuel tanks other than
those in motor vehicles, as defined in Sec. 63.11132, you must submit
the Initial Notification by May 24, 2011, or no later than 120 days
after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
The Initial Notification must contain the information specified in
paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section. The notification
must be submitted to the applicable EPA Regional office and delegated
state authority as specified in Sec. 63.13.
* * * * *
0
155. Amend table 3 to subpart CCCCCC of part 63 by revising the entry
for Sec. 63.9(b) and adding in numerical order an entry for Sec.
63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 3 to Subpart CCCCCC of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Subject Brief description CCCCCC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(b)(1)-(2), (4)-(5)..... Initial Notifications. Submit notification within Yes.
120 days after effective
date, or no later than 120
days after the source
becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is
later; notification of
intent to construct/
reconstruct, notification
of commencement of
construction/
reconstruction,
notification of startup;
contents of each.
[[Page 73920]]
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)..................... Notifications......... Electronic reporting Yes, only as specified
procedures. in Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart HHHHHH--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Paint Stripping and Miscellaneous Surface Coating
Operations at Area Sources
0
156. Amend Sec. 63.11175 by revising paragraph (a) introductory text
to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11175 What notifications must I submit?
(a) Initial Notification. If you are the owner or operator of a
paint stripping operation using paint strippers containing MeCl and/or
a surface coating operation subject to this subpart, you must submit
the initial notification required by Sec. 63.9(b). For a new affected
source, you must submit the Initial Notification no later than 180 days
after initial startup, or no later than 120 days after the source
becomes subject to this subpart, or July 7, 2008, whichever is later.
For an existing affected source, you must submit the initial
notification no later than January 11, 2010, or no later than 120 days
after the source becomes subject to this subpart. The initial
notification must provide the information specified in paragraphs
(a)(1) through (8) of this section.
* * * * *
0
157. Amend table 1 to subpart HHHHHH of part 63 by adding in numerical
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 1 to Subpart HHHHHH of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart HHHHHH of Part 63
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable to subpart
Citation Subject HHHHHH Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart PPPPPP--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Lead Acid Battery Manufacturing Area Sources
0
158. Amend Sec. 63.11425 by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.11425 What General Provisions apply to this subpart?
* * * * *
(b) For existing sources, the initial notification required by
Sec. 63.9(b) must be submitted not later than November 13, 2007, or no
later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart,
whichever is later.
(c) For existing sources, the initial notification of compliance
required by Sec. 63.9(h) must be submitted not later than March 13,
2009, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to
this subpart, whichever is later.
Subpart QQQQQQ--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Wood Preserving Area Sources
0
159. Amend Sec. 63.11432 by revising paragraphs (b) introductory text
and (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11432 What General Provisions apply to this subpart?
* * * * *
(b) If you own or operate a new or existing affected source that
uses any wood preservative containing chromium, arsenic, dioxins, or
methylene chloride, you must submit an initial notification of
applicability required by Sec. 63.9(b)(2) no later than 90 days after
the applicable compliance date specified in Sec. 63.11429, or no later
than 90 days after the source becomes subject to this subpart,
whichever is later. The initial notification may be combined with the
notification of compliance status required in paragraph (c) of this
section. The notification of applicability must include the following
information:
* * * * *
(c) If you own or operate a new or existing affected source that
uses any wood preservative containing chromium, arsenic, dioxins, or
methylene chloride, you must submit a notification of compliance status
required by Sec. 63.9(h) no later than 90 days after the applicable
compliance date specified in Sec. 63.11429, or no later than 90 days
after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
Your notification of compliance status must include this certification
of compliance, signed by a responsible official, for the standards in
Sec. 63.11430: ``This facility complies with the management practices
to minimize air emissions from the preservative treatment of wood in
accordance with Sec. 63.11430.''
* * * * *
Subpart RRRRRR--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Clay Ceramics Manufacturing Area Sources
0
160. Amend Sec. 63.11441 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11441 What are the notification requirements?
(a) You must submit an Initial Notification required by Sec.
63.9(b)(2) no later than 120 days after the applicable compliance date
specified in Sec. 63.11437, or no later than 120 days after the source
becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later. The Initial
Notification must include the
[[Page 73921]]
information specified in Sec. Sec. 63.9(b)(2)(i) through (iv) and may
be combined with the Notification of Compliance Status required in
paragraph (b) of this section.
* * * * *
Subpart TTTTTT--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Secondary Nonferrous Metals Processing Area Sources
0
161. Amend Sec. 63.11469 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11469 What are the notification requirements?
(a) You must submit the Initial Notification required by Sec.
63.9(b)(2) no later than 120 days after the applicable compliance date
specified in Sec. 63.11464, or no later than 120 days after the source
becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later. The Initial
Notification must include the information specified in Sec.
63.9(b)(2)(i) through (iv) and may be combined with the Notification of
Compliance Status required in Sec. 63.11467 and paragraph (b) of this
section if you choose to submit both notifications within 120 days.
* * * * *
Subpart WWWWWW--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants: Area Source Standards for Plating and Polishing
Operations
0
162. Amend Sec. 63.11509 by revising paragraph (a)(3) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.11509 What are my notification, reporting, and recordkeeping
requirements?
(a) * * *
(3) If you start up your affected source on or before July 1, 2008,
you must submit an Initial Notification not later than 120 calendar
days after July 1, 2008, or no later than 120 days after the source
becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
Subpart XXXXXX--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants Area Source Standards for Nine Metal Fabrication and
Finishing Source Categories
0
163. Amend Sec. 63.11519 by revising paragraph (a)(1) introductory
text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11519 What are my notifications, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements?
(a) * * *
(1) Initial notification. If you are the owner or operator of an
area source in one of the nine metal fabrication and finishing source
categories, as defined in Sec. 63.11514, you must submit the initial
notification required by Sec. 63.9(b), for a new affected source no
later than 120 days after initial startup, or no later than 120 days
after the source becomes subject to this subpart, or November 20, 2008,
whichever is later. For an existing affected source, you must submit
the initial notification no later than July 25, 2011, or 120 days after
the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later. Your
initial notification must provide the information specified in
paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section.
* * * * *
Subpart YYYYYY--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Area Sources: Ferroalloys Production Facilities
0
164. Amend Sec. 63.11529 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11529 What are the notification, reporting, and recordkeeping
requirements?
(a) Initial Notification. You must submit the Initial Notification
required by Sec. 63.9(b)(2) no later than 120 days after December 23,
2008, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to
this subpart, whichever is later. The Initial Notification must include
the information specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2)(i) through (iv).
* * * * *
Subpart AAAAAAA--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Area Sources: Asphalt Processing and Asphalt Roofing
Manufacturing
0
165. Amend Sec. 63.11564 by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.11564 What are my notification, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements?
(a) * * *
(2) As specified in Sec. 63.9(b)(2), if you have an existing
affected source, you must submit an Initial Notification not later than
120 calendar days after December 2, 2009, or no later than 120 days
after the source becomes subject to this subpart, whichever is later.
* * * * *
Subpart BBBBBBB--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Area Sources: Chemical Preparations Industry
0
166. Amend Sec. 63.11585 by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as
follows:
Sec. 63.11585 What are my notification, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements?
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Initial Notification of Applicability. If you own or operate an
existing affected source, you must submit an initial notification of
applicability as required by Sec. 63.9(b)(2) no later than April 29,
2010, or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to
this subpart, whichever is later. If you own or operate a new affected
source, you must submit an initial notification of applicability
required by Sec. 63.9(b)(2) no later than 120 days after initial
start-up of operation, or no later than 120 days after the source
becomes subject to this subpart, or April 29, 2010, whichever is later.
The initial notification of applicability must include the information
specified in Sec. Sec. 63.9(b)(2)(i) through (iii).
* * * * *
Subpart CCCCCCC--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants for Area Sources: Paints and Allied Products
Manufacturing
0
167. Amend Sec. 63.11603 by revising paragraph (a)(1) introductory
text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.11603 What are the notification, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements?
(a) * * *
(1) Initial Notification of Applicability. If you own or operate an
existing affected source, you must submit an initial notification of
applicability required by Sec. 63.9(b)(2) no later than June 1, 2010,
or no later than 120 days after the source becomes subject to this
subpart, whichever is later. If you own or operate a new affected
source, you must submit an initial notification of applicability
required by Sec. 63.9(b)(2) no later than 180 days after initial
start-up of the operations, or no later than 120 days after the source
becomes subject to this subpart, or June 1, 2010, whichever is later.
The notification of applicability must include the information
specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section.
* * * * *
Subpart HHHHHHH--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutant Emissions for Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers
Production
0
168. Amend table 4 to subpart HHHHHHH of part 63 by revising the entry
for Sec. 63.1 and adding in numerical
[[Page 73922]]
order an entry for Sec. 63.9(k) to read as follows:
Table 4 to Subpart HHHHHHH of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Part 63
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to subpart
Citation Subject HHHHHHH Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1(a)(1)-(a)(4), (a)(6), Applicability.......... Yes....................
(a)(10)-(a)(12), (b)(1), (b)(3),
(c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(5), (c)(6), (e).
* * * * * * *
Sec. 63.9(k)....................... Electronic reporting Yes.................... Only as specified in
procedures. Sec. 63.9(j).
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2020-22044 Filed 11-10-20; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE P
