[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 22 (Tuesday, February 3, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5038-5087]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-2227]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[OAR-2003-0138, FRL-7551-6]
RIN 2060-AE79


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Organic 
Liquids Distribution (Non-Gasoline)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action promulgates national emission standards for 
hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for new and existing organic liquids 
distribution (OLD) (non-gasoline) operations, which are carried out at 
storage terminals, refineries, crude oil pipeline stations, and various 
manufacturing facilities. These NESHAP implement section 112(d) of the 
Clean Air Act (CAA) by requiring all OLD operations at plant sites that 
are major sources to meet hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions 
standards reflecting the application of the maximum achievable control 
technology (MACT).
    The EPA estimates that approximately 5,300 megagrams per year (Mg/
yr) (5,900 tons per year (tpy)) of HAP are emitted from facilities in 
this source category. Although a large number of organic HAP are 
emitted nationwide from these operations, benzene, ethylbenzene, 
toluene, vinyl chloride, and xylenes are among the most prevalent. 
These HAP have been shown to have a variety of carcinogenic and 
noncancer adverse health effects.
    The EPA estimates that the final standards will result in the 
reduction of HAP emissions from major sources with OLD operations by 60 
percent. The emissions reductions achieved by the final standards, when 
combined with the emissions reductions achieved by other similar 
standards, will provide improved protection to the public and achieve a 
primary goal of the CAA.

DATES: This rule is effective February 3, 2004. The incorporation by 
reference of certain publications listed in today's final rule is 
approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of February 3, 
2004.

ADDRESSES: Docket. Docket Nos. A-98-13 and OAR-2003-0138 are located at 
the U.S. EPA Docket Center, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution 
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information concerning 
applicability and rule determinations,

[[Page 5039]]

contact the appropriate State or local agency representative. If no 
State or local representative is available, contact the EPA Regional 
Office staff listed in 40 CFR 63.13. For information concerning the 
analyses performed in developing the NESHAP, contact Martha Smith, U.S. 
EPA, Emission Standards Division, Waste and Chemical Processes Group, 
C439-03, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, (919) 541-2421, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a6d5cbcfd2ce88cbc7d4d2cec7e6c3d6c788c1c9d0"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="96e5fbffe2feb8fbf7e4e2fef7d6f3e6f7b8f1f9e0">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated Entities. Categories and entities 
potentially regulated by this action include:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                  Examples of regulated
                 Category                                 NAICS* code                                 SIC* code                          entities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.................................  325211, 325192, 325188, 32411, 49311,      2821, 2865, 2869, 2911, 4226, 4612, 5169,  Operations at major
                                            49319, 48611, 42269, 42271.                5171.                                      sources that transfer
                                                                                                                                  organic liquids into
                                                                                                                                  or out of the plant
                                                                                                                                  site, including:
                                                                                                                                  liquid storage
                                                                                                                                  terminals, crude oil
                                                                                                                                  pipeline stations,
                                                                                                                                  petroleum refineries,
                                                                                                                                  chemical manufacturing
                                                                                                                                  facilities, and other
                                                                                                                                  manufacturing
                                                                                                                                  facilities with
                                                                                                                                  collocated OLD
                                                                                                                                  operations.
Federal Government.......................  .........................................  .........................................  Federal agency
                                                                                                                                  facilities that
                                                                                                                                  operate any of the
                                                                                                                                  types of entities
                                                                                                                                  listed under the
                                                                                                                                  ``industry'' category
                                                                                                                                  in this table.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Considered to be the primary industrial codes for the plant sites with OLD operations.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this 
action. To determine whether your facility is regulated by this action, 
you should examine the applicability criteria in Sec. 63.2334 of the 
final rule. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of 
this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the 
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    Docket. We have established an official public docket for this 
action under Docket ID Nos. A-98-13 and OAR-2003-0138. The official 
public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this 
action, any public comments received, and other information related to 
this action. All items may not be listed under both docket numbers, so 
interested parties should inspect both docket numbers to ensure that 
they have received all materials relevant to the final rule. Although a 
part of the official docket, the public docket does not include 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the 
collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the 
Office of Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (Air Docket) 
in the EPA Docket Center, (EPA/DC) EPA West, Room B102, 1301 
Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public 
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public 
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744. The telephone number for the Air Docket 
is (202) 566-1742. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket 
materials.
    An electronic version of the public docket is available through 
EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may 
use EPA Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ to view public comments, 
to access the index listing of the contents of the official public 
docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are 
available electronically. Once in the system, select ``search,'' then 
key in the appropriate docket identification number. Although not all 
docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access 
any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket 
facility in the above paragraph entitled Docket.
    WorldWide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, 
an electronic copy of today's final NESHAP will also be available on 
the WWW through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following the 
Administrator's signature, a copy of the NESHAP will be posted on the 
TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules 
at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information and 
technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control. If more 
information regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN HELP line at 
(919) 541-5384.
    Judicial Review. Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial 
review of the final NESHAP is available only by filing a petition for 
review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 
Circuit by April 5, 2004. Under section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only 
an objection to a rule or procedure raised with reasonable specificity 
during the period for public comment can be raised during judicial 
review. Moreover, under section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements 
established by the final rule may not be challenged separately in any 
civil or criminal proceeding brought to enforce these requirements.
    Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as 
follows:

I. Introduction
    A. What Is the Purpose of NESHAP?
    B. What Is the Source of Authority for Development of NESHAP?
    C. What Processes and Operations Are Included in the OLD (Non-
gasoline) Source Category?
II. Summary of the Final OLD NESHAP
    A. What Source Categories and Subcategories Are Affected by the 
Final OLD NESHAP?
    B. What Are the Primary Sources of HAP Emissions and What Are 
the Emissions?
    C. What Is the Affected Source?
    D. What Are the HAP Emissions Limits, Operating Limits, and 
Other Standards?
    E. When Must I Comply With the OLD NESHAP?
    F. What Are the Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements?
    G. What Are the Continuous Compliance Requirements?
    H. What Are the Notification, Reporting, and Recordkeeping 
Requirements?
III. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts
    A. What Facilities Are Affected by These Final NESHAP?
    B. What Are the Air Quality Impacts?
    C. What Are the Water Quality Impacts?
    D. What Are the Solid and Hazardous Waste Impacts?
    E. What Are the Energy Impacts?
    F. What Are the Cost Impacts?
    G. What Are the Economic Impacts?
IV. Summary of Rule Differences From Proposal
    A. Rule Applicability
    B. Compliance Demonstrations
    C. Emission Limitations and Work Practice Standards
    D. Monitoring, Recordkeeping, and Reporting
V. Summary of Responses to Major Comments
    A. Rule Applicability
    B. Emission Limitations and Work Practice Standards
    C. Testing, Compliance Requirements, and Monitoring
    D. Notifications, Reports, and Records
    E. Definitions

[[Page 5040]]

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply: Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Congressional Review Act

I. Introduction

A. What Is the Purpose of NESHAP?

    The purpose of the final NESHAP is to protect the public health and 
the environment by reducing emissions of HAP from operations that 
distribute organic liquids.

B. What Is the Source of Authority for Development of NESHAP?

    Section 112 of the CAA requires us to list categories and 
subcategories of major sources and area sources of HAP and to establish 
NESHAP for the listed source categories and subcategories. Organic 
liquids distribution (non-gasoline) (major sources only) was included 
on the initial list of source categories published on July 16, 1992 (57 
FR 31576). Major sources of HAP are those that have the potential to 
emit 10 tpy or more of any one HAP or 25 tpy or more of any combination 
of HAP.
    Section 112 (d)(2) of the CAA requires NESHAP to reflect the 
maximum degree of reduction in emissions of HAP that is achievable. 
This level of control is commonly referred to as the MACT.
    The MACT floor is the minimum control level allowed for NESHAP. 
This concept appears in section 112(d)(3) of the CAA. For new sources, 
the MACT floor cannot be less stringent than the HAP emissions control 
that is achieved in practice by the best-controlled similar source. The 
MACT standards for existing sources can be less stringent than 
standards for new sources, but they cannot be less stringent than the 
average HAP emissions limitation achieved by the best-performing 12 
percent of existing sources in the category or subcategory (or by the 
best-performing five sources for categories or subcategories with fewer 
than 30 sources).
    In developing MACT, we also consider control options that are more 
stringent than the floor. We may establish standards more stringent 
than the floor based on the consideration of cost of achieving the HAP 
emissions reductions, any nonair quality health and environmental 
impacts, and energy requirements, under CAA section 112(d)(2).
    The NESHAP for organic liquids distribution were proposed on April 
2, 2002 (67 FR 15674). This action announces EPA's final decisions on 
the NESHAP.

C. What Processes and Operations Are Included in the OLD (Non-gasoline) 
Source Category?

    The OLD (non-gasoline) source category involves the distribution of 
organic liquids into, out of, or within a plant site. The distribution 
activities include the storage of organic liquids in storage tanks not 
subject to other 40 CFR part 63 standards and transfers into or out of 
the tanks from or to cargo tanks, containers, and pipelines. Organic 
liquids are those non-crude oil liquids that contain at least 5 percent 
by weight of any combination of the 98 HAP listed in Table 1 to subpart 
EEEE of part 63, and have a total liquid vapor pressure of 0.7 
kilopascals (0.1 pound per square inch absolute (psia)) or greater, and 
all crude oils downstream of the first point of custody transfer. For 
the purposes of the OLD NESHAP, organic liquids do not include 
gasoline, fuels that are consumed or dispensed on the plant site, 
kerosene (No. 1 distillate oil), diesel (No. 2 distillate oil), 
asphalt, and heavier distillate oils and fuel oils, hazardous waste, 
wastewater, or ballast water. Emission sources controlled by the OLD 
NESHAP are storage tanks, transfer operations, transport vehicles while 
being loaded, and equipment leak components (valves, pumps, and 
sampling connections) that have the potential to leak.
    The types of organic liquids and emission sources covered by the 
OLD NESHAP are frequently found at many types of facilities that are 
already subject to other NESHAP. If an emission source is in organic 
liquid distribution service and is already subject to an existing 40 
CFR part 63 NESHAP, then that emission source is not subject to the OLD 
NESHAP.

II. Summary of the Final OLD NESHAP

A. What Source Categories and Subcategories Are Affected by the Final 
OLD NESHAP?

    Today's final rule applies to the OLD source category. We did not 
develop any subcategories. However, OLD operations that do not meet the 
specified applicability criteria for relevant emission limitations and 
work practice standards contained in the final rule are not required to 
apply emission reduction measures:

B. What Are the Primary Sources of HAP Emissions and What Are the 
Emissions?

    The primary sources of HAP emissions from the OLD source category 
are the loss of HAP during the filling of storage tanks with organic 
liquids, storage of organic liquid in storage tanks, vapor displacement 
during the loading of organic liquids into transport vehicles and 
containers, and vapor leakage from transport vehicles at transfer racks 
during loadings of these vehicles. The HAP emissions are also the 
result of leaks from equipment such as valves, pumps, and sampling 
connection systems. Total baseline HAP emissions from the OLD source 
category are approximately 5,900 tpy.

C. What Is the Affected Source?

    We have defined the affected source broadly to be the collection of 
activities and equipment used to distribute organic liquids into, out 
of, or within a major source plant site. This affected source is termed 
the ``organic liquids distribution (OLD) operation.'' Four types of 
emission sources are included in the affected source: storage tanks 
storing organic liquids; transfer racks at which organic liquids are 
loaded into or unloaded out of transport vehicles and/or containers; 
the transport vehicles themselves while they are loading or unloading 
organic liquids at transfer racks; and equipment leak components in 
organic liquids service that are associated with pipelines and with 
storage tanks and transfer racks storing, loading, or unloading organic 
liquids.
    Applicability of the final standards is not restricted to any 
specific industries, but to each OLD operation that meets the 
applicability criteria of the final rule. The final standards do not 
apply to any emission source that is subject to another 40 CFR part 63 
rule.
    The liquids regulated by the final rule consist of non-crude oil 
organic liquids that contain at least 5 percent by weight of any 
combination of the organic HAP compounds listed in Table 1 to subpart 
EEEE of part 63 and have a total liquid vapor pressure of 0.1 psia or 
greater, plus all crude oils downstream of the first point of custody 
transfer. Gasoline is specifically excluded from coverage by the final 
rule as are fuels consumed or dispensed on the plant site as well as 
kerosene (No. 1 distillate oil), diesel (No. 2 distillate oil), 
asphalt, and heavier distillate oils and fuel oils.
    Regulatory overlaps are specifically addressed in the final rule. 
Many of the

[[Page 5041]]

facilities potentially affected by the final OLD NESHAP contain 
activities and equipment (i.e., certain storage tanks, transfer racks, 
and equipment components) that are already subject to other Federal air 
standards (such as 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb, for storage tanks, or 
subpart GGG or FFFF of 40 CFR part 63). The final rule clarifies that 
emission sources subject to other 40 CFR part 63 NESHAP are not subject 
to the OLD NESHAP. The final rule also clarifies that sources subject 
to other non-MACT rules must comply with the requirements of the OLD 
NESHAP as well as the other rules.

D. What Are the HAP Emission Limits, Operating Limits, and Other 
Standards?

    We are promulgating the requirements of the final NESHAP in the 
form of HAP emission limits (i.e., percent reduction or exhaust 
concentration), operating limits, and work practice standards. The work 
practice standards are a combination of design, equipment, and 
operational standards.
    The final NESHAP contain emission standards for storage tanks, 
transfer racks, transport vehicles, and equipment components at 
existing and new OLD operations.
    The standards for storage tanks apply to tanks storing organic 
liquids and meeting the tank capacity and liquid HAP vapor pressure 
applicability criteria given in Table 2 to subpart EEEE of part 63. You 
have three options for control. First, you may install a closed vent 
system and control device with at least 95 percent control efficiency 
for the organic HAP listed in Table 1 to subpart EEEE of part 63. You 
may also choose to demonstrate that the measurement of total organic 
compounds (TOC) is an appropriate surrogate for organic HAP. As an 
alternative option to the 95 percent standard, combustion devices may 
meet an exhaust concentration limit of 20 parts per million by volume 
(ppmv) of organic HAP or TOC. Second, you may capture and route 
emissions to a fuel gas system or back into a process. Third, you may 
meet a work practice standard by using a compliant internal or external 
floating roof in the affected storage tank. The tank size and liquid 
vapor pressure applicability criteria defining tanks subject to 
emission reduction requirements are different for tanks at existing or 
new affected sources.
    The owner or operator will have to install a continuous monitoring 
system (CMS) and establish operating limits for each control device 
used to control storage tanks. The CMS may be of a type to measure 
either organic concentration in the gas stream or an operating 
parameter (such as fire box temperature) of the control device. A site-
specific monitoring plan must be developed and submitted by the owner 
or operator for each emission source.
    The emission limit for transfer racks is a closed vent system and 
control device achieving a control efficiency of at least 98 percent 
for the organic HAP listed in Table 1 to subpart EEEE of part 63. You 
may also utilize a vapor balancing system to achieve the required 
control efficiency. You may also choose to demonstrate that the 
measurement of TOC is an appropriate surrogate for organic HAP. As an 
alternative option to the 98 percent standard, combustion devices may 
meet an exhaust concentration limit of 20 ppmv of organic HAP or TOC. 
Only transfer racks meeting the specified applicability criteria in the 
final rule are required to implement emission reduction measures. The 
same emission limit applies to affected transfer racks at both existing 
and new affected sources.
    The same requirements for installing a CMS and establishing 
operating limits for the control device applicable to storage tanks 
also apply to the control systems installed on transfer racks.
    A work practice standard applies to pumps, valves, and sampling 
connection systems. These equipment leak components in organic liquids 
service must be included in a leak detection and repair (LDAR) program 
which requires the use of a detection instrument. The term ``in organic 
liquid service'' is defined in the final rule to mean an equipment leak 
component that contains or contacts organic liquids having 5 percent by 
weight or greater of the organic HAP listed in Table 1 to subpart EEEE 
of part 63. Owners and operators have the option of applying the 
provisions from 40 CFR part 63, subpart TT, subpart UU, or subpart H 
for their LDAR program. The LDAR standard applies to equipment leak 
components at both existing and new affected sources.
    A work practice standard applies to transport vehicles (cargo tanks 
and tank cars) loading at affected transfer racks. Each of these 
vehicles must have current vapor tightness certification indicating 
that it has been properly tested for vapor tightness. If the vehicle is 
equipped with vapor collection equipment, the vehicle must be tested 
using EPA Method 27 on an annual basis. For vehicles not so equipped, 
the Department of Transportation (DOT) leak tightness standards apply, 
and current certification indicating that these standards have been met 
must be retained by the owner or operator for each vehicle that loads 
at affected transfer racks whether the source owns the vehicle or not. 
The owner or operator is not required to test transport vehicles he or 
she does not own, but must take adequate steps to ensure that 
uncertified vehicles are not loaded at affected racks. These work 
practice standards are the same for both existing and new affected 
sources.

E. When Must I Comply With the OLD NESHAP?

    We are requiring that all existing affected sources comply by 
February 5, 2007, except for floating roof storage tanks that do not 
initially meet the equipment standard for storage tanks in the final 
rule. These tanks must be in compliance following their next degassing 
and cleaning, or by February 3, 2014, whichever is sooner. If the first 
degassing and cleaning activity occurs during the 3 years following 
February 3, 2004, the compliance date is February 5, 2007. Existing 
area sources that increase their HAP emissions or their potential to 
emit such that they become major sources of HAP, and thus affected 
sources, must be in compliance within 3 years after the date they 
become major sources.
    Any affected source that commenced construction after April 2, 
2002, at a site where there were no existing OLD operations, is a new 
affected source. Any affected source that commenced reconstruction 
after April 2, 2002, at a site that was an existing OLD source, is a 
reconstructed source. Emissions sources at new and reconstructed 
affected sources that are now in operation must be in compliance on 
February 3, 2004, with certain exceptions. These exceptions are due to 
the fact that the final rule applies to some affected sources and 
emission sources that would not have been covered by the proposed rule, 
and that in some cases the final emission standards are more stringent 
than were proposed. In cases where an emission source at a now-
operating new or reconstructed affected source would not have been 
required to be controlled under the proposed rule but is required to be 
controlled under the final rule, the emission source must be in 
compliance by February 5, 2007. Where an emission source at such a new 
or reconstructed affected source would have been subject to a less 
stringent control requirement under the proposed rule than applies 
under the final rule, the emission source must be in compliance with 
the final rule's requirement by February 5, 2007, and in the interim 
must comply with the less stringent control requirement as proposed.

[[Page 5042]]

    New or reconstructed sources that commence construction or 
reconstruction after February 3, 2004 must comply upon startup.

F. What Are the Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements?

    To determine the applicability of the final standards to individual 
operations, each OLD operation must evaluate whether any of their 
distributed liquids contain less than 5 percent HAP by weight and, 
thus, do not meet the definition of an organic liquid under the final 
rule. The specified test method for this is EPA Method 311 of 40 CFR 
part 63, appendix A, or other methods approved by the Administrator. An 
owner or operator may use other means (such as voluntary consensus 
standard methods, material safety data sheets (MSDS), or certified 
product data sheets) for determining the HAP content. However, if the 
results of an analysis by EPA Method 311 (or other approved test 
method) are different from the HAP content determined by another means, 
the EPA Method 311 (or other approved test method) results will govern 
compliance determinations.
    Control devices used to comply with the final standards are subject 
to a performance test to demonstrate initial compliance with the 
emission limits, except that a design evaluation, conducted according 
to 40 CFR part 63 subpart SS, may be used for nonflare control devices.
    The test methods applicable to control devices include EPA Methods 
18, 25, and 25A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, and EPA Method 316 of 40 
CFR part 63, appendix A, depending on the constituents of the gas 
stream being controlled and the format of the standard (organic HAP or 
TOC) the facility selects for its compliance demonstration. Floating 
roof tanks are subject to visual and seal gap inspections to determine 
initial compliance with the tank work practice standards. For the LDAR 
program for equipment components, EPA Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A, is applicable.
    Initial compliance with the emission limits for storage tanks and 
transfer racks consists of demonstrating that the control device 
achieves the required 95 or 98 percent control efficiency for organic 
HAP (or TOC, if used as a documented surrogate) or 20 ppmv exhaust 
concentration for combustion devices. The required percentage control 
efficiency must be applied to the Table 1 to subpart EEEE of part 63 
HAP concentration found at the inlet to the control device.
    Work practice standards apply to storage tanks, transfer racks, 
transport vehicles, and equipment components. You must perform a visual 
inspection before filling internal floating roof tanks. You must also 
conduct a measurement of seal gaps for external floating roof tanks 
within 90 days after filling. For transfer racks, you must ensure that 
vapor balancing systems or equipment for routing emissions to a fuel 
gas system or back to a process are properly designed and operated. For 
transport vehicles, you must perform vapor tightness testing for 
vehicles that you own and maintain documentation for all affected 
vehicles certifying that they are vapor-tight. Finally, for the 
equipment LDAR program, you must identify which 40 CFR part 63 subpart 
you are complying with and keep a record identifying the selected 
subpart.

G. What Are the Continuous Compliance Requirements?

    If you use a control device, we are requiring that you monitor and 
record the operating parameters established during the initial 
performance test and calculate operating parameter values averaged on a 
daily basis. Continuous compliance is demonstrated if you collect CMS 
data as specified and maintain the operating limits established during 
the design evaluation or performance test.
    If you are subject to work practice standards, we are requiring 
that you demonstrate continuous compliance by performing the required 
work practices and by keeping the records required to show that you are 
in compliance. For storage tanks, you must continue to perform the 
applicable inspections and seal gap measurement to ensure that the 
floating roofs continue to provide the proper control. For transport 
vehicles, you must continue performing the required vapor tightness 
testing on vehicles that you own and take steps to ensure that all 
transport vehicles loading at the OLD operation have the required 
certification. For equipment components, you must perform the required 
monitoring, keep the required records, and file the required reports 
consistent with the LDAR program you selected for the equipment 
components in the affected source.

H. What Are the Notification, Reporting, and Recordkeeping 
Requirements?

    The notifications, records, and reports required by the final rule 
are generally consistent with the requirements of the General 
Provisions of subpart A of 40 CFR part 63. Two basic types of reports 
are required: notifications (such as the Initial Notification and the 
Notification of Compliance Status) and semiannual compliance, or 
periodic, reports. The Initial Notification apprises the permitting 
authority of applicability for existing sources or of construction for 
new sources.
    The Notification of Compliance Status must be submitted within 60 
days after the compliance demonstration activity has been completed. 
This report contains the results of the initial performance test, as 
well as all calculations and analyses used to show that the affected 
source has achieved and will continue to achieve compliance.
    You are required to describe in your semiannual compliance reports 
any deviations of monitored parameters from reference values; failures 
to comply with the startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) plan for 
control devices; and results of LDAR monitoring and storage tank 
inspections. These reports are also used to notify the permitting 
authority of any changes in CMS, processes, or controls since the last 
reporting period.
    You are required to keep a copy of each notification and report, 
along with supporting documentation, for 5 years. Of these 5 years, the 
2 most recent years must be kept on-site. The final rule allows 
electronic recordkeeping; however, you must be able to access all 
required records in a timely manner. You must keep records related to 
SSM, records of performance tests, and records for each continuous 
monitoring system. If you must comply with work practice standards, you 
also need to keep records for 5 years (the 2 most recent years must be 
kept on-site) certifying that you are in compliance with the work 
practices.

III. Summary of Environmental, Energy, and Economic Impacts

A. What Facilities Are Affected by the Final OLD NESHAP?

    Facilities affected by the final OLD NESHAP are those facilities 
that carry out organic liquid distribution activities. Most of these 
facilities can be grouped under three general categories: stand-alone 
(usually for-hire) storage terminals; OLD operations collocated with a 
petroleum refinery, a chemical manufacturing plant site, or other 
manufacturing plant site; and crude oil pipeline pumping or breakout 
stations (containing crude oil tankage).
    We estimate that in 1997, the baseline year for the final 
standards, there were approximately 279 collocated OLD operations, 86 
stand-alone storage terminals, and 16 crude oil pipeline stations, for 
a total of approximately 381

[[Page 5043]]

existing major source plant sites with OLD operations.

B. What Are the Air Quality Impacts?

    The 1997 baseline HAP emissions from OLD operations are 
approximately 5,900 tpy. The final OLD NESHAP will reduce HAP from 
existing major sources by 3,500 tpy, a reduction of 60 percent. Such 
emission reductions are likely to reduce the risk of adverse effects of 
HAP.
    Although the final OLD NESHAP do not specifically require the 
control of volatile organic compounds (VOC), the organic HAP emission 
control technologies upon which the standards are based will also 
significantly reduce VOC emissions from the source category. We 
estimate that the final OLD NESHAP will reduce nationwide VOC emissions 
emitted by the source category by approximately 9,900 tpy, or 70 
percent, from baseline. This will have the effect of reducing adverse 
ozone-related health and welfare impacts.
    The final OLD NESHAP will result in small increases in other air 
pollution emissions from combustion devices that will be installed in 
the next 5 years to comply with today's final rule. These increases 
result both from the combustion device directly and from the electrical 
generating plants used to generate the electricity necessary to operate 
the add-on controls and associated air handling equipment.

C. What Are the Water Quality Impacts?

    We estimate that the final OLD NESHAP will not significantly impact 
water quality. The final standards do not contain requirements related 
to water discharges, wastewater collection, or spill containment, and 
no additional organic liquids are expected to enter these areas as a 
result of the OLD NESHAP. A few facilities may select a scrubber 
(depending on the specific emissions they are controlling) to control 
emissions from transfer racks or fixed-roof storage tanks. The impact 
on water quality from the use of scrubbers is not expected to be 
significant.

D. What Are the Solid and Hazardous Waste Impacts?

    We project that there will be no significant solid or hazardous 
waste impact. Flares, thermal oxidizers, scrubbers, and condensers do 
not generate solid waste as a by-product of their operation. When 
adsorption systems are used, the spent activated carbon or other 
adsorbent that cannot be further regenerated may be disposed of in a 
landfill, which would contribute a small amount of solid waste.

E. What Are the Energy Impacts?

    The control devices used for transfer rack and storage tank control 
use electric motor-driven blowers, dampers, or pumps, depending on the 
type of system, in addition to electronic control and monitoring 
systems. The installation of these devices would have a small negative 
energy impact. To the extent that some of the controlled organic 
liquids are non-gasoline fuels, the applied control measures would keep 
these liquids in the distribution system and thus have a positive 
impact on this form of energy.

F. What Are the Cost Impacts?

    We have estimated the industrywide capital costs for HAP emissions 
control equipment to be $49.3 million for the 381 existing sources. The 
capital costs include the costs to purchase and install the control 
equipment.
    We have estimated the industrywide annual costs of the final rule 
are $25.1 million per year for the 381 existing sources. Annual costs 
include fixed annual costs, such as reporting, recordkeeping and 
capital amortization, and variable annual costs such as natural gas. 
The estimated average cost of the final rule is $7,100 per ton of HAP 
emissions reductions for existing sources.

G. What Are the Economic Impacts?

    The increases in price for petroleum and chemical products affected 
by the final OLD rule are less than 0.003 percent, and the price 
increase for distribution service covered by the final rule is 0.1 
percent. Reductions in output for petroleum and chemical products are 
also less than 0.003 percent, and the output reduction of distribution 
services is less than 0.002 percent.
    None of the facilities affected are expected to close as a result 
of incurring costs associated with the final rule. Therefore, it is 
likely that there is no adverse impact expected to occur for the 
industries affected by the final rule, such as chemical manufacturing, 
petroleum refineries, pipeline operators, and petroleum bulk terminal 
operators.

IV. Summary of Rule Differences From Proposal

A. Rule Applicability

    We made several clarifications to our intent as to the composition 
of the OLD source category and the affected source and the overall 
applicability of various requirements of the final rule. We have 
removed the facilitywide 7.29 million gallon throughput cutoff. We 
found, after reanalyzing our database, that we could not support such a 
cutoff, since our data reanalysis indicated that MACT floor levels of 
control applied to facilities below the proposed facility throughput 
cutoff. For the final rule, we have adopted a set of applicability 
criteria to be applied to each type of emission source to determine 
whether emission reductions are required for each specific emission 
source. These applicability criteria were developed from our MACT floor 
analysis of our database.
    We have written the definition of the term ``organic liquid'' to 
include any non-crude oil liquid that contains at least 5 percent by 
weight of any combination of the HAP listed in Table 1 to subpart EEEE 
of part 63 and also has a total liquid vapor pressure of at least 0.1 
psia, plus all crude oil downstream of the first point of custody 
transfer. This reflects our reanalysis of our database, which revealed 
that MACT floor levels of control apply to liquids with these HAP 
concentrations and vapor pressures. The definition also reflects our 
decision to eliminate the ``black oil'' exemption as proposed because 
we identified MACT floor controls for storage of crude oil.
    In response to several comments, we clarified that the OLD final 
rule will not regulate any emission sources that are part of another 40 
CFR part 63 MACT rule's affected source, whether those sources are 
actually controlled or not. We also included a new section in the final 
rule on how owners and operators should treat regulatory overlaps 
(i.e., two Federal rules with applicability to the same emission 
source).
    The final rule also corrects several of the proposed citations to 
40 CFR part 63, subparts PP, SS, TT, UU, and WW and adds new ones to 
make the use of the referenced provisions easier for regulated sources 
to understand.

B. Compliance Demonstrations

    The proposed rule was unclear as to how a source could use a design 
evaluation as an alternative to a performance test when demonstrating 
initial compliance for a control device. The final rule clarifies that 
the design evaluation (per 40 CFR part 63 subpart SS) may only be 
applied to nonflare control devices. Flares are subject to specific 
design criteria contained in the General Provisions (40 CFR 63.11(b)).
    We have changed the principal test method to be used for analyzing 
the organic HAP content of liquids from EPA Method 18 of 40 CFR part 
60, appendix A, to EPA Method 311 of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A. The 
EPA Method 18 is not an appropriate method for liquid analysis of the 
type that will be performed under the OLD NESHAP.

[[Page 5044]]

Method 18 is appropriate for determining the HAP content in air 
streams, not the HAP content in liquids. We are now specifying EPA 
Method 311 of appendix A of 40 CFR part 63, which is titled ``Analysis 
of Hazardous Air Pollutant Compounds in Paints and Coatings by Direct 
Injection into a Gas Chromatograph.'' Sources may also use alternative 
analytical methods with EPA's approval, or rely on supplier 
information, MSDS, and similar analyses that do not require the source 
to perform any testing. If an MSDS, or similar documentation, presents 
the HAP content of components of a liquid as a range, then you must use 
the upper end of the range of values in determining the total HAP 
content of the liquid. If the results of an analysis by EPA Method 311 
are different from the HAP content determined by another means, the EPA 
Method 311 results will govern compliance determinations.
    The final rule allows up to 180 days after the compliance date to 
conduct the initial performance tests, rather than having to conduct 
them by the compliance date, and, thus, makes the final rule consistent 
with the amended General Provisions and other MACT rules.

C. Emission Limitations and Work Practice Standards

    At proposal, we specified liquid vapor pressure cutoffs to 
determine applicability of the storage tank control requirements in 
terms of the annual average true vapor pressure of the stored liquid. 
This format was compatible with the liquid property data in our OLD 
database as we had received the data from industry. For the final rule, 
we have determined, in response to comments and after our re-analysis 
of our database, that the vapor pressure basis should be consistent 
with other NESHAP that also specify storage tank vapor pressure cutoff 
levels. Therefore, we have written the basis for the applicability 
criteria in the final OLD NESHAP to be the annual average true vapor 
pressure of the total organic HAP in the stored liquid.
    We have also increased the time period over which an owner or 
operator may achieve compliance with the work practice standards for 
floating roof storage tanks. For any floating roof tanks that do not 
currently meet the equipment requirements specified in 40 CFR part 63 
subpart WW, full compliance may be achieved within 10 years after the 
effective date of the final OLD NESHAP, or at the next degassing or 
cleaning of the tank, whichever occurs first. If the first degassing 
and cleaning activity occurs during the 3 years following the effective 
date of the final OLD NESHAP, the compliance date is 3 years from the 
effective date of the final OLD NESHAP. Fixed-roof tanks are still 
required to achieve compliance within 3 years after the effective date 
of the final OLD NESHAP.
    At proposal, the emission limit and applicability throughput cutoff 
for transfer racks was based on each rack loading position. In re-
analyzing the database since proposal, we have determined that the 
information for transfer racks could not be verified on the basis of 
individual rack loading position. We have written the final rule based 
on the entire transfer rack to be consistent with many other MACT 
rules.
    In response to requests by commenters and after re-analyzing our 
database, we added 40 CFR part 63 subpart H as one of the LDAR programs 
that may be used to comply with the work practice standard for 
equipment. We also clarified that only equipment leak components 
associated with the affected source need to be included in a source's 
LDAR program.

D. Monitoring, Recordkeeping, and Reporting

    The proposed rule contained detailed procedures for performing 
monitoring and for carrying out quality assurance checks on the 
monitors. The final rule incorporates the monitoring provisions of 40 
CFR part 63, subpart SS, and requires owners and operators to submit 
their own monitoring plan for approval by the applicable title V 
permitting authority. In accordance with subpart SS, the final rule 
allows the use of organic monitors in addition to monitors that measure 
an operating parameter of the control device (such as temperature). 
This will provide more flexibility in the way a source determines 
operating limits and monitors operation of control systems. In response 
to several comments, the averaging time for the monitored data is 
daily, which is consistent with 40 CFR part 63 subpart SS.
    Following proposal, we reviewed the proposed requirements to file 
reports and keep records and determined that these requirements could 
be streamlined by reorganizing the pertinent rule sections and deleting 
certain records and reports that were duplicative or unnecessary for 
ensuring that sources were maintaining compliance with the standards. 
We also responded to comments requesting flexibility in the way a 
source generates and submits reports by allowing a source to combine 
the reports required by different MACT rules or to send the periodic 
reports required under the final OLD NESHAP along with those required 
by title V of the CAA. We have incorporated provisions to allow these 
forms of combined reporting, as well as an allowance for multiple 
Notifications of Compliance Status for the same affected source to be 
submitted together. We have included specific references to the 
periodic reporting requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subparts SS, TT, UU, 
and WW, which had been inadvertently omitted from the proposal.

V. Summary of Responses to Major Comments

A. Rule Applicability

    Comment: Several commenters stated that the Agency should revise 
the definition of ``OLD operation'' to be the combination or group of 
emission units used to transfer organic liquids into or out of a plant 
site in order to provide a clear definition of the OLD source category. 
Two of the commenters stated that EPA's definition of ``OLD operation'' 
is inconsistent with its source category listing. The proposed 
definition captures facilities that receive organic liquids but do not 
serve as distribution points, and from which such liquids are not 
obtained for further use and processing. These commenters urged EPA to 
limit the source category so that facilities and activities that do not 
serve as distribution points, or are merely managing organic liquids 
without distribution, are not captured in the final rule. Other 
commenters urged EPA to clarify that the final rule will not apply to 
end-users of organic liquid products, but rather only to manufacturers 
and distributors of those organic liquid products in the SIC/NAICS 
codes listed at proposal.
    Response: The commenter's suggested definition for ``OLD 
operation'' is more appropriate for the affected source definition to 
clearly establish the limits of the affected source, but is not 
appropriate for describing the source category as a whole.
    Further, we disagree with the commenters that our definition of OLD 
operation and, thus, the OLD source category is inconsistent with the 
source category listing by including facilities that receive organic 
liquids without further distributing them to end users. We consider the 
distribution network to include both outgoing and incoming transfers 
and storage of organic liquids, whether offsite or onsite. Thus, while 
the types of facilities identified by the commenters may never 
distribute the liquids offsite, the activities, equipment, and 
emissions that occur at such receiving and end-use facilities are part

[[Page 5045]]

of the overall organic liquid distribution network.
    The final rule is clear that the source category includes OLD 
operations that are collocated with other (such as manufacturing) 
activities at major source plant sites. Since the source category 
includes distribution operations in many industrial categories, we have 
not included any reference to SIC or NAICS codes in the final rule.
    Comment: One commenter noted that the Technical Support Document 
(TSD) indicates that ``tanks and other liquid handling equipment 
involved solely in activities within the plant site would not be 
considered to be OLD emission sources * * *,'' but the provisions of 
the proposed rule and the definition of ``OLD operation'' do not 
support this position.
    Similarly, commenters recommended that the affected source not 
include dedicated equipment used to transfer and store organic liquids 
between on-site process units.
    Response: Our intent for the final rule is to reduce HAP emissions 
from the storage and transfer of organic liquids within a distribution 
network. It is our judgment that the distribution network ends only 
when the organic liquids reach a final destination where they are 
consumed or are introduced into an operation included in another source 
category. Therefore, the OLD network includes the transfer and storage 
of organic liquids involving any equipment identified in the affected 
source for OLD and that are not subject to another MACT rule. Further, 
in our judgement, there is no practical difference in the types of 
equipment in use and the types of available emission controls are 
identical for both inter- and intra-plant site transfers.
    Based on these considerations, it is our intent that equipment used 
to store or transfer organic liquids that occur ``within'' a plant site 
are considered part of the OLD distribution network and part of the OLD 
affected source unless such equipment is subject to another MACT 
standard. Therefore, we have not excluded from the final rule ``tanks 
and other liquid handling equipment involved solely in activities 
within the plant site,'' and we have written the definition of OLD 
operation to include transfers and storage of organic liquids ``into, 
out of, or within a plant site.'' Thus, if an emission source meets the 
relevant HAP content, vapor pressure, and capacity or throughput 
criteria, the emission reduction requirements of the final rule apply 
to that emission source even if it transfers or stores organic liquids 
wholly within a plant site.
    Comment: Several commenters requested that EPA clarify the 
relationship between applicability and affected source. These 
commenters felt that restricting the affected source to only those 
emission points that are subject to controls could result in a very 
narrow definition of the affected source. It could also result in 
triggering the MACT new source requirements by the addition of a 
relatively small component to an OLD operation, if the rest of the OLD 
operation were exempt from controls. This does not appear to be EPA's 
intent, but rather an inadvertent consequence of the manner in which 
the proposed rule addresses emission points that are exempt from 
controls.
    Another commenter stated that EPA's proposed affected source 
definition is unlawful because EPA chose a broad definition that allows 
equipment to be replaced without the replacement becoming a new source.
    Response: We agree with the commenters that the proposed rule did 
not contain a clear definition of the affected source, primarily 
because of confusion that occurred as the result of the two different 
definitions of ``affected source'' that were inadvertently created in 
the proposed rule.
    While the intent of proposed Sec. 63.2338(b)(2) was to provide 
additional detail to supplement the definition in Sec. 63.2338(b)(1), 
we understand the confusion that this created by appearing to present a 
different and conflicting affected source definition. In the final 
rule, we have defined ``affected source'' as ``* * * the collection of 
activities and equipment used to distribute organic liquids into, out 
of, or within a facility that is a major source of HAP.''
    We also agree with the commenters that the affected source should 
include all of the pertinent emission sources without regard to the 
applicability criteria that cause certain equipment to be subject to 
different requirements of the final rule. Therefore, the final rule, in 
Sec. 63.2338(b), presents a description of the affected source in which 
all of the pertinent emission sources are listed, without regard to 
their control requirements under the final rule. We have also written 
Sec. 63.2338(b)(1) to define the affected source as ``the collection of 
activities and equipment.'' This clarifies our intention to have a 
broad interpretation of affected source.
    We acknowledge that a broad definition in many circumstances allows 
individual emission points (such as a single storage tank, pump, etc.) 
to be replaced without the new source standards being applied to that 
new piece of equipment. Using a broad definition of affected source is, 
however, within our discretion in selecting the best approach for the 
standards for a particular source category. The term ``affected 
source'' refers to the collection of processes, activities, or 
equipment to which a MACT standard applies. In other MACT rules, we 
have adopted either a broader or narrower definition of affected source 
for given categories depending on the nature of particular MACT 
requirements and the strategies available for meeting them. A broader 
definition permits emission reduction requirements to apply to a larger 
group of processes, activities, and equipment. This approach encourages 
owners or operators to develop and utilize more innovative and 
economically efficient control strategies. Using a narrower definition 
of affected source frequently leads to difficulties for facilities in 
managing differing requirements for individual pieces of equipment 
without achieving substantive emission reduction.
    For the purpose of determining MACT, however, we chose to utilize 
the approach of examining the emission sources individually. In our 
industry survey, we requested data for each emission source rather than 
from the entire OLD operation. By evaluating the data on an emission 
source basis, we were able to establish MACT floors for each type of 
emission source without having to consider how each facility controlled 
emissions on a facilitywide basis. For example, we established MACT 
floors for storage tanks based on facilities with the best controlled 
storage tanks, even if those facilities did not utilize the best 
controlled transfer racks.
    Our selected approach for the final OLD NESHAP is consistent with 
the 40 CFR part 63 General Provisions, as amended (67 FR 16582, April 
5, 2002), which adopt a broader definition of affected source such that 
future MACT standards will generally adopt a definition of affected 
source which consists of all existing HAP-emitting equipment and 
activities that are at a single contiguous site and are within a 
specific category or subcategory.
    Comment: Several commenters recommended that compounding, blending, 
and packaging operations be included in the affected source, but with 
no control requirements. According to the commenters, this would result 
in a more accurate investment basis for OLD operations at a site, would 
clarify which MACT affected source these operations are associated 
with, and would avoid the potential for future regulatory overlap.

[[Page 5046]]

    One commenter supported the inclusion of small containers (pails, 
drums, portable tanks, and isotainers) as part of the OLD affected 
source but urged that small containers be excluded from controls in the 
final rule.
    Response: We have written the definition of affected source in the 
final rule to include storage tanks and transfer racks used to store or 
transfer organic liquids regardless of the particular operation or 
activity such tanks and transfer racks were supporting, including such 
operations and activities as packaging, blending, and compounding.
    We have not defined the affected source to single out the 
operations identified by the commenter because the changes that were 
made to the definition provide the necessary clarity. The final rule 
makes it clear that equipment used in operations such as these would be 
part of the affected source if they meet the general criteria of 
storing or transferring organic liquids and they are not subject to 
another MACT rule. Equipment meeting the affected source criteria in 
Sec. 63.2338 of the final rule are to be included as emission sources 
in the initial Notifications and Reports required under Sec.Sec. 
63.2382 and 63.2386 of the final rule.
    Finally, we have included containers in the definition of affected 
source. This is consistent with how we have re-defined the affected 
source to include equipment even if control is not required under the 
final rule. The re-analysis of our data after reviewing the public 
comments resulted in a finding that the floor level of control for 
existing container filling operations is no emission reduction. We did, 
however, identify a MACT floor level of control for new source 
container filling. As discussed in more detail later in this preamble, 
we have determined that there are no feasible or cost-effective beyond-
the-floor alternatives for the filling of containers at existing 
sources. Therefore, the final rule includes control requirements only 
for container filling operations that are new sources.
    Comment: A number of commenters stated that the inclusion of cargo 
tanks as part of the affected source is inappropriate. These commenters 
pointed out that third parties typically provide cargo tanks and they 
are not generally under the common control of the OLD facilities. The 
commenters also stated that, if the OLD operation owner purchases 
either new cargo tanks or a fleet of existing cargo tanks, they should 
not be included in the reconstruction cost evaluation and potentially 
trigger new source MACT requirements at the OLD operation.
    Response: As discussed in the proposal preamble and the TSD, and in 
previous rulemakings including the Gasoline Distribution MACT NESHAP 
(40 CFR part 63, subpart R), cargo tanks (consisting of tank trucks and 
tank cars, and renamed as ``transport vehicles'' in the final rule) can 
be a significant source of emissions while being loaded at transfer 
racks. Transport vehicles (whether owned/leased by the facility or 
operated by other firms) must be included in the affected source to 
ensure that MACT control will extend to these sources. As the final 
rule makes clear in Table 4 to subpart EEEE of part 63, the owner or 
operator must have vapor tightness documentation for each transport 
vehicle loading at an affected transfer rack. Third parties in many 
cases will be responsible for getting periodic testing (EPA Method 27 
or DOT test) performed and for providing the certification papers to 
the facilities.
    The acquisition of additional transport vehicles, whether by the 
source owner or by third parties, would not be included in the 
reconstruction cost evaluation and would not trigger any different 
control requirements for the liquid transfer operation. The items that 
define the affected source are the stationary infrastructure of the 
facility; that is, the combination of tanks, transfer racks, and 
equipment leak components. The primary mission of transport vehicles is 
transporting the liquids on roadways. Thus, they are not part of the 
stationary infrastructure of the facility. The objective of the 
``reconstruction'' provisions of the CAA is to prevent an existing 
source from avoiding more stringent new source standards by perpetually 
rebuilding existing equipment rather than installing new equipment. The 
purchase of transport vehicles should have no impact on the triggering 
of more stringent standards for the storage tanks or transfer racks at 
an affected source. Also, at an OLD operation, facilitywide emission 
rates are impacted by the size, throughput capacity, and number of 
storage tanks and transfer racks. From the standpoint of overall 
emissions, it makes no difference if one vehicle is loaded ten times or 
if ten identical vehicles are loaded once. Therefore, the number of 
individual transport vehicles or the acquisition of additional 
transport vehicles should not be included as part of the infrastructure 
of the facility that is considered in determining ``reconstruction'' 
cost. The acquisition of additional containers by an owner or operator 
of an OLD facility would also not be considered in the determination of 
``reconstruction'' costs.
    Comment: Three commenters stated that EPA needed to clarify that 
only pipelines with equipment leak components (i.e., pumps, valves, or 
sampling connection systems) associated with a storage tank or transfer 
rack included in the affected source will be subject to the LDAR 
requirements. Commenters requested that a pipeline that transfers 
organic liquids directly to or from a process unit that does not pass 
through a transfer rack or storage vessel subject to the rule is not to 
be included in the affected source or in the calculation of throughput 
used in applicability determinations.
    Commenters also stated that the exclusions from the OLD rule should 
include pipeline equipment leak components used to directly transfer 
organic liquids across plant site boundaries into or out of storage 
tanks not subject to another MACT standard or process equipment that 
are not storage tanks, and unloading facilities and pipeline equipment 
used to transfer organic liquids from ships, barges, tank trucks, or 
tank cars into a storage tank covered by other MACT standards or 
process equipment that are not storage tanks.
    Response: Pipelines themselves are not and never were part of the 
affected source definition. Only equipment leak components that are 
part of a pipeline were considered part of the affected source at 
proposal. We know of no reason as to why equipment leak components 
associated with a pipeline that transfers organic liquids should not be 
part of the affected source for the final rule, regardless of whether 
the organic liquid being transferred is deposited in a storage tank 
subject to the final rule or to another MACT standard. If the 
pipeline's equipment leak components are subject to another MACT 
standard, then they are not subject to the final OLD NESHAP. If the 
pipeline's equipment leak components are not subject to another MACT 
standard and the pipeline is in organic liquids service, then the 
equipment leak components are subject to the requirements of the final 
OLD NESHAP.
    Finally, the final rule does not include a facility-level 
throughput calculation to determine whether or not a facility is 
subject to the final rule. Therefore, there is no longer a need to 
clarify the relationship of pipelines to the throughput applicability 
determination.
    Comment: We received a large number of comments concerning the 
proposed applicability criteria of 7.29 million gallons per year, which 
would

[[Page 5047]]

have excluded facilities from the OLD rule if their facility throughput 
was less than 7.29 million gallons of organic liquids. Several 
commenters supported the cutoff and requested clarification on the 
procedures for determining throughput. Other commenters questioned the 
appropriateness of excluding from control those facilities that are in 
the source category and have emission sources that could be controlled 
by the final OLD rule.
    Response: We proposed a facility-level throughput cutoff believing 
it was a useful criterion to identify smaller facilities at which 
controls would not be required based on our understanding that such 
facilities were not typically required to be controlled under other 
rules. We re-analyzed the database to determine if MACT floors existed 
for facilities with throughputs less than 7.29 million gallons of 
organic liquids, and determined that MACT floors exist for facilities 
with throughputs of less than 7.29 million gallons. Therefore, we can 
not support the proposed 7.29 million gallon cutoff.
    However, as a result of our re-analysis of the database, we 
determined that throughput cutoffs for certain emission points were 
justified. The throughput cutoffs are now a part of the applicability 
criteria used to determine which transfer racks are subject to control.
    Comment: Several commenters requested clarification of the 
relationship between the OLD rule and other existing rules and future 
rules.
    Response: We agree with the commenters that the final OLD NESHAP 
must be explicit in describing the specific applicability of other 40 
CFR part 63 NESHAP for sources that potentially may be drawn into more 
than one subpart. Section 63.2338(c)(1) of the final rule states that 
storage tanks, transfer racks, and equipment leak components that are 
part of an affected source under another 40 CFR part 63 NESHAP are 
excluded from the definition of affected source, even in cases where 
the other rule does not require a reduction in emissions from the 
emission source.
    Comment: Several commenters stated that EPA needs to address 
overlap between the OLD NESHAP and other non-40 CFR part 63 existing 
rules, such as the Storage Tank New Source Performance Standard (40 CFR 
part 60, subpart Kb), the Benzene Storage Tank and Benzene Transfer 
Operations NESHAP (40 CFR part 61, subparts Y and BB, respectively), 
and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations.
    Response: We have written 40 CFR 63.2396 to address the overlap 
between the final OLD NESHAP and those rules cited by the commenters. 
If meeting the requirements of another rule does not result in an owner 
or operator fully meeting the requirements of the OLD NESHAP, then the 
owner or operator must modify the compliance methods to come into full 
compliance with the OLD NESHAP while remaining in compliance with the 
other rule.
    Comment: One commenter, whose facility is subject to 40 CFR part 
63, subpart Y (Marine Loading), pointed out that 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart SS, Sec. 63.983(b) and (c), imposes an initial leak detection 
standard for closed vent systems that is more stringent than the 
detection standard contained in subpart Y; Sec. 63.983(c)(1)(v) 
specifies only the use of methane for calibration of the instrument 
used to conduct the initial EPA Method 21 sweeps in subpart SS, while 
subpart Y is more flexible; subpart Y and subpart SS conflict on the 
response required if a leak is found; and, for closed vent systems that 
contain bypass lines, subpart Y contains an exemption on closure 
requirements for maintenance vents, but subpart SS does not allow that 
exemption. The commenter stated that this is appropriate for subpart Y 
due to the ``batch'' nature of tank vessel loading, and that it would 
be inappropriate to impose the subpart SS requirement on part of their 
facility.
    Response: If an OLD emission source is required to be controlled 
under the final OLD NESHAP and that emission source is already 
controlled in a ``shared'' control device, then the owner or operator 
is required to be in compliance with both NESHAP or the NESHAP that 
impose the more stringent emission standard and/or work practices.
    If an OLD emission source is in OLD operation part of the year and 
``in service'' for another NESHAP for the rest of the year, then that 
OLD emission source is required to be in compliance with the final OLD 
NESHAP when that emission source is in OLD operation, even if the 
requirements between the two NESHAP rules are different. The owner or 
operator still has the option to permanently comply with whichever 
NESHAP provides the most stringent emission standard and/or work 
practices.
    Comment: One commenter noted several conflicts between 40 CFR part 
63, subparts SS and Y, and the proposed OLD NESHAP; specifically, 
performance tests on incinerators using specified test methods and 
conflicting language regarding the temperature monitoring location. The 
commenter claimed that the proposed control device evaluation in 40 CFR 
63.2362(g) that would be submitted according to the requirements of 40 
CFR 63.985(b)(1)(i) is an unnecessarily burdensome requirement for a 
facility that has source test data less than 5 years old showing that 
the control device more than adequately controls emissions. For such 
facilities, the commenter requested that existing data be allowed to be 
used in lieu of a design evaluation.
    Response: We have written the performance test and design 
evaluation requirements in Sec. 63.2362 of the final rule and Table 5 
to subpart EEEE of part 63 to more clearly specify the use of the 40 
CFR part 63, subpart SS, procedures and also to clarify that prior test 
results may be used, in many cases, to demonstrate compliance with the 
final OLD NESHAP. The final rule also allows owners or operators the 
flexibility of applying for approval to use alternative test methods.
    Comment: Two commenters recommended that EPA clarify the OLD 
boundary by incorporating the concept of ``intervening storage tanks,'' 
which has been used in several other MACT standards such as the 
Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON) and the Polymers and Resins rules. Under 
this concept, if a bulk tank in a centralized tank farm area has 
received organic liquids from outside the plant site and feeds that 
material to another storage tank at the process unit (an ``intervening 
storage tank''), the bulk tank is assigned to the organic liquid 
distribution operation and the intervening storage tank to the process 
unit.
    Response: We have evaluated the comment concerning the concept of 
``intervening storage tanks'' and have determined that such a concept 
is neither appropriate nor needed for the final OLD NESHAP. The 
``intervening storage tank'' concept is specifically to help facilities 
identify which storage tanks are part of the affected source of a 
particular MACT source category. The intent of the final OLD NESHAP is 
to supplement other NESHAP and apply to all remaining unregulated 
storage tanks that are in OLD operation. To incorporate similar 
``intervening storage tank'' language in the final OLD rule is at best 
unnecessary and at worst could lead to excluding tanks that should be 
covered by the final OLD NESHAP.
    Comment: Several commenters recommended that EPA clarify that the 
emission limitations and work practice standards identified in Sec. 
63.2346 apply whenever an emission source is in OLD operation, but not 
when the emission

[[Page 5048]]

source is not in OLD operation. Commenters pointed out that the 
proposal stated that affected facilities must be in compliance with the 
emission limitations at all times except for periods of startup, 
shutdown, or malfunction. They felt that periods of ``non-operation of 
the affected source'' should be included on this list.
    Commenters recommended that Sec. 63.2374(c) be clarified such that 
for demonstrating continuous compliance data averages should only 
include data collected when vapors from OLD operations are being routed 
to the control device.
    Response: It was our intent in the proposed rule that the emission 
limitations and work practice standards apply only when an emission 
source is transferring or storing an organic liquid or when an 
equipment leak component is in organic liquids service. Because there 
are no emissions from storage tanks or transfer racks during periods of 
``non-operation of the affected source,'' there is no need for the 
emission limitations to apply during these times. In addition to 
periods when the entire affected source is not in operation, there may 
be periods when any one of the emissions sources within the affected 
source is not in operation or is not in OLD operation. During these 
periods, the emission limitations for all other emission sources would 
still apply, but the emission limitations would not apply to the 
emission source not in OLD operation. This intention has been clarified 
in Sec. 63.2350 of the final rule.
    We agree with the comment that only data collected during times 
when emissions are being routed to the control device should be used in 
demonstrating continuous compliance and have written Sec. 63.2374(c) of 
the final rule to the effect that data are not to be used when 
collected during ``periods when emissions from organic liquids are not 
routed to the control device.''
    Comment: One commenter felt that the proposed rule should be 
modified to allow pilot flames to be turned off during flare shutdowns 
and when all the sources serviced by the flare are shut down.
    A second commenter thought EPA should reconsider the continuous 
compliance requirements for thermal incinerators that utilize ``bladder 
tanks,'' which collect emissions in a bladder until a sufficient 
quantity is collected to use the incinerator, so that the oxidizer does 
not have to be operated continuously. The commenter suggested changing 
the rule language to require sites to maintain the average fire box 
temperature only during times that vapors are introduced to the control 
device.
    Response: The requirement to continuously maintain a flare pilot 
flame is part of the 40 CFR part 63 General Provisions, which state 
that a pilot flame is required for an open flare during periods when 
emissions may be vented to the flare. If the flare is shutdown (out of 
service), there is no need to require a pilot flame because no 
emissions will be vented to the flare. Where the emissions sources 
serviced by the flare are shutdown, we agree that operating a pilot 
flame during such periods would be nonproductive because there are no 
emissions to be vented to the flare. We have written Table 9 to subpart 
EEEE of part 63 to allow an owner or operator not to maintain the pilot 
flame when all emission sources serviced by the flare are shutdown (out 
of service). However, we are requiring in the final rule that owners 
and operators make a demonstration to the permitting authority that it 
will not experience a deviation and to keep records of each time the 
pilot flame is extinguished and relit.
    We also agree with the commenter that it is unnecessary to maintain 
the average fire box temperature in thermal incinerators during periods 
when emissions are not vented to the incinerator. Therefore, we have 
written Table 9 to subpart EEEE of part 63 to clarify that the average 
fire box temperature in thermal incinerators need only be maintained 
while emissions are being vented to the control device. The final rule 
requires the owner or operator to monitor both this temperature and the 
time periods when vapors are flowing to the device. We also note that 
an owner or operator may have to increase the firebox temperature some 
time before emissions are vented back into the incinerator in order to 
comply with the average fire box temperature requirement.
    Comment: We received several comments concerning the definition of 
``organic liquid'' that affects the applicability of the proposed 
standards. One commenter asserted that the exemption of most organic 
liquids containing less than 5 percent HAP by weight is in violation of 
the requirements of the CAA. Another commenter claimed that the 5 
percent HAP cutoff is legally permissible on ``de minimis'' grounds.
    Two commenters recommended that EPA revise its definition of 
``organic liquid'' to exclude liquids that are not predominantly 
organic in order to exclude from regulation those liquids that contain 
very small amounts of organic material such as predominantly aqueous or 
inorganic liquids. The commenters felt that these liquids should not be 
included in the final OLD NESHAP because they do not emit significant 
amounts of organics to the environment and controlling them will not 
provide the intended emission reductions.
    Finally, several commenters added that EPA should provide a list of 
common materials within the petroleum industry that will not be 
regulated, such as kerosene (No. 1 distillate oil), diesel (No. 2 
distillate oil), asphalt, and heavier distillate oils and fuel oils.
    Response: The EPA disagrees that the proposed exemption of organic 
liquids containing less than 5 percent HAP-by-weight can be justified 
by de minimis principles. The EPA's de minimis authority exists to help 
avoid excessive regulation of tiny amounts of pollutants, where 
regulation would yield a result contrary to a primary legislative goal. 
It is unavailable ``where the regulatory function does provide 
benefits, in the sense of furthering the regulatory objectives, but the 
agency concludes that the acknowledged benefits are exceeded by the 
costs.'' EDF v. EPA, 82 F.3d 451, 466 (D.C. Cir. 1996); Public Citizen 
v. Young, 831 F.2d 1108, 1112-13 (D.C. Cir. 1987); Alabama Power v. 
EPA, 636 F.2d 323, 360-61 & n.89 (D.C. Cir. 1979). Accordingly, a de 
minimis exemption to section 112(d)(3) is unavailable, because it would 
frustrate a primary legislative goal by carving out tons of HAP 
emissions from regulation. The EPA's rejection of the de minimis 
concept has already been affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia Circuit, in National Lime Ass'n v. EPA, 233 F.3d 
625, 640 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (``NLA''), in which the court rejected the 
petitioner's claim that in light of both the high costs and low 
quantities of HAP at issue in that case, EPA should read a de minimis 
exception into the requirement that it regulate all HAP emitted by 
major sources. In that case, the Court found that ``EPA reasonably 
rejected this argument on the ground that the statute `does not provide 
for exceptions from emissions standards based on de minimis principles 
where a MACT floor exists.' '' NLA at 640.
    Contrary to the commenter's request, EPA sees no reason to revisit 
this fundamental issue, and rejects the assertion that both EPA and the 
court decided this issue incorrectly in NLA. Section 112 of the CAA is 
replete with careful definitions of volume-or effect-based limitation 
on regulation, indicating that Congress has already defined what 
amounts of HAP

[[Page 5049]]

emissions are too small to warrant MACT standards. The requirement to 
adopt MACT emission limitations, for example, applies without exception 
to ``each category or subcategory of major sources * * * of [HAP].'' 
CAA section 112(d)(1). For sources below the major source threshold, 
however, EPA has discretion to require ``generally available control 
technologies or management practices.'' CAA section 112(d)(5). Congress 
has thus itself defined volumetrically which sources' emissions are 
small enough not to warrant mandatory MACT standards.
    Congress likewise defined several MACT exceptions applicable where 
emissions have de minimis health effects. Section 112(d)(4) of the CAA 
allows EPA to establish standards less stringent than MACT for HAP with 
an established health threshold, so long as it sets a standard below 
the health threshold with ``an ample margin of safety.'' Section 
112(b)(3)(C) of the CAA directs EPA to de-list HAP--precluding section 
112(d) MACT standards--if EPA determines that ``there is adequate data 
on the health and environmental effects of the substance to determine 
that emissions, ambient concentrations, bioaccumulation or deposition 
of the substance may not reasonably be anticipated to cause any adverse 
effects to the [sic] human health or adverse environmental effects.'' 
Section 112(c)(9)(B)(i) of the CAA lets EPA delete source categories 
from the category list--the consequence again being no MACT control--if 
it determines that, for emissions of carcinogenic HAP, ``no source in 
the category * * * emits such [HAP] in quantities which may cause a 
lifetime risk of cancer greater than one in one million to the 
individual in the population who is most exposed to emissions of such 
pollutant from the source.'' For noncarcinogens, EPA may delete source 
categories if it determines that ``emissions from no source in the 
category or subcategory * * * exceed a level which is adequate to 
protect public health with an ample margin of safety and no adverse 
environmental effect will result from emissions from any source.'' CAA 
section 112(c)(9)(B)(ii). Moreover, in defining which source 
modifications trigger additional regulatory standards, CAA section 
112(g)(1)(A) mentions a ``greater than de minimis increase in actual 
emission of a [HAP].'' This shows that Congress knew how to use the de 
minimis concept when it considered such was appropriate in section 112, 
and the fact that it did not use it in section 112(d)(3) supports 
EPA's--and the D.C. Circuit's--conclusion that it is unavailable to 
support an exception to a MACT floor.
    The EPA does not find persuasive the commenter's reliance on CMA v. 
EPA, 217 F.3d 861, 866 (D.C. Cir. 2000) for the proposition that the 
overall purpose of section 112 is protecting human health and the 
environment, and that, therefore, as long as this general purpose is 
met, EPA may fashion de minimis exceptions from MACT. First, this 
position appears to assume that the issue is to be drawn on a clean 
slate, while in fact the same court has affirmed EPA's view that 
section 112(d)(3) provides no discretion to use a de minimis rationale 
to avoid MACT, and the CMA case was not faced with it. Second, the 
commenter appears to give prominence to an over-arching statutory goal 
over the specific language of the statutory provisions themselves, in 
assessing whether those provisions are ``extraordinarily rigid'' 
regarding EPA's otherwise-inherent de minimis authority; the logical 
extension of such an approach would be to find that no single provision 
in the CAA could restrict EPA's de minimis authority, in light of the 
CAA's over-arching purpose ``to promote the public health and 
welfare.'' CAA section 101(b)(1). Third, the commenter does not present 
any statutory arguments to overcome those that EPA presented to the 
court--and which the court affirmed--in NLA, beyond noting that CAA 
section 112(d)(8) is even more extraordinarily rigid in requiring 
regulation of coke ovens than is otherwise the case for MACT standards. 
Finally, EPA is unable to discern the basis for the commenter's 
suggestion that EPA has in fact ``been relying on'' de minimis 
authority in the MACT program ``for years,'' and is not aware of any 
instance in which EPA has explicitly created such an exception from an 
identified MACT floor. Therefore, and for the additional reasons 
discussed below, EPA does not believe it is appropriate or necessary to 
revisit the Agency's and the D.C. Circuit's prior conclusions regarding 
the availability of the de minimis principle in the final OLD NESHAP.
    However, for the final rule, we are promulgating a 5 percent HAP by 
weight threshold for non-crude oil liquids in the definition of an 
organic liquid. No such cutoff is being adopted for crude oil. There 
are several reasons why we believe such a cutoff is appropriate for the 
final OLD NESHAP, which EPA believes support the use of a non-crude oil 
5 percent cutoff without having to rely upon a legally unavailable de 
minimis theory. During the planning and development of the proposed 
rule, we intended to reduce HAP emissions from the distribution of 
organic liquid products that were either pure HAP liquids, mixtures of 
HAP and non-HAP liquids, or crude oils. As stated, our intent was to 
focus on products (including crude oil, which is a naturally occurring 
product) ``intended for further use or processing.'' Therefore, we 
focused our data gathering efforts on five 2-digit Standard Industrial 
Classification (SIC) codes that we believed represented the vast 
majority of the facilities nationwide engaged in the distribution of 
what we considered to be organic liquid products.
    We surveyed facilities in these five 2-digit SIC codes asking broad 
questions about the liquids that they distributed that contained 
organic HAP. In evaluating and analyzing the data, we discovered that 
the types of liquids containing organic HAP, including some non-product 
liquids and liquids with very low organic HAP contents, were more 
diverse than we had expected. In addition, the types of facilities 
engaged in distribution of such liquids, were greater than we had 
assumed in developing the proposed rule, as was the degree to which 
unforseen facility types were distributing and controlling emissions 
from such liquids.
    As stated above, such low HAP content non-crude oil liquids were 
not initially anticipated to be covered by the OLD rule, and may in 
many cases be the result of impurities or contaminants and not the 
result of an intended formulation of a product. These types of non-
crude oil liquids (those with small HAP contents) can be found at many 
facilities outside the five 2-digit SIC that we targeted. At this 
point, based on the data collected for the OLD rule, we cannot 
ascertain the representativeness of our data for those industries in 
other 2-digit SIC codes that we did not survey. Nor can we ascertain 
how many additional emission sources (controlled or uncontrolled) might 
need to be added to the database to adequately assess the MACT floor 
for these facilities and non-crude oil liquids and make final, 
enforceable regulatory decisions. We believe that our current data are 
insufficient for this purpose and do not provide enough information 
about the emissions, emission controls in use, or potential to reduce 
emissions to complete the MACT floor analyses that we believe are 
appropriate to address the unexpected non-crude oil liquids and 
facility types that we did not foresee as being subject to the OLD rule 
when we developed the proposal. As a result, we do not have sufficient 
data to develop regulatory requirements,

[[Page 5050]]

including those regarding emissions control and reduction, and 
monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting, for low HAP-content non-crude 
oil liquids. We also do not currently have the flexibility in our 
schedule to allow us to gather the necessary additional data to assess 
requirements for these low HAP-content non-crude oil liquids prior to 
the consent decree date for promulgation of the final OLD rule. Section 
112(d)(3)(A) and (B) of the CAA directs EPA to base existing source 
MACT floor determinations on ``emissions information'' which EPA 
``has'' or ``could reasonably obtain.'' Rather than adopt requirements 
for low-HAP non-crude oil liquids based on insufficient data, EPA is 
proceeding with the final OLD NESHAP as initially envisioned and 
supported.
    We are also concerned that if we were to lower or eliminate the 5 
percent HAP content cutoff level for non-crude oil liquids, the final 
OLD NESHAP would have previously unforeseen impacts on a significant 
number of Department of Defense (DoD) facilities, at a time when the 
Federal government as a whole is re-assessing the extent to which it is 
appropriate to subject DoD facilities to regulatory requirements. There 
was a consensus among representatives of the DoD that the OLD rule as 
proposed (a 5 percent HAP content cutoff) would not impact the storage 
and distribution of many types of fuels and other liquids in use at 
military installations. However, if non-crude oil liquids with less 
than 5 percent HAP were included in the definition of organic liquids 
as written in the final OLD rule, many DoD facilities would be subject 
to the final rule and impacted in ways that DoD representatives have 
informed EPA may seriously compromise the military function. The 
potential impacts of facilities such as these becoming subject to the 
final OLD rule were not considered at proposal. No information was 
provided by commenters, including DoD or others, during the public 
comment period that would be useful in quantifying the potential 
impacts of lowering or eliminating the cutoff for these facilities. In 
light of the sensitivity of this issue, EPA believes it would be 
inappropriate to proceed with the final rule in a form that might cause 
unforeseen and as-yet un-analyzed impacts on DoD facilities.
    After evaluating the issues discussed above, we have concluded that 
the most appropriate approach for the final OLD NESHAP, and the one 
that is most consistent with the CAA's directives, is to adopt a 
definition of organic liquid that includes a HAP content cutoff level 
for non-crude oil liquids. We have also concluded that the proposed 
level of 5 percent is a reasonable separation between our intended 
scope of products and those non-crude oil liquids that contain low 
amounts of HAP, often as impurities and contaminants.
    For vapor pressure, we have only a small amount of data for non-
crude oil liquids with true vapor pressures less than 0.1 psia. The 
data we do have are not representative of the universe of such low 
vapor pressure non-crude oil liquids and are not sufficient to enable 
us to support a MACT floor or emission standard requiring controls. We 
conclude that for a non-crude oil organic liquid to be subject to the 
final OLD rule, the organic liquid must have a total vapor pressure of 
at least 0.1 psia and must also contain at least 5 percent HAP by 
weight.
    With regard to the comments about excluding organic liquids that 
are not predominantly HAP and including primarily aqueous or inorganic 
liquids, we investigated the HAP emission potential for solutions of 
HAP in organic liquids, inorganic liquids, and water (or mostly water). 
Based on consideration of the volatilization properties of organic 
compounds in various types of liquid media, we cannot support the 
suggestion for limiting the scope of the organic liquid definition. 
More detail on our analysis of this issue can be found in a memorandum 
in the docket.
    Lastly, we have included a list of exempt liquids in the definition 
because the liquids are well defined and would exhibit such low vapor 
pressure that they would not exceed the 0.1 psia vapor pressure 
threshold.
    Comment: One commenter requested that EPA clarify that the 
evaluation of crude oil as an organic liquid is only applicable after 
custody transfer.
    Several commenters felt that ``black oil'' should be redefined 
based on whether it has the potential for flash emissions rather than 
in terms of the gas-to-oil ratio (GOR) and API gravity because 
petroleum transporters, petroleum marketers, and major petroleum 
product testing laboratories do not commonly use the gas-to-oil ratio. 
One commenter suggested that, for OLD MACT applicability, ``black oil'' 
should be determined solely on the basis of API gravity. This commenter 
also noted that for the purpose of ``black oil'' determination, the 
point of entry to the distribution system should be defined as the 
point of entry to the affected facility. Two other commenters felt that 
the determination should be made at a point that is representative of 
the combined crude oil stream.
    One commenter provided data on crude oils handled throughout the 
country, including the Alaskan oil pipeline and the Valdez Marine 
Terminal (VMT). These data indicated that the API gravities for all of 
these crude oils average less than 40 degrees. For example, the blended 
North Slope crude oil loaded at the VMT ranges from 23 degrees to about 
28 degrees, with most of it averaging 26 degrees API. The commenter 
concluded that if the OLD NESHAP are finalized with an exemption for 
crude oils having an API gravity less than 40 degrees, the effect will 
be to exclude virtually all crude oil from the final OLD rule.
    Response: We have clarified in the final rule that only crude oil 
after the first point of custody transfer is subject to the final rule.
    As discussed in the proposal preamble, the exclusion of black oil 
from the definition of crude oil (and hence from the family of 
regulated ``organic liquids'') was based on a similar exemption in the 
Oil and Gas Production NESHAP, 40 CFR part 63, subpart HH. Based on the 
comments received and additional data (e.g., typical API gravities of 
crude oil distributed), we have discovered that most crude oil being 
distributed at OLD facilities would have been excluded from the final 
rule, even though our impacts analyses assumed most crude oil was 
subject to control. Moreover, in the reevaluation of our data, we 
determined that there are emission reduction floors for crude oil. 
Furthermore, the emission potential of crude oil is the same as for 
other organic liquids with similar HAP and HAP contents, and the total 
HAP emissions can actually be much larger due to the significant 
volumes of crude oil being distributed.
    We have revised the definition of organic liquid to include all 
crude oil (after the first point of custody transfer) and have deleted 
the ``black oil'' exemption, the exclusion for heavier crude oils 
(i.e., those with an API gravity less than 40 degrees), and the 
parameter ``gas-to-oil-ratio'' as a measure of applicability for crude 
oil. Under the final rule, crude oil will be subject to the same 
storage tank capacity and HAP vapor pressure criteria used to determine 
control requirements for other organic liquids.
    Comment: We received comments stating that EPA Method 18 is not an 
appropriate method for determining the organic composition of liquid 
streams, and that only the analytical requirements of EPA Method 18 
should be made applicable in the final rule.
    The commenters stated that testing should not be required if a 
material is already known to be a regulated organic

[[Page 5051]]

liquid through process knowledge, an approach EPA has used in other 
rules, or if the material transferred is a commercial product with 
established specifications and is accompanied by an MSDS based on prior 
analysis.
    Response: After reviewing the EPA's analytical test methods, we are 
in agreement with these commenters that EPA Method 18 is not an 
appropriate method for liquid analysis of the type that will be 
performed under the final OLD NESHAP. The EPA Method 18 is appropriate 
for determining the HAP content in air streams, not the HAP content in 
liquids. We are now specifying EPA Method 311 of appendix A of 40 CFR 
part 63, which is titled ``Analysis of Hazardous Air Pollutant 
Compounds in Paints and Coatings by Direct Injection into a Gas 
Chromatograph.''
    The final rule includes provisions that allow the owner or operator 
of an affected OLD operation to use a variety of information available 
to them to determine whether a given liquid meets the HAP content 
criteria in the definition of ``organic liquids.'' Information such as 
product data sheets or MSDS, as well as knowledge of commonly accepted 
formulations for certain products, may be used to designate materials 
as above or below the HAP content criteria.
    While the owner or operator will not be required to test each 
liquid, EPA may require a test using EPA Method 311 (or an approved 
alternative) to confirm the reported content of organic HAP (from Table 
1 to subpart EEEE of part 63) in the liquid. In the event of any 
inconsistency between information provided by the owner or operator and 
the values obtained using the test methods, the results obtained 
through the use of an approved test method (e.g., EPA Method 311) will 
govern compliance determinations.
    Comment: One commenter felt there is an issue of the reliability of 
determining vapor pressures at 0.1 psia and lower. Since true vapor 
pressure is uncertain for low volatility stocks (such as distillate 
oils), EPA should allow the use of a surrogate property. The commenter 
suggested allowing the use of a flash point of 100<deg<ls-thn-eq>F as a 
surrogate for the 0.1 psia vapor pressure cutoff.
    Response: We agree that measured values of liquid vapor pressure 
become increasingly uncertain as the vapor pressure decreases. In order 
to avoid the difficulties of these measurements for liquids with very 
low volatilities, and also to be consistent with other rules such as 
the HON, we have changed the basis for determining the vapor pressure 
of an organic liquid. Under the final rule, the vapor pressure may be 
determined by using the specified test methods or by using a calculated 
value based on knowledge of the organic HAP content of the liquid. As 
vapor pressure may now be a calculated value, it is not necessary to 
use a surrogate approach. Also, we have included a list of exempt 
liquids in the definition of organic liquids because the liquids 
exempted are well defined and would exhibit such low vapor pressure 
that they would not exceed the 0.1 psia vapor pressure threshold. 
Therefore, the final rule does not incorporate the flash point 
approach.
    Comment: Two commenters stated that the storage tank capacity and 
vapor pressure criteria need to be reevaluated. The commenters noted 
that the proposed cutoffs in Table 2 to subpart EEEE of part 63 for 
applicability of storage tank controls are the same as those in the 
HON, and stated that the HON criteria should not set a precedent for 
any other source category. The commenters pointed out that other MACT 
rules that have followed the statutory procedure for MACT floor 
determination, such as the Refinery MACT, have concluded that the 
values for these criteria should be much higher. One commenter stated 
that the storage tank capacity and vapor pressure applicability 
criteria should, in fact, be consistent with 40 CFR part 63, subpart CC 
(Refinery MACT I). According to the commenter, these differences lead 
to confusion about applicability for facilities that must comply with 
several MACT rules.
    Response: Applicability criteria are established based on the MACT 
floor and beyond-the-floor determinations and are made independently 
for each source category. This determination depends on the data 
available for each category. Since the data reflect different tank 
sizes and liquids stored, the applicability criteria may, and do, vary 
from one rule to the next. Therefore, it is not necessary or 
appropriate that the OLD applicability criteria be the same as for the 
Refinery MACT. Further, based on the re-analysis of the database, the 
applicability criteria for the final OLD rule have been written to 
better reflect our OLD database and no longer matches the HON 
applicability criteria.
    One commenter was concerned about the potential confusion 
differences in applicability criteria may create for facilities that 
must meet several MACT rules. There should be no confusion at such 
facilities. The OLD NESHAP will not conflict with other storage tank 
applicability requirements, as storage tanks that are already subject 
to an existing 40 CFR part 63 subpart rule will continue to be subject 
to that subpart. The fact that an owner or operator must comply with 
different NESHAP for different storage tanks simply means that the 
owner or operator will have to implement an accurate and more exact 
accounting of which NESHAP apply to which tanks. This needs to be done 
only once, provided storage tanks do not change source categories.
    Comment: Several commenters stated that the final OLD NESHAP should 
include a vapor pressure threshold for transfer rack control. The 
commenters suggested that a 1.5 psia threshold (i.e., no control for a 
rack if all transferred liquids are below the threshold), which was 
used in the HON and in the Marine Tank Vessel Loading NESHAP, be 
adopted. These commenters did not believe that cost-effective controls 
could be implemented for these low vapor pressure materials because of 
the low level of emissions. They also felt that mandating controls for 
these low volatility liquids could result in greater emissions from the 
control device than from the loading activities.
    Response: In response to these comments, we re-examined the OLD 
database to determine the relationship between the current level of 
transfer rack control and the organic HAP vapor pressures. We 
determined that MACT floors consisting of the use of a control device 
existed for transfer racks handling liquids with vapor pressures 
greater than 0.1 psia at both new and existing sources. Since the MACT 
floor for loading activities down to this level is a closed vent and 
control system, we did not include a vapor pressure criterion for 
transfer racks in the final rule. We note, however, that transfer racks 
transferring non-crude oil liquids with total vapor pressures less than 
0.1 psia (i.e., liquids that are not ``organic liquids'' for purposes 
of the OLD NESHAP) are not subject to the final OLD rule.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that EPA's proposed exemption from 
control for the following emission sources: (a) storage tanks below 
10,000 gallon capacity, (b) transfer racks with annual throughput less 
than 3.12 million gallons, and (c) pumps and valves in organic liquids 
service for less than 300 hours per year is unlawful because it allows 
unregulated HAP emissions.
    Response: Based on a reevaluation of our database, we have revised 
the emission source criteria approach for storage tanks and transfer 
racks in the final rule. We are, however, retaining the 300 hour per 
year requirement for pumps and valves. Each of these items is discussed 
below.

[[Page 5052]]

    Storage tanks below 10,000 gallons capacity. At proposal, we 
proposed to exclude from control new tanks with capacities of less than 
10,000 gallons and existing tanks with capacities of less than 20,000 
gallons. This exclusion was based on other MACT rules with storage tank 
standards that exclude such tanks from control. We have revised the 
database to include only those tanks likely to be subject to the final 
OLD rule and re-calculated MACT floors based on the remaining tanks in 
the database. We retained the basic analysis methodology of examining 
tanks by capacity and vapor pressure ranges, using common capacity and 
vapor pressure ranges (i.e., those frequently found in other rules) and 
by examining the cumulative level of control across these ranges.
    Based on the revised analysis, the only MACT floors requiring 
emission reduction that were identified for existing tanks with less 
than 10,000 gallons capacity were for those tanks with capacities 
between 5,000 and 10,000 gallons capacities that are included in the 
5,000 to 50,000 gallons capacity range containing non-crude oil liquids 
with a HAP partial vapor pressure equal to or greater than 4.0 psia or 
crude oil.
    For new sources, a MACT floor requiring emission reduction was 
identified for tanks with 5,000 to 10,000 gallons capacities containing 
non-crude oil liquids with a HAP partial vapor pressure equal to or 
greater than 4.0 psia or crude oil. A MACT floor was also identified 
for tanks with capacities of 10,000 gallons or more and containing non-
crude oil liquids with a HAP partial vapor pressure equal to or greater 
than 0.1 psia or crude oil. We have used these findings to determine 
the applicability criteria (tank capacity and HAP partial vapor 
pressure) to determine which tanks will be subject to control.
    For those tanks for which the MACT floor was found to be ``no 
emission reduction,'' we conducted a beyond-the-floor analysis, and we 
have determined that there are no feasible or cost effective beyond-
the-floor alternatives for these storage tanks. Therefore, the final 
rule does not include control requirements for tanks for which the MACT 
floor was determined to be ``no emission reduction.''
    In conclusion, the final rule is driven by the data for the OLD 
source category and includes capacity and vapor pressure criteria based 
on those data to determine which OLD storage tanks are required to be 
controlled and those that are not required to be controlled. Requiring 
no additional emission reduction from certain tanks is justified by the 
available data, meets the mandates of the CAA, and is not unlawful.
    Transfer rack loading positions below 3.12 million gallons per 
year. As for storage tanks, we proposed to exclude relatively smaller 
transfer rack positions from control based on the requirements of other 
40 CFR part 63 subparts (e.g., subparts SS and YY define a low 
throughput transfer rack as one that transfers less than a total of 
11.8 million liters/yr (3.12 million gallons per year) of liquid 
containing regulated HAP). This throughput is equivalent to about 9,000 
gallons per day, or the filling of approximately one tank truck.
    Based on a re-analysis of the data (as described for storage tanks 
above), we determined that this applicability criterion is not 
appropriate for the OLD source category. Our data re-assessment 
indicates that there are emission reduction MACT floors for existing 
and new transfer racks above and below the 3.12 million gallons per 
year threshold. Therefore, the final rule does not adopt the 3.12 
million gallons per year exemption for transfer racks.
    Equipment in organic liquids service less than 300 hours per year. 
The stringency of a LDAR program is based on a number of factors. These 
factors include the definition of ``in organic HAP service'' (e.g., 5 
percent HAP, 10 percent HAP), the leak definition (e.g., 500 ppmv, 
10,000 ppmv), the frequency of monitoring (e.g., monthly, quarterly, 
annually), and exemptions for monitoring requirements (e.g., difficult 
to monitor components, in service less than 300 hours per year). The 
smaller the values associated with the definition of ``in organic HAP 
service'' and the leak definition, and the more frequent the 
monitoring, the more effective the LDAR program (better emission 
reduction). The more exemptions, the less effective the LDAR program.
    In examining the LDAR programs in place at OLD facilities, we 
evaluated the overall effectiveness of the programs, including each of 
the aforementioned items. In general, the majority of the LDAR programs 
in place at OLD facilities use a 10 percent HAP in organic HAP service 
definition and do not contain a 300-hour per year in service exemption 
because the LDAR programs tend to be State or local rules or older New 
Source Performance Standard-type rules. The proposed rule allowed an 
affected source to comply with either of two NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, 
subpart TT or UU) for equipment leaks. While both of these NESHAP 
contain an exemption for components in service less than 300 hours per 
year, they have an ``in organic HAP service'' definition of 5 percent 
(not 10 percent). When compared to a 10 percent ``in organic HAP 
service'' definition without a 300-hour per year exemption, a LDAR 
program with a 5 percent ``in organic HAP service'' definition with a 
300-hour per year exemption is more effective in reducing emissions 
(i.e., is more stringent). This occurs, in part, because there are more 
components caught by lowering the ``in organic HAP service'' definition 
than are ``lost'' due to the 300-hour per year in service exemption 
and, in part, because there are less emissions associated with 
components operating only 300 hours per year than from components in 
the 5 to 10 percent organic HAP range.
    The 300-hour per year in service exemption has been provided in 
previous rules primarily to address equipment that has only occasional 
use in HAP service. Examples of such equipment are pumps and 
compressors used only during startup and shutdown of a process unit. 
Equipment in use less than 300 hours per year would be difficult to 
monitor within a regularly scheduled LDAR program, and very little 
emission reduction would be realized by including them.
    The analysis of equipment LDAR programs in place within the OLD 
industry indicated that the 300-hour service exemption with monthly 
instrument-based inspections results in a level of control at least as 
stringent as the MACT floor level of control. Our investigation of the 
available control approaches for controlling equipment leaks did not 
identify any control approaches that would be beyond-the-floor level 
and also cost effective.
    Therefore, for the reasons stated above, we are not removing the 
300 hours per year exemption from the LDAR programs specified in the 
final rule.
    Comment: One commenter stated that the CAA requires EPA to 
promulgate standards for all emission points at all major sources, and 
that exemptions based on capacity, throughput, and hours of service 
violate that requirement. The commenter noted that EPA attempts to 
justify the exemptions by arguing that the exempted facilities do not 
have a volume of emissions that warrants control, but the Agency does 
not claim that these emissions are de minimis.
    Response: The EPA disagrees with the commenter's suggestion that 
every emission point at an affected source must be required to reduce 
emissions. Section 112(a) of the CAA does not state, or imply, that all 
emission points must be subjected to control

[[Page 5053]]

requirements in standards promulgated under section 112. Section 
112(d)(1) allows the Administrator to distinguish among classes, types, 
and sizes of sources within a category or subcategory in establishing 
such standards. We interpret this provision for the final OLD rule, as 
we have for previous NESHAP, as allowing emission limitations to be 
established for subcategories of sources based on size or volume of 
materials processed at the affected source. Under the discretion 
allowed by the CAA to consider sizes of sources, we made the 
determination that certain small-capacity and low-use operations can be 
analyzed separately for purposes of identifying the MACT floor and 
determining whether beyond-the-floor requirements are reasonable. With 
regard to whether emissions from certain groups of sources are ``de 
minimis,'' the commenter did not elaborate on its interpretation of 
this term or how it might apply in discussing the OLD applicability 
criteria for emission limitations.
    Comment: One commenter stated that the EPA has no discretion to 
exempt certain OLD emission sources such as container filling, 
wastewater collection, and semi-aqueous waste. Several other commenters 
stated that the final rule should explicitly state that wastewater 
operations, including the treatment, storage, transfer, or discharge of 
wastewater, are exempt from the final OLD NESHAP. Some commenters were 
concerned that the rule as proposed would regulate hazardous waste 
transfer and conveyance systems that are collocated at manufacturing 
facilities that are major sources for HAP and requested that EPA allow 
such sites to utilize alternate LDAR programs established under 40 CFR 
part 265, subpart BB, and 40 CFR part 63, subpart GGG.
    Response: As previously discussed, the proposed rule would reduce 
HAP emissions from the distribution of organic liquid products that 
were either pure HAP liquids, mixtures of HAP and non-HAP liquids, or 
crude oils, focusing on products (including crude oil, which is a 
naturally occurring product) intended for further use or processing. 
The handling of wastewater and semi-aqueous waste is not part of the 
distribution of organic liquid products. The definition of ``organic 
liquid'' in the final rule excludes hazardous waste, wastewater, and 
ballast water. In addition, the final rule clearly states that emission 
sources that are part of the affected source under another 40 CFR part 
63 rule (such as oil and natural gas production) are not included in 
the affected source for the final OLD rule.
    However, based on a review of data on container filling operations, 
we have determined that the only MACT floor for either existing or new 
sources is a new source floor for container filling operations. We 
identified one container filling operation that controls emissions by 
performing the operation in a total enclosure that is vented to a 
thermal oxidizer. This level of control meets the level 3 control for 
container filling found in 40 CFR part 63, subpart PP, the National 
Emission Standards for Containers. We have not, however, identified any 
technology that would achieve cost-effective beyond-the-floor control 
for new source container filling operations. The final rule requires 
owners or operators of new container filling operations to comply with 
the level 3 control requirements found in Sec. 63.924 of subpart PP.

B. Emission Limitations and Work Practice Standards

    Comment: A commenter claimed that EPA set the floor for new storage 
tanks the same as the floor for existing tanks without demonstrating 
that the floors reflect the best performing source, and claimed that 
EPA set the floor for existing transfer racks as the use of a control 
device with 95 percent control efficiency based on a ``cursory 
analysis.''
    The commenter states that EPA's proposed emission standards do not 
reflect the maximum achievable degree of reduction in emissions, and 
that EPA failed to adequately consider beyond-the-floor standards for 
each of the three regulated emission sources.
    Response: As a clarification, the averaging process (for either the 
arithmetic average or the median) is applied to the top 12 percent of 
sources and not to the whole data set. This approach, consisting of 
more than one possible way of determining floors, is a practical 
necessity when working with the results of an averaging process. In 
examining our database and evaluating it based on comments, we have 
used the median source of the top performing 12 percent of existing 
sources where there are at least 30 sources, or the median source of 
the top performing five sources where there are fewer than 30 sources 
to determine MACT floors for the final OLD rule. Our methodology for 
determining MACT floors for existing sources is reasonable and conforms 
to the legal requirements of the CAA.
    In developing the proposal and performing the MACT floor analysis 
for storage tanks, we evaluated each of the three primary types of 
tanks used for storage of organic liquids. These tank types are 
characterized by their basic construction and are referred to as fixed 
roof, internal floating roof, and external floating roof tanks. The 
selection of which type to use in a given situation is based on factors 
including capacity, types of liquids to be stored, climate, throughput, 
and cost. The emission control approach utilized for storage tanks 
differs depending on the tank type. The most common emission control 
approach for organic liquids storage tanks is floating roof technology, 
installed as either an internal or external floating roof. Floating 
roofs with properly designed seals and gaskets have been determined to 
perform at the highest level of emission control in use for storage 
tanks. External floating roof tanks achieve a somewhat lower control 
efficiency, because the vapor space above the floating roof is open to 
the atmosphere. However, the application of floating roof technology is 
the best demonstrated technology for this type of tank construction. 
For these reasons the Agency has developed storage tank equipment 
standards that specify in detail the design features that must be 
incorporated into a compliant floating roof design.
    The emission reductions that can be achieved by add-on control 
devices on fixed roof tanks are equivalent to the reductions that can 
be achieved by floating roof technology. As with floating roof 
technology, the performance of the various types of add-on controls are 
somewhat variable depending on operational factors such as the types of 
liquids being stored and the tank filling rate. Properly designed and 
operated add-on control systems have been demonstrated to achieve 
emission reductions of 95 percent or greater from fixed roof storage 
tanks.
    We developed MACT floor levels of control for the range of tank 
capacities and HAP vapor pressure of liquids stored based on the OLD 
storage tank database. The MACT floor level of control that was 
determined from the database is the use of properly designed floating 
roof technology or an add-on control device achieving a 95 percent 
reduction in HAP emissions. The MACT floor for storage tanks at new 
sources is not the same as the floor for tanks at existing sources. The 
new source storage tank floor is more stringent because the control 
requirements extend to tanks storing liquids with lower vapor pressures 
(i.e., more tanks will undergo control than at existing sources). New 
storage tanks in the 10,000 to 50,000 gallons capacity range will be 
subject to control under the final OLD rule at HAP vapor pressures as 
low as 0.1 psia (versus 4.0 psia for existing tanks in this same 
capacity range).

[[Page 5054]]

    Based on our review of the types of control devices in use 
(primarily incinerators, adsorbers, and scrubbers) and the range of 
control efficiencies reported (approximately 20 percent to over 99 
percent), we proposed that 95 percent was the most appropriate control 
efficiency for transfer operations. We selected this value based on the 
known capabilities of these control devices and on regulatory limits 
specified in other rules.
    Following proposal, we re-analyzed our OLD database and determined 
that the MACT floor for transfer racks at existing and new sources is a 
control efficiency of 98 percent, based on the best performing sources. 
The 98 percent level of control has been shown to be achievable by 
well-designed and operated combustion devices. The choice of control 
options is not limited to combustion devices, however, as vapor 
balancing systems also achieve the required 98 percent control level 
where they are technically feasible.
    In evaluating beyond-the-floor alternatives, we examined the 
ability to switch products, the ability to switch fuels, the potential 
for improved performance of add-on controls at already controlled 
sources, and the use of add-on control devices to reduce emissions from 
sources for which we determined the floors were ``no additional 
emission reductions.''
    The emission sources subject to the OLD rule are storage tanks, 
transfer racks, and equipment leak components (pumps, valves, and 
sampling connections). The liquids that are stored in storage tanks are 
those liquids required by a facility or its customers. It is not 
feasible for a facility to switch to a lower vapor pressure liquid when 
its customer requires a specific liquid. Therefore, product switching 
is not a feasible beyond-the-floor alternative for storage tanks. For 
the same basic reason, product switching is not a feasible beyond-the-
floor alternative for transfer racks. Finally, equipment leak 
components can only leak what is in the process stream that they 
contact. Those process streams come from OLD storage tanks and transfer 
racks. As product switching is not feasible for tanks and racks, it is 
not feasible for equipment leaks.
    With regards to fuel switching, the emissions that occur from 
tanks, racks, and equipment leak components have no fuel sources 
associated with them. The emissions occur as the result of displaced 
vapors when loading, breathing losses, and leaks. There are no fuel 
sources to ``switch.'' Therefore, fuel switching is not feasible.
    The use of add-on control devices, including vapor balancing, 
however, represents a feasible beyond-the-floor alternative for storage 
tanks and transfer racks. Our analyses of beyond-the-floor alternatives 
for those emission sources for which we determined the floors are ``no 
emission reduction,'' showed cost-effectiveness values greater than 
$10,000 per ton for storage tanks and greater than $50,000 per ton for 
transfer racks. We have determined that these values are not 
reasonable. Further, because add-on controls were determined to be 
``not cost effective,'' we did not evaluate the associated impacts of 
add-on controls for energy and other non-air quality environmental 
impacts. We note here that we have included in the final rule the 
option for transfer racks of using a vapor balancing system where 
technically feasible. These systems have demonstrated control 
efficiencies of 98 percent or greater (i.e., floor levels of control).
    Our investigation of the available control approaches for 
controlling equipment leaks did not identify any control approaches 
that would be beyond-the-floor level and also cost effective. We are, 
therefore, promulgating equipment leak standards based on the floor 
level of control determined from the OLD database.
    Comment: Commenters stated that the proposed rule text did not 
indicate whether the entire CAA section 112 HAP list or the proposed 
OLD Table 1 to subpart EEEE of part 63 HAP list is the appropriate 
chemical list to use for the various determinations and performance 
demonstrations, even though the proposal preamble notes that organic 
HAP listed on Table 1 to subpart EEEE of part 63 (and all crude oil 
except black oil) are the ``regulated liquids.'' One commenter noted 
that the proposal did not include emission standards for 24 of the 93 
organic HAP that EPA claims are emitted from OLD operations, based on 
the Agency's claim that the HAP for which standards were not set are 
lower in volatility and have lower potential to be emitted.
    Response: We have written Table 1 to subpart EEEE of part 63 to 
include all of the organic HAP identified as being present in OLD 
liquids. The control devices and work practice standards in the final 
OLD rule affect all of the HAP in an OLD liquid, even those that have 
lower emission potential due to their low vapor pressure. By including 
all of the known organic HAP in Table 1 to subpart EEEE of part 63, 
there is no longer any inconsistency between the HAP emitted by OLD 
operations, the HAP used to determine whether control is required, and 
the HAP used to demonstrate compliance. Therefore, while the initial 
determination of whether an entire facility meets the criteria for 
being a major source is based on all the HAP listed in the CAA, 
compliance with the final OLD rule is based only on the 98 HAP found in 
Table 1 to subpart EEEE of part 63.
    Comment: One commenter pointed out that EPA has proposed allowing 
sources to meet a standard for TOC emissions rather than meeting any 
standard for HAP, stating that the Agency cannot credibly claim that 
TOC is a valid surrogate for all HAP that OLD facilities emit. In 
addition, the TOC option would result in control of even fewer HAP. For 
these reasons, the commenter believes this provision of the proposal is 
unlawful.
    Response: The primary format for the emission limits in the final 
OLD rule is a control efficiency standard for organic HAP. At proposal, 
we offered the option of complying with the percent reduction standards 
using a TOC format. The use of ``surrogate'' pollutants is an accepted 
practice in environmental regulation, because it is often reasonable to 
infer similar behavior among members of a class of pollutants that 
share a common attribute. Dithiocarbamate Task Force v. EPA, 98 F.3d 
1394, 1399 (D.C. Cir. 1996); NRDC v. EPA, 822 F.2d 104, 125 (D.C. Cir. 
1987). Significant regulatory cost and time can be saved by relying on 
that relationship; monitoring, sampling, and recordkeeping can be 
reduced when a surrogate pollutant, rather than numerous individual 
pollutants, are tracked. Specifically, EPA's use of a surrogate 
pollutant in the MACT program has been upheld as reasonable in judicial 
review, where the court held that if control of the surrogate pollutant 
is the means by which sources achieve reductions in multiple HAP, EPA 
may require surrogate control without quantifying the reduction in HAP 
thus achieved. NLA v. EPA, 233 F.3d 625, 639 (D.C. Cir. 2000). After 
evaluating the comments, we have retained the optional TOC measurement 
format, but have added a requirement for a demonstration by the owner 
or operator that the HAP emission reduction achieved is at least as 
stringent as the TOC emission reduction for their affected sources. To 
make this demonstration, the owner or operator will have to show that 
the ratio of captured organic HAP-to-TOC is at least 1-to-1, such that 
it can thereafter be assured that capture of TOC will result in capture 
of organic HAP to at least as stringent a level as required. After the 
initial demonstration to establish the relationship between HAP and TOC 
emission reductions, use of the TOC

[[Page 5055]]

format will be an acceptable alternative emission limit.
    For the 20 ppmv outlet concentration standard, the use of TOC is an 
acceptable option without an equivalency determination. Because 
measured TOC in a gas stream includes all HAP, and may include some 
organic compounds that are not HAP, the concentration of HAP at the 
outlet of a control device will always be less than the measured TOC 
value. Thus, the limitation of TOC to a maximum concentration of 20 
ppmv will always result in HAP emissions of 20 ppmv, or less.
    We initially selected the TOC format as a possible alternative for 
the standards to provide flexibility for source owners and operators, 
while still requiring the MACT level of emission control to be 
achieved. The requirements of the final OLD rule will accomplish both 
objectives by allowing the use of a demonstrated surrogate, in 
appropriate cases. The approach adopted in the final rule will ensure 
that in all cases where the TOC surrogate is used, the correlation 
between the surrogate and organic HAP will have been demonstrated, and 
that control of the surrogate will achieve emission reductions of 
organic HAP at least as stringent as under the organic HAP limit.
    Comment: Several commenters stated that the proposed rule fails to 
provide for the use of a number of proven emission reduction options 
and focuses primarily on closed vent systems and control devices. The 
commenters stated that EPA must allow the option of vapor balancing for 
storage tank and transfer rack emission reduction. Further, emission 
reduction options such as cooling the liquid in a storage tank to 
reduce vapor pressure, maintaining an inert gas blanket, or routing 
emissions to a fuel gas system or to a process should be specifically 
stated to be acceptable alternatives for compliance with the proposed 
rule.
    Response: We have considered these comments and reviewed the 
provisions of the HON and other MACT rules that allow the alternative 
of vapor balancing, and we have added vapor balancing to the final rule 
as an alternative control approach for transfer racks (i.e., to control 
HAP vapors displaced during the loading of transport vehicles). Vapor 
balancing is a highly efficient (98 percent or greater) means of 
reducing the emissions of vapors displaced during the loading of 
transport vehicles. Vapor balancing to a fixed roof tank with an add-on 
control device may be a viable option for facilities that utilize this 
type of tank. However, vapor balancing is not technically feasible in 
all cases.
    We recognize that, for the variety of liquids and equipment 
configurations that exist at OLD operations in many different 
industries, there may be numerous control approaches that would reduce 
HAP emissions to a degree equivalent to an end-of-pipe control system. 
Cooling a liquid may reduce its actual vapor pressure below the 
threshold for control in a storage tank, in which case the storage tank 
control requirements would not apply. The final rule addresses the 
routing of emissions to a fuel gas system or a process in Sec.Sec. 
63.2346(a) and (b) and 63.2378(d). We have not added the use of an 
inert gas blanket as an approved control measure because we have no 
evidence (and the commenters did not provide any) that this approach 
inherently provides the level of control required by the final 
standards. However, Sec. 63.2346(g) of the final rule provides for 
requests for approval to use any other alternative approach. We have 
added a reference to Sec. 63.177 of the HON to provide a more 
structured method for receiving approval of approaches that are not 
specifically listed in the final rule.
    Comment: One commenter requested that the availability of the 
floating roof option be limited to those storage tanks storing stock 
with an annual average true vapor pressure of less than 11.1 psia. 
Proposed Table 4 allows compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart WW 
(floating roof control), as an alternative compliance measure for 
storage tanks, but without this vapor pressure restriction. Other EPA 
rules require controls on tanks storing stocks with vapor pressure 
greater than 11.1 psia (if the tank is in the capacity category that is 
subject to controls), but they do not allow the use of floating roofs 
as a control option for these higher volatility stocks. Several 
commenters also recommended that the storage tank definition should 
exclude pressure vessels designed to operate in excess of 204.9 
kilopascals (29.7 psia) and without emissions to the atmosphere.
    Response: We have written the final OLD rule to limit the 
application of floating roof technology to storage tanks containing 
organic liquids with an organic HAP annual average true vapor pressure 
less than 76.6 kilopascals (11.1 psia). For affected tanks with liquids 
[ge]11.1 psia, only a closed-vent system and control device may be 
used. The OLD storage tank definition has also been written to exclude 
from OLD coverage pressure vessels designed to operate in excess of 
204.9 kilopascals (29.7 psia) and without emissions to the atmosphere.
    Comment: One commenter noted that EPA proposed to regulate 
equipment leaks through work practice standards, and EPA has not 
determined that it is not feasible to prescribe or enforce an emission 
standard. In fact, EPA notes in the TSD that leakless equipment, such 
as seal-less pumps, can ``eliminate emissions entirely.''
    Response: We have previously determined in the development of rules 
such as the HON that emission standards (in the format of a numerical 
emission limit) are not feasible for equipment leaks. Under section 112 
of the Act, national emission standards must, whenever possible, take 
the format of a numerical emission standard. Typically, an emission 
standard is written in terms of an allowable emission rate (mass per 
unit of time), performance level (e.g., 90 percent control), or an 
allowable concentration. These types of standards require the direct 
measurement of emissions to determine compliance. For some source 
types, emission standards cannot be prescribed because it is not 
feasible to measure emissions. Section 112(h)(2) of the CAA recognizes 
this situation by defining two conditions under which it is not 
feasible to establish an emission standard. These conditions are: (1) 
If the pollutants cannot be emitted through a conveyance designed and 
constructed to emit or capture the pollutant; or (2) if the application 
of measurement methodology is not practicable due to technological and 
economic limitations. If an emission standard cannot be established, 
EPA may instead establish a design, equipment, work practice, or 
operational standard or combination thereof.
    For equipment leak sources, such as pumps and valves, EPA has 
previously determined that it is not feasible to prescribe or enforce 
emission standards. Except for those items of equipment for which 
standards can be set at a specific concentration, the only method of 
measuring emissions is total enclosure of individual items of 
equipment, collection of emissions for a specified time period, and 
measurement of the emissions. This procedure, known as bagging, is a 
time-consuming and prohibitively expensive technique considering the 
great number of individual items of equipment in a typical process 
unit. Moreover, this procedure would not be useful for routine 
monitoring and identification of leaking equipment for repair.
    While we did not include this rationale in the OLD proposal, 
emission

[[Page 5056]]

standards in the form of numerical emission limits are not feasible for 
components subject to the OLD equipment leak regulations, and we have 
included the rationale in the final rule for establishing the equipment 
leak standards under CAA section 112(h).
    The use of leakless equipment, as discussed in the TSD, may not be 
compatible with many of the liquids transferred at OLD sources. For 
example, seal-less pumps use the pumped liquid for lubrication and 
cooling, and some transferred liquids may not be adequate in this 
capacity. Also, this equipment can develop leaks after a period of 
time, which would require an LDAR program similar to the program in 
place for traditional equipment. For OLD operations, we have not 
developed enough experience and do not have data to indicate that 
equipment emissions at these operations justify this extreme type of 
reduction approach. The LDAR program represented in the final rule is 
being used successfully throughout industry to maintain low leakage 
rates from equipment.
    Comment: Several commenters believe that EPA should not require 
instrument LDAR to control equipment leaks at OLD facilities. They said 
that instrument scanning for equipment leaks is impractical and not 
cost-effective, and they recommended that the OLD MACT rule specify a 
sensory (sight, sound, smell) leak detection and repair program similar 
to that in the Gasoline Distribution MACT rule, 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
R. One of the commenters felt that many OLD sources are already subject 
to regular Coast Guard inspection as well as EPA's SPCC plan 
requirements. The gains from additional LDAR requirements on the same 
piping must be quite limited but would come with a substantial burden.
    Another commenter noted that the preamble states that the Agency 
found that an instrument-based LDAR program similar to the HON 
represents the MACT floor, but the OLD MACT rule generally applies to 
facilities similar to bulk gasoline terminals. Consequently, Table 4 
Item 3 should state: ``You must comply with the requirement of subpart 
R of this part.''
    Response: In our MACT analysis, we determined that the MACT floor 
for existing sources is an instrument-based LDAR program. We further 
determined that this is the best system of emission reduction 
available, so we selected it as MACT for existing and new sources. 
Therefore, allowing a sensory program would not represent MACT because 
such programs have not been demonstrated to the Administrator's 
satisfaction to be equivalent to equipment-based programs for OLD 
operations. We specifically requested data to show that sensory 
programs would achieve the MACT level of control. In the development of 
40 CFR part 63, subpart R, industry provided such data for gasoline and 
the final rule allows sensory programs. The Agency has received no data 
to support the claim that sensory programs would achieve equivalent 
control for OLD operations. Therefore, we have not written the 
equipment leak standards in the final rule as requested by the 
commenters. The final rule provides flexibility by allowing LDAR 
programs that are consistent with the provisions of 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart TT, UU, or H.

C. Testing, Compliance Requirements, and Monitoring

    Comment: One commenter felt that proposed Table 5 to subpart EEEE 
of part 63 needs to be revised to allow for design evaluations in lieu 
of performance testing for non-flare control devices controlling 
emissions from storage tanks, as 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS specifies. 
In proposed Sec. 63.2362, there is no language explaining specifically 
when a design evaluation may be done in lieu of a performance test. In 
addition, it appears that you must conduct a performance test to 
demonstrate compliance with emission limits in Table 2 to subpart EEEE 
of part 63 for both storage tanks and transfer racks. The commenter 
provided suggested revised language to clarify Sec. 63.2362 through 
references to applicable provisions of subpart SS.
    A second commenter noted that the text of proposed Sec. 63.2354(a) 
pertaining to ``other initial compliance demonstrations'' was imprecise 
and confusing, since there is nothing other than performance testing 
requirements in 40 CFR 63.7(a)(2).
    One commenter noted that a source that qualifies as an existing 
source may already be obligated to perform initial performance tests as 
a condition of a new source review construction permit. In the event of 
overlapping requirements to perform initial performance tests, there 
should be coordination of the schedule by which the testing is to be 
performed.
    Two other commenters noted that proposed Sec. 63.2358 would require 
performance testing of a control device used to comply with the OLD 
rule even if it is the same control device already tested and in use 
for compliance with another 40 CFR part 63 NESHAP standard. They felt 
that a facility that has already conducted performance testing to 
comply with a more stringent NESHAP should be able to use those test 
results in place of a new performance test.
    Response: We have written Sec. 63.2354 of the final rule and Table 
5 to subpart EEEE of part 63 to clarify that design evaluations may be 
used in lieu of performance testing for demonstrating initial 
compliance for nonflare control devices. The requirements in 40 CFR 
63.985(b)(1) were developed to ensure that design evaluations include 
adequate documentation to demonstrate that the control device being 
used achieves the required control efficiency. By specifically listing 
this alternative to performance testing in the final OLD rule, we have 
provided additional flexibility to owners or operators and increased 
uniformity among the other MACT rules that affect them.
    We have also written the language in Sec. 63.2370 of the final rule 
to clarify that the initial compliance demonstrations referred to in 
that section are those initial compliance requirements contained in 
Tables 6 and 7 to subpart EEEE of part 63. We have clarified that the 
General Provisions in Sec. 63.7(a)(2) impose a schedule for the 
performance testing, while design evaluations are to be submitted in 
the Notification of Compliance Status per Sec. 63.985(b)(1) of 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart SS.
    Under 40 CFR 63.7(h), the owner or operator of an affected facility 
may request a waiver of the performance test requirements. Individual 
performance tests may be waived if, in the Administrator's judgment, 
the source is meeting the relevant standard(s) on a continuous basis. 
The provisions allowing for submission of a request for a waiver of the 
performance test, accompanied by supporting information such as a 
documented performance test previously conducted on the device, should 
avoid the situation of overlapping tests.
    Comment: One commenter stated that EPA has failed to mandate 
adequate continuous monitoring requirements and that, at a minimum, EPA 
must establish requirements that provide a reasonable assurance of 
compliance. As an example, EPA did not propose the use of continuous 
emission monitoring systems (CEMS), but rejected them on cost grounds 
without indicating why the costs are too high. Another commenter noted 
that 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS (Sec. 63.990(c)), allows for use of 
organic monitoring device CEMS as an alternative to the continuous 
parameter monitoring systems (CPMS) for which operating limits are to 
be established. The final OLD rule should include the same allowance.

[[Page 5057]]

    Response: Section 112 of the CAA does not require EPA to impose a 
CEMS requirement in MACT standards. Instead, EPA has substantial 
discretion in exercising its technical expertise to devise a monitoring 
system that assures compliance with applicable requirements. NLA v. 
EPA, 233 F.3d 625, 635 (D.C. Cir. 2000); Marsh v. Oregon Natural 
Resources Council, 490 U.S. 360, 377 (1989). Particularly, the D.C. 
Circuit has already ruled that parameter monitoring requirements 
provide the necessary assurance of continuous compliance with 
applicable requirements and enhance the enforceability of emission 
standards, as required by the CAA. NRDC v. EPA, 194 F.3d 130, 134-37 
(D.C. Cir. 1999). The commenters should note that the proposal included 
a requirement (in Sec. 63.2366(a)) to install, operate, and maintain a 
CPMS on each control device installed under the final OLD rule. These 
CPMS continuously measure an operating parameter of the control device 
that influences emissions (such as temperature inside a thermal 
incinerator, vacuum achieved during the desorption cycle of a carbon 
adsorption system, etc.). They have been widely prescribed in several 
other MACT rules and are specified under the monitoring requirements of 
40 CFR part 63, subpart SS. We consider properly selected CPMS to 
provide a reasonable assurance of compliance with the applicable 
requirements established in the final OLD rule. Deviations from the 
established values (operating limits) for these parameters must be 
reported by the facility in their periodic reports to EPA.
    Because CPMS are judged to provide a reasonable assurance of 
compliance and are generally less expensive to install and operate, a 
requirement to use CEMS is not necessary. While we are not requiring 
the use of CEMS in the final OLD rule, facilities may request to 
utilize CEMS as an alternative monitoring method under Sec. 63.8 of the 
General Provisions.
    In addition, we have added an option for the use of organic 
monitoring devices (one type of CEMS) to Table 9 to subpart EEEE of 
part 63. In accordance with the 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS, 
requirements in Sec. 63.990(c), an organic monitoring device may be 
used (as an alternative to CPMS) where absorbers (scrubbers), 
condensers, and carbon adsorbers are used to meet a weight percent 
emission reduction or a ppmv outlet concentration requirement. Organic 
monitors provide a reasonable assurance of compliance by quantifying 
exhausted total organic compounds (pollutants), which in turn provides 
an indication of the proper operation of the control device. A properly 
operating control device will continue to achieve the required control 
levels for organic HAP specified in the final OLD rule.
    The alternative of installing and operating either CPMS or CEMS, in 
conjunction with effectively managed control devices, will provide a 
reasonable assurance of compliance with the final OLD rule's 
requirements.
    Comment: Several commenters asserted that EPA has proposed 
installation, operation, and maintenance requirements for continuous 
parameter monitoring systems in Sec. 63.2366 of the final rule that are 
wasteful, unnecessary, and in some cases infeasible and will have 
environmentally negative impacts. Due to the significant problems 
associated with the proposed continuous parameter monitoring system 
requirements, EPA should withdraw these requirements from the OLD final 
rule and use the existing subpart SS requirements for continuous 
monitoring systems.
    Response: We have decided not to include the performance 
specifications for CPMS in the final OLD rule as they were proposed. We 
have clarified in the final rule that owners and operators must comply 
with the continuous monitoring provisions of subpart SS. Since owners 
and operators subject to the final OLD rule are required to comply with 
the requirements of subpart SS, they are already required to follow 
written performance specifications. We have concluded that the 
requirements in subpart SS are adequate to ensure that CPMS are 
properly operated and provide reasonable assurance of continuing 
compliance with the standards.
    In a separate action, we are currently developing performance 
specifications for CPMS that we intend to propose to be followed by 
owners and operators of all sources subject to standards under 40 CFR 
part 63. We decided it would be premature to promulgate performance 
specifications for the final OLD rule when the performance 
specifications that would ultimately be promulgated in the General 
Provisions of 40 CFR part 63 may be significantly different as a result 
of possible public comments received on that rulemaking.
    Comment: One commenter stated that a minimum or maximum parameter 
monitoring limit should be established based on the parameter values 
measured during the performance test and supplemented by engineering 
assessments and/or manufacturer's recommendations. Nowhere in the 
proposal preamble, 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE, or any of the 
referenced standards is there any indication of how operating limits 
are established. The final OLD rule should allow the facility to 
establish the operating limits necessary to achieve the requirements of 
Table 2 to subpart EEEE of part 63. This would be consistent with the 
HON. In addition, the conditions for conducting performance tests 
should be consistent between Table 12 to subpart EEEE of part 63 (Sec. 
63.7(e)(1)) and Sec. 63.997(e)(1) of 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS, to 
avoid confusion.
    Response: We have included in the final OLD rule a requirement for 
the owner or operator to develop and submit a monitoring plan according 
to the requirements in Sec. 63.985(c) of 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS. 
The monitoring plan must specify the parameters that an owner or 
operator proposes to monitor and the range of acceptable values for 
each parameter. The final OLD rule specifies parameters that must be 
monitored unless the owner or operator chooses to request permission to 
monitor an alternative parameter. The final OLD rule does not, however, 
provide specific ranges of acceptable values for the monitored 
parameters. Owners or operators must establish monitored parameter 
limits based on performance testing or design evaluation information. 
Thus, the owner or operator now has the flexibility to establish 
monitoring parameter limits that are most appropriate for assuring that 
their particular equipment complies with the emission limitations.
    Comment: Two commenters stated that, in Tables 3 and 9 to subpart 
EEEE of part 63, compliance with the operating limits should be based 
on a daily average value instead of an hourly average. They claim that 
using an hourly average as the basis for compliance with the operating 
limit is a very stringent requirement and is in direct conflict with 
numerous 40 CFR part 63 standards. They also claim that the use of 
daily averages instead of hourly averages supports every legitimate 
need of EPA's Enforcement Office, while still making compliance with 
the final OLD rule possible.
    Response: We have evaluated the changes recommended by the 
commenters and have modified Tables 3 and 9 to require that daily 
average values of recorded parameters be used to determine compliance. 
Daily average values have been considered by EPA in other MACT rules to 
be sufficient to demonstrate compliance for the types of control 
devices in use within this industry. We concluded, after further 
evaluation, that an hourly average may not be sufficient to account for 
normal, short-term fluctuations of operating

[[Page 5058]]

parameter values. Also, the parameter monitoring limits are normally 
established during performance testing that covers a span of three, 1-
hour runs. This testing period helps ensure that short-term variations 
in operating conditions (temperature, flow rate, concentration, etc.) 
do not inappropriately bias the overall average. It is consistent with 
EPA policy developed in other MACT rules and with good engineering 
judgement to allow daily average values to be used to determine 
compliance. It should also be noted that in cases where an emission 
source operates for a total of less than 24 hours at a time, the 
average recorded values must comply over the total operating period.
    Comment: One commenter stated that the non-applicability of the 
emission limits during periods of SSM is unclear and needs to be 
addressed, and recommended that specific language in Sec. 63.2378, 
patterned on 40 CFR Sec.Sec. 63.102-103 or 63.480(j) regarding 
operation during SSM, be included in the final OLD rule.
    Response: We have written the language in Sec. 63.2378 to clarify 
the applicability of the emission limitations during periods of SSM. 
While the emission limitations still apply during periods of SSM, 
deviations from the emission limitations during these periods are not 
automatically considered to be violations if the owner or operator 
demonstrates that they have followed the requirements of their SSM 
plan. Paragraphs (b)(2) of Sec. 63.2378 require that control devices be 
operated during periods of SSM if possible without damaging the devices 
and paragraphs (b)(3) require that appropriate measures be taken to 
minimize emissions during periods of SSM. The final OLD rule does 
require, in Sec. 63.2386(d), that deviations from the emission 
limitation that occur during periods of SSM be reported in the 
semiannual compliance report.
    Comment: The same commenter stated that proposed Sec. 63.2378(d) is 
unnecessary and confusing and should be deleted, stating that SSM 
requirements are adequately addressed in the recently amended General 
Provisions and no argument has been made to justify deviating from 
those provisions.
    Response: As discussed in the previous response pertaining to SSM 
requirements, we have clarified in the final rule that deviations 
occurring during periods of SSM must be reported in the semiannual 
compliance report even though they are not automatically considered to 
be violations of the emission limitation. The result is more 
consistency between the final OLD rule and other recently promulgated 
rules and also provides the EPA with information necessary to decide on 
a case by case basis if further documentation should be requested from 
a facility.
    Comment: Several commenters felt that EPA should allow storage 
tanks with nonconforming seals to upgrade the seals up until the next 
time the tank is out of service, but no more than 10 years after rule 
promulgation. For an existing affected source, the proposed OLD rule 
would have required compliance with the emission limitations and work 
practice standards for existing sources no later than 3 years after the 
effective date of the final rule. Other MACT rules with storage tank 
provisions recognize that a 3-year compliance schedule would typically 
result in an increase in emissions because the emissions associated 
with emptying and degassing the tanks for performing the required 
alterations can be greater than the emission reductions that those 
alterations would achieve.
    Response: In response to these comments, we reviewed the allowances 
made in other MACT rules regulating storage tanks, and also the Generic 
MACT standards for storage vessels, 40 CFR part 63, subpart WW, which 
are an allowable alternative (in Table 4 of the proposed rule) to the 
95 percent emission limit.
    The Gasoline Distribution MACT rule (40 CFR part 63, subpart R) 
allows a 3-year compliance period for upgrading external floating deck 
rim seals and for applying controls (gaskets, etc.) to deck fittings. 
However, if only the fitting controls are needed for a particular 
external floating roof tank to achieve compliance, the facility may 
wait until the next scheduled degassing and cleaning of the tank (or up 
to 10 years) to install the fitting controls. Subpart WW of 40 CFR 
63.1063(a)(2)(ix) is similar to the Gasoline Distribution rule in that 
fitting controls may be installed up to 10 years after promulgation.
    The Petroleum Refinery MACT rule (40 CFR part 63, subpart CC) 
allows up to 10 years to achieve compliance for existing floating roof 
storage tanks, but gives fixed-roof tanks only 3 years to comply due to 
the much greater emission reduction achieved for fixed-roof tanks.
    Analysis of the emissions created by a tank degassing and cleaning 
event were performed under both the Gasoline Distribution and Refinery 
rules. We agree that for OLD storage tanks, the net cumulative 
emissions from performing a special cleaning and degassing to bring a 
floating roof tank into compliance would be greater than from allowing 
an OLD operation to wait until a scheduled cleaning event to make these 
modifications. Therefore, the final OLD rule includes a provision to 
allow a facility up to 10 years to convert the rim seals or deck 
fittings on existing floating roof tanks. However, the analysis for the 
Refinery rule showed that the emissions from degassing and cleaning 
fixed-roof tanks can be balanced within 1 year by the reductions 
achieved by applying the subpart WW controls (specific floating roofs 
and seals) or a 95 percent efficient control device. Therefore, 
existing fixed-roof tanks are required in the final rule to achieve 
compliance within 3 years after the effective date.
    The final OLD rule is written to be consistent with the overall CAA 
goal of reducing HAP emissions. In a situation such as the control of 
this type of storage tanks, strictly adhering to the 3-year compliance 
timeframe to implement the MACT floor level of control actually results 
in increased emissions. Thus, if our goal is to reduce HAP emissions, 
we are faced with a choice of allowing facilities more time to comply 
with the MACT level of control or not require that they comply at all. 
The approach taken achieves more HAP emission reductions than would be 
achieved by not requiring facilities to meet the MACT level of control.

D. Notifications, Reports, and Records

    Comment: One commenter stated that the provisions of proposed Sec. 
63.2386(c)(4) and (d) (information to be included in semiannual 
Compliance reports) are too broad and EPA has not indicated why such 
broad applicability is needed and what useful purpose repeated 
submittal of information will serve.
    Similarly, another commenter requested that EPA revise Sec. 
63.2386(d) concerning the first Compliance report because the records 
requested in Sec. 63.2386(d)(1), (4), and (5) will literally require 
the submission of reams of paper with each Compliance report.
    Response: We have reviewed the proposed requirements related to the 
content of the initial notification of compliance status (NOCS) and 
subsequent compliance reports. We agree that, to the extent that the 
initial NOCS includes the information necessary to understand the OLD 
activities at the site, this information need not be reported again in 
subsequent compliance reports unless there are substantive changes 
affecting applicability or organic HAP emissions. Therefore, we have 
streamlined the referenced paragraphs to eliminate

[[Page 5059]]

duplicated information (but also to require the initial Compliance 
report to contain any updated or final facility information that was 
not reported in the NOCS).
    Comment: One commenter stated that language added April 5, 2002, to 
40 CFR 63.10(d)(5)(i) of the General Provisions concerning reporting 
the number, duration, and a brief description of each SSM is 
unnecessarily burdensome for OLD-type operations, where there are many 
individual components, any of which can be undergoing SSM activities 
independent of the other components. The commenter suggested that the 
approach used in the HON offers reasonable relief and that it be used. 
Specifically, the commenter recommended that requirements for 
recordkeeping and reporting be for ``startups, shutdowns, and 
malfunctions during which excess emissions occur.''
    Two other commenters expressed concern with the immediate SSM 
reporting requirement in Table 11 to subpart EEEE of part 63, item 2. 
They stated that this requirement should be made consistent with the 
HON, which allows these events to be reported in the next semiannual 
Compliance report.
    Response: The amount of information required in the amended General 
Provisions for the SSM reports does not represent an undue burden for 
OLD operations. We believe that the additional information required 
under the amended General Provisions is useful to the EPA in gaining an 
understanding of the frequency, duration, and types of SSM activities 
at an affected source. Because sources are required to minimize 
emissions to the extent which is consistent with safety and good air 
pollution control practices during periods of SSM, gaining an 
understanding of the overall operation of an affected source is 
important. Therefore, we have retained the requirement in Sec. 
63.2386(c)(5), which references the General Provisions. We have also 
retained the requirement in Table 11 to subpart EEEE of part 63, item 
2, which specifies that an immediate SSM report must be submitted if 
the owner or operator takes an action that is not consistent with their 
SSM plan. We concluded that a failure to follow an approved SSM plan 
should not go unreported for a period of time that could be almost 6 
months. In those cases where the owner or operator follows their SSM 
plan, reporting in the next scheduled compliance report is allowed 
under Table 11 to subpart EEEE of part 63.
    Comment: Two commenters expressed concern with proposed Sec. 
63.2378(b), which implies that if the operator starts up or shuts down 
a control device and it does not meet the 1-hour average temperature 
because it only ran for 15 minutes of a given hour, then the operator 
has to report that they did not meet the required temperature even 
though the temperature during the actual loading operation may have met 
the requirements. One of the commenters stated that this results in 
much more recordkeeping and reporting than the HON, Polymers & Resins 
MACT rules, or 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS, for no environmental or 
compliance benefits.
    Response: We have written the language in Sec. 63.2378 to clarify 
the applicability of the emission limitations during periods of SSM. 
While the emission limitations still apply during periods of SSM, 
deviations from the emission limitations during these periods are not 
automatically considered to be violations if the owner or operator 
demonstrates that they have followed the requirements of their approved 
SSM plan. Paragraphs (b)(2) require that control devices be operated 
during periods of SSM if possible without damaging the devices and 
paragraph (b)(3) require that appropriate measures be taken to minimize 
emissions during periods of SSM. The final OLD rule does require, in 
Sec. 63.2386(d), that deviations from the emission limitations that 
occur during periods of SSM be reported in the semiannual compliance 
report, even though they are not automatically considered to be 
violations of the emission limitations. It should be noted that the 
averaging period has been written as daily averages of monitored 
parameters and, also, that monitoring is only required during periods 
of operation of the emission source. In the commenters example of a 
source operating for only 15 minutes, if the monitored parameter meets 
the operating limitation during that period of operation, it would not 
be considered a deviation.

E. Definitions

    Comment: Several commenters felt that EPA should revise the 
definition of annual average true vapor pressure in proposed Sec. 
63.2406, as there is no good reason to require annual recalculation of 
the average ambient temperature. The referenced method for determining 
true vapor pressure (API 2517) uses the normal average annual 
temperature. This is published by the National Climatic Data Center as 
a cumulative average over many years, and thus may be considered a 
constant for a given location.
    Commenters stated that the temperature basis used for vapor 
pressure determination should be related to the actual facility 
emission potential and consistent with the regulatory basis. Two of the 
commenters stated that the vapor pressure determination for storage 
tank applicability should be based on the annual average temperature of 
the stored organic liquid.
    Response: We agree that the average annual temperature for a given 
location is not likely to vary from year to year to the extent that, if 
all other factors are unchanged, it will have a noticeable effect on 
emissions. Thus, annual recalculation of this temperature is 
unnecessary and we have written the definition in the final OLD rule to 
reflect this. As suggested by one of the commenters, we have also added 
the term ``actual annual average temperature'' to clarify that the 
actual liquid temperature should be used in determinations of vapor 
pressure.
    We have also written the definition of ``annual average true vapor 
pressure'' so that it is based on the actual annual average temperature 
of the liquid, and annual recalculation of the vapor pressure value is 
not needed.
    Comment: One commenter suggested that in the definition of black 
oil, EPA should delete the word ``hydrocarbon'' and the parentheses 
around ``petroleum'' to ensure clarity of intent. It is possible for a 
chemical plant to bring onto or ship out from a plant an oily, black 
hydrocarbon liquid that could meet the other criteria of this 
definition. The commenter believes that EPA intends that black oil be a 
technical term related only to petroleum liquids.
    Response: We have deleted the term ``black oil'' from the final 
rule. All crude oil will now be subject to the requirements under the 
final OLD rule.
    Comment: One commenter recommended that EPA use the proposed Sec. 
63.2334(b) definition of ``organic liquid'' in Sec. 63.2406 
(Definitions) to specifically exclude ``black oil'' and gasoline. 
Another commenter recommended that EPA revise the organic liquid 
definition to make clear the intent that the HAP content cutoff (5 
percent by weight) applies to liquids other than crude oil.
    Response: We have written the definition of ``organic liquid'' to 
clarify the intended meaning of this term in the final OLD rule and 
have removed the description of organic liquids from Sec. 63.2334(b). 
We have included a 5 percent cutoff level for defining non-crude oil 
liquids as ``organic liquids.''
    Comment: Many commenters suggested changes to the definition of

[[Page 5060]]

storage tank. One commenter stated that EPA should clarify that the 
rule only applies to stationary tanks. The proposed definition stated 
that the term means a stationary unit, and then cited several examples 
of non-stationary units. If these examples were to be interpreted as 
constituting the only non-stationary units that are not subject to the 
rule, then other portable tanks and containers could be improperly 
construed as being subject to the rule. Several commenters recommended 
that the storage tank definition should exclude pressure vessels 
designed to operate in excess of 204.9 kilopascals and without 
emissions to the atmosphere. Three commenters recommended that the 
storage tank definition be changed to clearly include blending tanks in 
the affected source and that, therefore, storage tanks and transport 
vessels used for ``incidental mixing and blending'' are a part of the 
OLD affected source. The commenters maintained that it must be clear 
that the OLD rule does not exclude from the affected source those 
storage tanks that have the ability to practice ``incidental blending 
and mixing to maintain product specifications.''
    A final commenter recommended that vessels permanently attached to 
motor vehicles such as trucks, tank cars, barges, or ships be excluded 
from this definition (per the definition in the HON).
    Response: We are in agreement with the commenters concerning the 
types of tanks intended to be covered by the term ``storage tank.'' We 
have written the definition to make it more consistent with other rules 
(such as the HON and the Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP) and to reflect 
suggestions of the commenters.
    Comment: Two commenters suggested that the definition of transfer 
rack be amended by deleting the ``physically separate'' criterion 
because the 11.8 million liter (3.12 million gallon) throughput cutoff 
in the OLD rule is based on each transfer rack loading position and not 
the transfer rack as a whole. The last sentence in the transfer rack 
definition was also included in the HON subparts F and G definitions 
for loading rack, in Sec.Sec. 63.101 and 63.111. Under the HON, this 
sentence was important to enable one to distinguish between the terms 
``transfer rack'' and ``loading rack'' when making the Group 1/Group 2 
determination. This Group status was based on throughput of the entire 
transfer rack and not each transfer rack loading position.
    Response: We are retaining the definition as proposed for 
``transfer rack,'' including the ``physically separate'' criterion, 
because we have written the description of the transfer rack emission 
source subject to emission standards from each loading position to the 
entire transfer rack, consistent with other air emission control 
regulations for volatile organic and petroleum liquid transfer 
operations. In the data reassessment we performed after proposal, we 
also found that the reported transfer rack data were sufficient to 
develop a MACT floor level of control for transfer racks but not for 
individual loading positions.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), EPA 
must determine whether a regulation is ``significant'' and, therefore, 
subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and the 
requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order defines 
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a 
rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, 
or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal government communities;
    (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of 
recipients thereof; or
    (4) raise novel or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the 
President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive 
Order.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been 
determined that today's final rule is not a ``significant regulatory 
action'' because it will not have an annual effect on the economy of 
$100 million or more and is therefore not subject to OMB review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in the final rule have been 
submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. (ICR No. 1963.02) The 
information requirements are not effective until OMB approves them.
    The information requirements are based on notification, 
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the NESHAP General 
Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), which are mandatory for all 
operators subject to national emission standards. These recordkeeping 
and reporting requirements are specifically authorized by section 114 
of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7414). All information submitted to the EPA 
pursuant to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for which a 
claim of confidentiality is made is safeguarded according to EPA 
policies set forth in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
    The final rule will require maintenance inspections of the control 
devices but will not require any notifications or reports beyond those 
required by the General Provisions. The recordkeeping requirements 
require only the specific information needed to determine compliance.
    The annual monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping burden to 
affected sources for this collection (averaged over the first 3 years 
after the effective date of the promulgated rule) is estimated to be 
137,170 labor-hours per year, with a total annual cost of $7.5 million 
per year. These estimates include a one-time performance test and 
report (with repeat tests where needed), one-time submission of an SSMP 
with semiannual reports for any event when the procedures in the plan 
were not followed, semiannual compliance reports, maintenance 
inspections, notifications, and recordkeeping.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources 
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or 
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time 
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize 
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and 
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to 
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; 
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; 
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; 
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the 
EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When this ICR is 
approved by OMB, the Agency will publish a technical amendment to 40 
CFR part 9 in the Federal Register to display the OMB control number 
for the

[[Page 5061]]

approved information collection requirements contained in the final 
rule.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

    The EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a 
regulatory flexibility analysis in connection with the final rule. The 
EPA has also determined that the final rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's final rule on 
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business whose 
parent company has fewer than 100 or 1,500 employees, or a maximum of 
$5 million to $18.5 million in revenues, depending on the size 
definition for the affected North American Industry Classification 
System (NAICS) code; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a 
government of a city, county, town, school district or special district 
with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization 
that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and 
operated and is not dominant in its field. It should be noted that 
companies in 42 NAICS codes are affected by the final rule, and the 
small business definition applied to each industry by NAICS code is 
that listed in the Small Business Administration (SBA) size standards 
(13 CFR 121). For more information on size standards for particular 
industries, please refer to the economic impact analysis in the docket.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on 
small entities, EPA has concluded that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
We have determined that six small firms in the industries affected by 
the final rule may be affected. Out of the six affected small firms, 
none are estimated to have compliance costs that exceed one percent of 
their revenues.
    In addition, the final rule is likely to increase profits at the 
many small firms not adversely affected by the final rule due to the 
very slight increase in market prices. The median compliance cost to 
sales estimates for the affected small and large firms is virtually 
identical (0.02 percent compared to less than 0.01 percent for the 
large firms) and no small firms are expected to close in response to 
incurring the compliance costs associated with the final rule.
    Although the final rule will not have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities, the final rule includes 
provisions that will minimize the impact on small entities in several 
ways. We chose to set the control requirements at the MACT floor 
control level and not at a control level more stringent. The transfer 
rack cutoff, based on facilitywide throughput, and tank size cutoffs in 
the final rule will reduce the effects on small businesses. We have 
identified a list of 98 HAP from the list of 188 in the CAA to be 
considered for regulation. Regulated liquids are non-crude oil organic 
liquids that contain at least 5 percent by weight of the 98 HAP listed 
in Table 1 to subpart EEEE of part 63 and a vapor pressure of at least 
0.1 psia, and all crude oil after the first point of custody transfer 
after the production field. In addition, we worked with various trade 
associations during the development of the rulemaking. These actions 
have reduced the economic impact on small entities from the final rule.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in 
aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 1 
year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is 
needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and 
consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the 
least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that 
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do 
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation of why that 
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under 
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must 
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling 
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely 
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant 
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and 
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory 
requirements.
    The EPA has determined that today's final rule does not include a 
Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or 
more to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the 
private sector. Therefore, the requirements of the UMRA do not apply to 
this action.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that 
has federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance 
costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA consults with 
State and local officials early in the process of developing the 
proposed regulation. The EPA also may not issue a regulation that has 
federalism implications and that preempts State law unless EPA consults 
with State and local officials early in the process of developing the 
regulation.
    The final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not 
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship 
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, 
as specified in Executive Order 13132. Furthermore, the final OLD 
NESHAP do not require these governments to take on any new 
responsibilities. Therefore, the requirements of section 6 of Executive 
Order 13132 does not apply to the final rule.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to

[[Page 5062]]

ensure ``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' 
``Policies that have tribal implications'' is defined in the Executive 
Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on 
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal 
government and the Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes.''
    The final rule does not have tribal implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship 
between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. No 
affected plant sites are known to be owned or operated by Indian tribal 
governments. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to the final 
rule.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental 
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, EPA must evaluate the environmental health or safety 
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned 
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably 
feasible alternatives considered by EPA.
    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that 
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has 
the potential to influence the regulation. The final rule is not 
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is based on technology 
performance and not on health or safety risks. No children's risk 
analysis was performed because no alternative technologies exist that 
would provide greater stringency at a reasonable cost; therefore, the 
results of any such analysis would have no impact on the stringency 
decision.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    The final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 
28355, May 22, 2001). The rule is not a ``significant energy action'' 
because it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the 
supply, distribution, and use of energy. The reduction in petroleum 
product output, which includes reductions in fuel production, is 
estimated at only 0.006 percent, or about 311 barrels per day (about 
15,500 metric tons per year). The reduction in coal, natural gas, and 
electricity output is expected to be negligible. The increase in price 
of petroleum products is estimated to be only 0.001 percent nationwide. 
While energy distribution services such as pipeline operations will be 
directly affected by the final rule, energy distribution costs are 
expected to increase by only 0.1 percent. We estimate that there will 
be a slight increase of only 0.001 percent of net imports (imports -- 
exports), and no other adverse outcomes are expected to occur with 
regard to energy supplies. Given the minimal impacts on energy supply, 
distribution, and use as a whole nationally, all of which are under the 
threshold screening criteria for compliance with this Executive Order 
established by the Office of Management and Budget, no significant 
adverse energy effects are expected to occur.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Public Law No. 104-113; 15 U.S.C. 272 note) 
directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in their 
regulatory and procurement activities unless to do so would be 
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary 
consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials 
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, business practices) 
developed or adopted by one or more voluntary consensus bodies. The 
NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through annual reports to OMB, 
with explanations when an agency does not use available and applicable 
voluntary consensus standards.
    The final rule involves technical standards. The EPA cites the 
following standards in the final rule: EPA Methods 1, 1A, 2, 2A, 2C, 
2D, 2F, 2G, 3, 3B, 4, 18, 21, 25, 25A, 27, 311, 316 (formaldehyde). 
Consistent with the NTTAA, EPA conducted searches to identify voluntary 
consensus standards in addition to these EPA methods. No applicable 
voluntary consensus standards were identified for EPA Methods 1A, 2A, 
2D, 2F, 2G, 21, 27, 311, and 316. The search and review results have 
been documented and are placed in the docket (docket numbers A-98-13 
and OAR-2003-0138) for the final rule.
    Three voluntary consensus standards were identified as appropriate 
to the final rule. The voluntary consensus standard ASTM D6420-99, 
``Standard Test Method for Determination of Gaseous Organic Compounds 
by Direct Interface Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS),'' is 
appropriate in the cases described below for inclusion in the final 
rule in addition to EPA Method 18 codified at 40 CFR part 60, Appendix 
A, for measurement of organic HAP or total organic compounds. 
Therefore, the standard ASTM D6420-99 is cited in today's final rule.
    Similar to EPA's performance-based Method 18, ASTM D6420-99 is also 
a performance-based method for measurement of gaseous organic 
compounds. However, ASTM D6420-99 was written to support the specific 
use of highly portable and automated GC/MS. While offering advantages 
over the traditional EPA Method 18, the ASTM method does allow some 
less stringent criteria for accepting GC/MS results than required by 
EPA Method 18. Therefore, ASTM D6420-99 is a suitable alternative to 
EPA Method 18 only where: the target compound(s) are those listed in 
Section 1.1 of ASTM D6420-99; and the target concentration is between 
150 ppbv and 100 ppmv.
    For target compound(s) not listed in Section 1.1 of ASTM D6420-99, 
but potentially detected by mass spectrometry, the regulation specifies 
that the additional system continuing calibration check after each run, 
as detailed in Section 10.5.3 of the ASTM method, must be followed, 
met, documented, and submitted with the data report even if there is no 
moisture condenser used or the compound is not considered water 
soluble. For target compound(s) not listed in Section 1.1 of ASTM 
D6420-99, and not amenable to detection by mass spectrometry, ASTM 
D6420-99 does not apply.
    As a result, EPA included ASTM D6420-99 in the final rule, and EPA 
Method 18 as a gas chromatography (GC) option in addition to ASTM 
D6420-99. This will allow the continued use of GC configurations other 
than GC/MS.
    Two additional voluntary consensus standards, ASTM D2879-83 
``Standard Test Method for Vapor Pressure-Temperature Relationship and 
Initial Decomposition Temperature of Liquids by Isoteniscope,'' and API 
Publication 2517 ``Evaporative Loss from External Floating-Roof Tanks, 
Third Edition, February 1989,'' were already incorporated by reference 
in 40 CFR

[[Page 5063]]

Sec. 63.14 and are also being cited in the final rule for measurement 
of vapor pressure.
    Five voluntary consensus standards: ASTM D1979-91, ASTM D3432-89, 
ASTM D4747-87, ASTM D4827-93, and ASTM PS9-94 are incorporated by 
reference in EPA Method 311.
    The search for emissions measurement procedures identified nine 
other voluntary consensus standards. The EPA determined that seven of 
these nine standards identified for measuring emissions of the HAP or 
surrogates subject to emission standards in the final rule were 
impractical alternatives to EPA test methods for the purposes of the 
final rule. Therefore, EPA does not intend to adopt these standards for 
this purpose. The reasons for this determination for the seven methods 
are discussed in the docket.
    Two of the nine voluntary consensus standards identified in this 
search were not available at the time the review was conducted for the 
purposes of the final rule because they are under development by a 
voluntary consensus body: ASME/BSR MFC 13M, ``Flow Measurement by 
Velocity Traverse,'' for EPA Method 2 (and possibly 1); and ASME/BSR 
MFC 12M, ``Flow in Closed Conduits Using Multiport Averaging Pitot 
Primary Flowmeters,'' for EPA Method 2.
    Section 63.2362 and Table 5 to subpart EEEE of part 63 list the EPA 
testing methods included in the regulation. Under Sec. 63.7(f) and Sec. 
63.8(f) of subpart A of the General Provisions, a source may apply to 
EPA for permission to use alternative test methods or alternative 
monitoring requirements in place of any of the EPA testing methods, 
performance specifications, or procedures.

J. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 801 et seq., as added 
by the SBREFA, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, 
the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which 
includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the 
Comptroller General of the United States. The EPA will submit a report 
containing this final rule and other required information to the U.S. 
Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General 
of the United States prior to publication of the final rule in the 
Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after 
it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major 
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. Sec. 804(2). The final rule will be 
effective on February 3, 2004.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hazardous 
substances, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Dated: August 25, 2003.
Marianne Lamont Horinko,
Acting Administrator.

0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

Subpart A--[Amended]

0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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


0
2. Section 63.14 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(8) and (c)(1) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 63.14  Incorporation by reference.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (8) ASTM D2879-83, 96, Test Method for Vapor Pressure-Temperature 
Relationship and Initial Decomposition Temperature of Liquids by 
Isoteniscope, IBR approved for Sec. 63.111 and Sec. 63.2406.
    (c) * * *
    (1) API Publication 2517, Evaporative Loss from External Floating-
Roof Tanks, Third Edition, February 1989, IBR approved for Sec. 63.111 
and Sec. 63.2406.
* * * * *

0
3. Part 63 is amended by adding a new subpart EEEE to read as follows:

Subpart EEEE--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants: Organic Liquids Distribution (Non-Gasoline)

Sec.

What This Subpart Covers

63.2330 What is the purpose of this subpart?
63.2334 Am I subject to this subpart?
63.2338 What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?
63.2342 When do I have to comply with this subpart?

Emission Limitations, Operating Limits, and Work Practice Standards

63.2346 What emission limitations, operating limits, and work 
practice standards must I meet?

General Compliance Requirements

63.2350 What are my general requirements for complying with this 
subpart?

Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements

63.2354 What performance tests, design evaluations, and performance 
evaluations must I conduct?
63.2358 By what date must I conduct performance tests or other 
initial compliance demonstrations?
63.2362 When must I conduct subsequent performance tests?
63.2366 What are my monitoring installation, operation, and 
maintenance requirements?
63.2370 How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission 
limitations, operating limits, and work practice standards?

Continuous Compliance Requirements

63.2374 When do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate continuous 
compliance and how do I use the collected data?
63.2378 How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission 
limitations, operating limits, and work practice standards?

Notifications, Reports, and Records

63.2382 What notifications must I submit and when and what 
information should be submitted?
63.2386 What reports must I submit and when and what information is 
to be submitted in each?
63.2390 What records must I keep?
63.2394 In what form and how long must I keep my records?

Other Requirements and Information

63.2396 What compliance options do I have if part of my plant is 
subject to both this subpart and another subpart?
63.2398 What parts of the General Provisions apply to me?
63.2402 Who implements and enforces this subpart?
63.2406 What definitions apply to this subpart?

Tables to Subpart EEEE of Part 63

Table 1 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63--Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants
Table 2 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63--Emission Limits
Table 3 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63--Operating Limits--High 
Throughput Transfer Racks
Table 4 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63--Work Practice Standards
Table 5 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63--Requirements for Performance 
Tests and Design Evaluations
Table 6 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63--Initial Compliance with Emission 
Limits
Table 7 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63--Initial Compliance with Work 
Practice Standards
Table 8 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63--Continuous Compliance with 
Emission Limits
Table 9 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63--Continuous Compliance with 
Operating Limits--High Throughput Transfer Racks
Table 10 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63--Continuous Compliance with Work 
Practice Standards

[[Page 5064]]

Table 11 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63--Requirements for Reports
Table 12 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63--Applicability of General 
Provisions to Subpart EEEE

What This Subpart Covers


Sec. 63.2330  What is the purpose of this subpart?

    This subpart establishes national emission limitations, operating 
limits, and work practice standards for organic hazardous air 
pollutants (HAP) emitted from organic liquids distribution (OLD) (non-
gasoline) operations at major sources of HAP emissions. This subpart 
also establishes requirements to demonstrate initial and continuous 
compliance with the emission limitations, operating limits, and work 
practice standards.


Sec. 63.2334  Am I subject to this subpart?

    (a) Except as provided for in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this 
section, you are subject to this subpart if you own or operate an OLD 
operation that is located at, or is part of, a major source of HAP 
emissions. An OLD operation may occupy an entire plant site or be 
collocated with other industrial (e.g., manufacturing) operations at 
the same plant site.
    (b) Organic liquid distribution operations located at research and 
development facilities, consistent with section 112(c)(7) of the Clean 
Air Act (CAA), are not subject to this subpart.
    (c) Organic liquid distribution operations do not include the 
activities and equipment, including product loading racks, used to 
process, store, or transfer organic liquids at facilities listed in 
paragraph (c) (1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) Oil and natural gas production field facilities, as the term 
``facility'' is defined in Sec. 63.761 of subpart HH.
    (2) Natural gas transmission and storage facilities, as the term 
``facility'' is defined in Sec. 63.1271 of subpart HHH.


Sec. 63.2338  What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?

    (a) This subpart applies to each new, reconstructed, or existing 
OLD operation affected source.
    (b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, the 
affected source is the collection of activities and equipment used to 
distribute organic liquids into, out of, or within a facility that is a 
major source of HAP. The affected source is composed of:
    (1) All storage tanks storing organic liquids.
    (2) All transfer racks at which organic liquids are loaded into or 
unloaded out of transport vehicles and/or containers.
    (3) All equipment leak components in organic liquids service that 
are associated with pipelines, except as provided in paragraph (c)(2) 
of this section, and with storage tanks and transfer racks storing, 
loading, or unloading organic liquids.
    (4) All transport vehicles while they are loading or unloading 
organic liquids at transfer racks.
    (c) The equipment listed in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this 
section and used in the identified operations is excluded from the 
affected source.
    (1) Storage tanks, transfer racks, and equipment leak components 
that are part of an affected source under another 40 CFR part 63 
national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants regulation 
(NESHAP).
    (2) Equipment leak components associated with pipelines that 
transfer organic liquids directly to or from storage tanks subject to 
another 40 CFR part 63 NESHAP or to or from non-tank process unit 
components (e.g., process reactors).
    (3) Non-permanent storage tanks, transfer racks, and equipment leak 
components used in special situation distribution loading and unloading 
operations (such as maintenance or upset liquids management).
    (4) Storage tanks, transfer racks, and equipment leak components 
used to conduct maintenance activities, such as stormwater management, 
liquid removal from tanks for inspections and maintenance, or 
changeovers to a different liquid stored in a storage tank.
    (d) An affected source is a new affected source if you commenced 
construction of the affected source after April 2, 2002, and you meet 
the applicability criteria in Sec. 63.2334 at the time you commenced 
operation.
    (e) An affected source is reconstructed if you meet the criteria 
for reconstruction as defined in Sec. 63.2.
    (f) An affected source is existing if it is not new or 
reconstructed.


Sec. 63.2342  When do I have to comply with this subpart?

    (a) If you have a new or reconstructed affected source, you must 
comply with this subpart according to the schedule identified in 
paragraph (a)(1) or (2) of this section, as applicable.
    (1)(i) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section, 
if you startup your new affected source on or before February 3, 2004 
or if you reconstruct your affected source on or before February 3, 
2004, you must comply with the emission limitations, operating limits, 
and work practice standards for new and reconstructed sources in this 
subpart no later than February 3, 2004.
    (ii) For any emission source listed in paragraph Sec. 63.2338(b) at 
an affected source that commenced construction or reconstruction after 
April 2, 2002, but before February 3, 2004, that is required to be 
controlled based on the applicability criteria in this subpart, but:
    (A) Would not have been required to be controlled based on the 
applicability criteria as proposed for this subpart, you must comply 
with the emission limitations, operating limits, and work practice 
standards for each such emission source based on the schedule found in 
paragraph (b) of this section or at startup, whichever is later; or
    (B) Would have been subject to a less stringent degree of control 
requirement as proposed for this subpart, you must comply with the 
emission limitations, operating limits, and work practice standards in 
this subpart for each such emission source based on the schedule found 
in paragraph (b) of this section or at startup, whichever is later, and 
if you start up your affected new or reconstructed source before 
February 5, 2007, you must comply with the emission limitations, 
operating limits, and work practice standards for each such emission 
source as proposed for this subpart, until you are required to comply 
with the emission limitations, operating limits, and work practice 
standards in this subpart for each such emission source based on the 
schedule found in paragraph (b) of this section.
    (2) If you commence construction of or reconstruct your affected 
source after February 3, 2004, you must comply with the emission 
limitations, operating limits, and work practice standards for new and 
reconstructed sources in this subpart upon startup of your affected 
source.
    (b)(1) If you have an existing affected source, you must comply 
with the emission limitations, operating limits, and work practice 
standards for existing affected sources no later than February 5, 2007, 
except as provided in paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
    (2) Floating roof storage tanks at existing affected sources must 
be in compliance with the work practice standards in Table 4 to this 
subpart, item 1, at all times after the next degassing and cleaning 
activity or within 10 years after February 3, 2004, whichever occurs 
first. If the first degassing and cleaning activity occurs during the 3 
years following February 3, 2004, the compliance date is February 5, 
2007.
    (c) If you have an area source that does not commence 
reconstruction but increases its emissions or its potential to

[[Page 5065]]

emit such that it becomes a major source of HAP emissions and an 
existing affected source subject to this subpart, you must be in 
compliance by 3 years after the area source becomes a major source.
    (d) You must meet the notification requirements in Sec. 63.2382(a) 
according to the schedules in Sec. 63.2382(a) and (b)(1) through (3) 
and in subpart A of this part. Some of these notifications must be 
submitted before the compliance dates for the emission limitations, 
operating limits, and work practice standards in this subpart.

Emission Limitations, Operating Limits, and Work Practice Standards


Sec. 63.2346  What emission limitations, operating limits, and work 
practice standards must I meet?

    (a) Storage tanks. For each storage tank storing organic liquids 
that meets the tank capacity and liquid vapor pressure criteria for 
control in Table 2 to this subpart, items 1 through 5, you must comply 
with paragraph (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this section. For each storage 
tank storing organic liquids that meets the tank capacity and liquid 
vapor pressure criteria for control in Table 2 to this subpart, item 6, 
you must comply with paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
    (1) Meet the emission limits specified in Table 2 to this subpart 
and comply with the applicable requirements specified in 40 CFR part 
63, subpart SS, for meeting emission limits, except substitute the term 
``storage tank'' at each occurrence of the term ``storage vessel'' in 
subpart SS.
    (2) Route emissions to fuel gas systems or back into the process as 
specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS.
    (3) Comply with 40 CFR part 63, subpart WW (control level 2).
    (b) Transfer racks. For each transfer rack that meets the facility-
level organic liquid loading volume and transfer rack organic HAP 
content criteria for control in Table 2 to this subpart, items 7 
through 9, you must comply with paragraph (b)(1), (2), or (3) of this 
section.
    (1) Meet the emission limits specified in Table 2 to this subpart 
and comply with the applicable requirements for transfer racks 
specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS, for meeting emission limits.
    (2) Route emissions to fuel gas systems or back into the process as 
specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS.
    (3) Use a vapor balancing system that routes organic HAP vapors 
displaced from the loading of organic liquids into transport vehicles 
to the appropriate storage tank.
    (c) Equipment leak components. For each pump, valve, and sampling 
connection that operates in organic liquids service for at least 300 
hours per year, you must comply with the applicable requirements under 
40 CFR part 63, subpart TT (control level 1), subpart UU (control level 
2), or subpart H. Pumps, valves, and sampling connectors that are 
insulated to provide protection against persistent sub-freezing 
temperatures are subject to the ``difficult to monitor'' provisions in 
the applicable subpart selected by the owner or operator. This 
paragraph only applies if the affected source has at least one storage 
tank or transfer rack that meets the applicability criteria for control 
in Table 2 to this subpart.
    (d) Transport vehicles. For each transport vehicle equipped with 
vapor collection equipment, you must comply with paragraph (d)(1) of 
this section. For each transport vehicle without vapor collection 
equipment, you must comply with paragraph (d)(2) of this section.
    (1) Follow the steps in 40 CFR 60.502(e) to ensure that organic 
liquids are loaded only into vapor-tight transport vehicles and comply 
with the provisions in 40 CFR 60.502(f) through (i), except substitute 
the term ``transport vehicle'' at each occurrence of the term ``tank 
truck'' or ``gasoline tank truck'' in those paragraphs.
    (2) Ensure that organic liquids are loaded only into transport 
vehicles that have a current certification in accordance with the U.S. 
Department of Transportation (DOT) pressure test requirements in 49 CFR 
part 180 for cargo tanks or 49 CFR 173.31 for tank cars.
    (e) Operating limits. For each high throughput transfer rack, you 
must meet each operating limit in Table 3 to this subpart for each 
control device used to comply with the provisions of this subpart 
whenever emissions from organic liquids are routed to the control 
device. For each storage tank and low throughput transfer rack, you 
must comply with the requirements for monitored parameters as specified 
in subpart SS of this part for storage vessels and low throughput 
transfer racks, respectively. Alternatively, you may comply with the 
operating limits in Table 3 to this subpart.
    (f) If you elect to demonstrate compliance with a percent reduction 
requirement in Table 2 to this subpart using total organic compounds 
(TOC) rather than organic HAP, you must first demonstrate, subject to 
approval of the Administrator, that TOC is an appropriate surrogate for 
organic HAP in your case; that is, for your storage tank(s) and/or 
transfer rack(s), the percent destruction of organic HAP is equal to or 
higher than the percent destruction of TOC. This demonstration must be 
conducted prior to or during the initial compliance test.
    (g) As provided in Sec. 63.6(g), you may request approval from the 
Administrator to use an alternative to the emission limitations, 
operating limits, and work practice standards in this section. You must 
follow the procedures in Sec. 63.177(b) through (e) in applying for 
permission to use such an alternative. If you apply for permission to 
use an alternative to the emission limitations, operating limits, and 
work practice standards in this section, you must submit the 
information described in Sec. 63.6(g)(2).
    (h) Emission sources that are part of the affected source as 
specified in Sec. 63.2338, but which are not subject to the provisions 
of paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, are only subject to the 
requirements specified in Sec. 63.2386(d).
    (i) Opening of a safety device is allowed at any time that it is 
required to avoid unsafe operating conditions.
    (j) If you elect to comply with this subpart by combining emissions 
from different emission sources subject to this subpart in a single 
control device, then you must comply with the provisions specified in 
Sec. 63.982(f).

General Compliance Requirements


Sec. 63.2350  What are my general requirements for complying with this 
subpart?

    (a) You must be in compliance with the emission limitations, 
operating limits, and work practice standards in this subpart at all 
times when the equipment identified in Sec. 63.2338(b)(1) through (4) 
is in OLD operation.
    (b) You must always operate and maintain your affected source, 
including air pollution control and monitoring equipment, according to 
the provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i).
    (c) You must develop and implement a written startup, shutdown, and 
malfunction (SSM) plan according to the provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(3).

Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements


Sec. 63.2354  What performance tests, design evaluations, and 
performance evaluations must I conduct?

    (a)(1) For each performance test that you conduct, you must use the 
procedures specified in subpart SS of this part and the provisions 
specified in paragraph (b) of this section.
    (2) For each design evaluation you conduct, you must use the 
procedures specified in subpart SS of this part.

[[Page 5066]]

    (3) For each performance evaluation of each continuous monitoring 
system (CMS) you conduct, you must follow the requirements in Sec. 
63.8(e).
    (b)(1) For nonflare control devices, you must conduct each 
performance test according to the requirements in Sec. 63.7(e)(1), and 
either Sec. 63.988(b), Sec. 63.990(b), or Sec. 63.995(b), using the 
procedures specified in Sec. 63.997(e).
    (2) You must conduct three separate test runs for each performance 
test on a nonflare control device as specified in Sec.Sec. 63.7(e)(3) 
and 63.997(e)(1)(v). Each test run must last at least 1 hour, except as 
provided in Sec. 63.997(e)(1)(v)(A) and (B).
    (3)(i) In addition to EPA Method 25 or 25A of 40 CFR part 60, 
appendix A, to determine compliance with the organic HAP or TOC 
emission limit, you may use EPA Method 18 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix 
A. If you use EPA Method 18 to measure compliance with the percentage 
efficiency limit, you must first determine which organic HAP are 
present in the inlet gas stream (i.e., uncontrolled emissions) using 
knowledge of the organic liquids or the screening procedure described 
in EPA Method 18. In conducting the performance test, you must analyze 
samples collected as specified in EPA Method 18, simultaneously at the 
inlet and outlet of the control device. Quantify the emissions for the 
same organic HAP identified as present in the inlet gas stream for both 
the inlet and outlet gas streams of the control device.
    (ii) If you use EPA Method 18 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, to 
measure compliance with the emission concentration limit, you must 
first determine which organic HAP are present in the inlet gas stream 
using knowledge of the organic liquids or the screening procedure 
described in EPA Method 18. In conducting the performance test, analyze 
samples collected as specified in EPA Method 18 at the outlet of the 
control device. Quantify the control device outlet emission 
concentration for the same organic HAP identified as present in the 
inlet or uncontrolled gas stream.
    (4) If a principal component of the uncontrolled or inlet gas 
stream to the control device is formaldehyde, you may use EPA Method 
316 of appendix A of this part instead of EPA Method 18 of 40 CFR part 
60, appendix A, for measuring the formaldehyde. If formaldehyde is the 
predominant organic HAP in the inlet gas stream, you may use EPA Method 
316 alone to measure formaldehyde either at the inlet and outlet of the 
control device using the formaldehyde control efficiency as a surrogate 
for total organic HAP or TOC efficiency, or at the outlet of a 
combustion device for determining compliance with the emission 
concentration limit.
    (5) You may not conduct performance tests during periods of SSM, as 
specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(1).
    (c) To determine the HAP content of the organic liquid, you may use 
EPA Method 311 of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A, or other method approved 
by the Administrator. In addition, you may use other means, such as 
voluntary consensus standards, material safety data sheets (MSDS), or 
certified product data sheets, to determine the HAP content of the 
organic liquid. If the method you select to determine the HAP content 
provides HAP content ranges, you must use the upper end of each HAP 
content range in determining the total HAP content of the organic 
liquid. The EPA may require you to test the HAP content of an organic 
liquid using EPA Method 311 or other method approved by the 
Administrator. If the results of the EPA Method 311 (or any other 
approved method) are different from the HAP content determined by 
another means, the EPA Method 311 (or approved method) results will 
govern.


Sec. 63.2358  By what date must I conduct performance tests and other 
initial compliance demonstrations?

    (a) You must conduct initial performance tests and design 
evaluations according to the schedule in Sec. 63.7(a)(2), or by the 
compliance date specified in any applicable State or Federal new source 
review construction permit to which the affected source is already 
subject, whichever is earlier.
    (b)(1) For storage tanks and transfer racks at existing affected 
sources complying with the emission limitations listed in Table 2 to 
this subpart, you must demonstrate initial compliance with the emission 
limitations within 180 days after February 5, 2007.
    (2) For storage tanks and transfer racks at reconstructed or new 
affected sources complying with the emission limitations listed in 
Table 2 to this subpart, you must conduct your initial compliance 
demonstration with the emission limitations within 180 days after the 
initial startup date for the affected source or February 3, 2004, 
whichever is later.
    (c)(1) For storage tanks at existing affected sources complying 
with the work practice standard in Table 4 to this subpart, you must 
conduct your initial compliance demonstration the next time the storage 
tank is emptied and degassed, but not later than 10 years after 
February 3, 2004.
    (2) For transfer racks and equipment leak components at existing 
affected sources complying with the work practice standards in Table 4 
to this subpart, you must conduct your initial compliance demonstration 
within 180 days after February 5, 2007.
    (d) For storage tanks, transfer racks, and equipment leak 
components at reconstructed or new affected sources complying with the 
work practice standards in Table 4 to this subpart, you must conduct 
your initial compliance demonstration within 180 days after the initial 
startup date for the affected source.


Sec. 63.2362  When must I conduct subsequent performance tests?

    (a) For nonflare control devices, you must conduct subsequent 
performance testing required in Table 5 to this subpart, item 1, at any 
time the EPA requests you to in accordance with section 114 of the CAA.
    (b)(1) For each transport vehicle that you own that is equipped 
with vapor collection equipment and loads organic liquids at an 
affected transfer rack, you must perform the vapor tightness testing 
required in Table 5 to this subpart, item 2, on that transport vehicle 
at least once per year.
    (2) For transport vehicles that you own that do not have vapor 
collection equipment, you must maintain current certification in 
accordance with the U.S. DOT pressure test requirements in 49 CFR part 
180 for cargo tanks or 49 CFR 173.31 for tank cars.


Sec. 63.2366  What are my monitoring installation, operation, and 
maintenance requirements?

    (a) You must install, operate, and maintain a CMS on each control 
device required in order to comply with this subpart. If you use a 
continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) (as defined in Sec. 
63.981), you must comply with the applicable requirements for CPMS in 
subpart SS of this part for the control device being used. If you use a 
continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS), you must comply with the 
requirements in Sec. 63.8.
    (b) For nonflare control devices controlling storage tanks and low 
throughput transfer racks, you must submit a monitoring plan according 
to the requirements in subpart SS of this part for monitoring plans.


Sec. 63.2370  How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission 
limitations, operating limits, and work practice standards?

    (a) You must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission 
limitation and work practice standard

[[Page 5067]]

that applies to you as specified in Tables 6 and 7 to this subpart.
    (b) You demonstrate initial compliance with the operating limits 
requirements specified in Sec. 63.2346(e) by establishing the operating 
limits during the initial performance test or design evaluation.
    (c) You must submit the results of the initial compliance 
demonstration in the Notification of Compliance Status according to the 
requirements in Sec. 63.2382(b).

Continuous Compliance Requirements


Sec. 63.2374  When do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate 
continuous compliance and how do I use the collected data?

    (a) You must monitor and collect data according to subpart SS of 
this part and paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.
    (b) When using a control device to comply with this subpart, you 
must monitor continuously or collect data at all required intervals at 
all times that the emission source and control device are in OLD 
operation, except for CMS malfunctions (including any malfunction 
preventing the CMS from operating properly), associated repairs, and 
required quality assurance or control activities (including, as 
applicable, calibration checks and required zero and span adjustments).
    (c) Do not use data recorded during CMS malfunctions, associated 
repairs, required quality assurance or control activities, or periods 
when emissions from organic liquids are not routed to the control 
device in data averages and calculations used to report emission or 
operating levels. Do not use such data in fulfilling a minimum data 
availability requirement, if applicable. You must use all of the data 
collected during all other periods, including periods of SSM, in 
assessing the operation of the control device.


Sec. 63.2378  How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the 
emission limitations, operating limits, and work practice standards?

    (a) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with each emission 
limitation, operating limit, and work practice standard in Tables 2 
through 4 to this subpart that applies to you according to the methods 
specified in subpart SS of this part and in Tables 8 through 10 to this 
subpart, as applicable.
    (b) You must follow the requirements in Sec. 63.6(e)(1) and (3) 
during periods of startup, shutdown, malfunction, or nonoperation of 
the affected source or any part thereof. In addition, the provisions of 
paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section apply.
    (1) The emission limitations in this subpart apply at all times 
except during periods of nonoperation of the affected source (or 
specific portion thereof) resulting in cessation of the emissions to 
which this subpart applies. The emission limitations of this subpart 
apply during periods of SSM, except as provided in paragraphs (b)(2) 
and (3) of this section. During periods of SSM, the owner or operator 
must follow the applicable provisions of the SSM plan required by Sec. 
63.2350(c). However, if a SSM, or period of nonoperation of one portion 
of the affected source does not affect the ability of a particular 
emission source to comply with the emission limitations to which it is 
subject, then that emission source is still required to comply with the 
applicable emission limitations of this subpart during the startup, 
shutdown, malfunction, or period of nonoperation.
    (2) The owner or operator must not shut down control devices or 
monitoring systems that are required or utilized for achieving 
compliance with this subpart during periods of SSM while emissions are 
being routed to such items of equipment if the shutdown would 
contravene requirements of this subpart applicable to such items of 
equipment. This paragraph (b)(2) does not apply if the item of 
equipment is malfunctioning. This paragraph (b)(2) also does not apply 
if the owner or operator shuts down the compliance equipment (other 
than monitoring systems) to avoid damage due to a contemporaneous SSM 
of the affected source or portion thereof. If the owner or operator has 
reason to believe that monitoring equipment would be damaged due to a 
contemporaneous SSM of the affected source of portion thereof, the 
owner or operator must provide documentation supporting such a claim in 
the next Compliance report required in Table 11 to this subpart, item 
1. Once approved by the Administrator, the provision for ceasing to 
collect, during a SSM, monitoring data that would otherwise be required 
by the provisions of this subpart must be incorporated into the SSM 
plan.
    (3) During SSM, you must implement, to the extent reasonably 
available, measures to prevent or minimize excess emissions. For 
purposes of this paragraph (b)(3), the term ``excess emissions'' means 
emissions greater than those allowed by the emission limits that apply 
during normal operational periods. The measures to be taken must be 
identified in the SSM plan, and may include, but are not limited to, 
air pollution control technologies, recovery technologies, work 
practices, pollution prevention, monitoring, and/or changes in the 
manner of operation of the affected source. Back-up control devices are 
not required, but may be used if available.
    (c) Periods of planned routine maintenance of a control device used 
to control storage tanks or transfer racks, during which the control 
device does not meet the emission limits in Table 2 to this subpart, 
must not exceed 240 hours per year.
    (d) If you elect to route emissions from storage tanks or transfer 
racks to a fuel gas system or to a process, as allowed by Sec. 
63.982(d), to comply with the emission limits in Table 2 to this 
subpart, the total aggregate amount of time during which the emissions 
bypass the fuel gas system or process during the calendar year without 
being routed to a control device, for all reasons (except SSM or 
product changeovers of flexible operation units and periods when a 
storage tank has been emptied and degassed), must not exceed 240 hours.

Notifications, Reports, and Records


Sec. 63.2382  What notifications must I submit and when and what 
information should be submitted?

    (a) You must submit each notification in subpart SS of this part, 
Table 12 to this subpart, and paragraphs (b) through (d) of this 
section that applies to you. You must submit these notifications 
according to the schedule in Table 12 to this subpart and as specified 
in paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section.
    (b)(1) Initial Notification. 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.
    (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.
    (c) If you are required to conduct a performance test, you must 
submit the Notification of Intent to conduct the test at least 60 
calendar days before it is initially scheduled to begin as required in 
Sec. 63.7(b)(1).
    (d)(1) Notification of Compliance Status. If you are required to 
conduct a performance test, design evaluation, or other initial 
compliance demonstration as specified in Table 5, 6, or 7 to this 
subpart, you must submit a Notification of Compliance Status.
    (2) The Notification of Compliance Status must include the 
information required in Sec. 63.999(b) and in paragraphs (d)(2)(i) 
through (viii) of this section.

[[Page 5068]]

    (i) The results of any applicability determinations, emission 
calculations, or analyses used to identify and quantify organic HAP 
emissions from the affected source.
    (ii) The results of emissions profiles, performance tests, 
engineering analyses, design evaluations, flare compliance assessments, 
inspections and repairs, and calculations used to demonstrate initial 
compliance according to Tables 6 and 7 to this subpart. For performance 
tests, results must include descriptions of sampling and analysis 
procedures and quality assurance procedures.
    (iii) Descriptions of monitoring devices, monitoring frequencies, 
and the operating limits established during the initial compliance 
demonstrations, including data and calculations to support the levels 
you establish.
    (iv) Listing of all operating scenarios.
    (v) Descriptions of worst-case operating and/or testing conditions 
for the control device(s).
    (vi) Identification of emission sources subject to overlapping 
requirements described in Sec. 63.2396 and the authority under which 
you will comply.
    (vii) The applicable information specified in Sec. 63.1039(a)(1) 
through (3) for all pumps and valves subject to the work practice 
standards for equipment leak components in Table 4 to this subpart, 
item 3.
    (viii) If you are complying with the vapor balancing work practice 
standard for transfer racks according to Table 4 to this subpart, item 
2.a, include a statement to that effect, and a statement that the 
pressure vent settings on the affected storage tanks are greater than 
or equal to 2.5 pounds per square inch gauge (psig).


Sec. 63.2386  What reports must I submit and when and what information 
is to be submitted in each?

    (a) You must submit each report in subpart SS of this part, Table 
11 to this subpart, Table 12 to this subpart, and in paragraphs (c) 
through (e) of this section that applies to you.
    (b) Unless the Administrator has approved a different schedule for 
submission of reports under Sec. 63.10(a), you must submit each report 
according to Table 11 to this subpart and by the dates shown in 
paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section, by the dates shown in 
subpart SS of this part, and by the dates shown in Table 12 to this 
subpart, whichever are applicable.
    (1)(i) The first Compliance report must cover the period beginning 
on the compliance date that is specified for your affected source in 
Sec. 63.2342 and ending on June 30 or December 31, whichever date is 
the first date following the end of the first calendar half after the 
compliance date that is specified for your affected source in Sec. 
63.2342.
    (ii) The first Compliance report must be postmarked no later than 
July 31 or January 31, whichever date follows the end of the first 
calendar half after the compliance date that is specified for your 
affected source in Sec. 63.2342.
    (2)(i) Each subsequent Compliance report must cover the semiannual 
reporting period from January 1 through June 30 or the semiannual 
reporting period from July 1 through December 31.
    (ii) Each subsequent Compliance report must be postmarked no later 
than July 31 or January 31, whichever date is the first date following 
the end of the semiannual reporting period.
    (3) For each affected source that is subject to permitting 
regulations pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, if the 
permitting authority has established dates for submitting semiannual 
reports pursuant to 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), 
you may submit the first and subsequent Compliance reports according to 
the dates the permitting authority has established instead of according 
to the dates in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section.
    (c) First Compliance report. The first Compliance report must 
contain the information specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (10) of 
this section.
    (1) Company name and address.
    (2) Statement by a responsible official, including the official's 
name, title, and signature, certifying that, based on information and 
belief formed after reasonable inquiry, the statements and information 
in the report are true, accurate, and complete.
    (3) Date of report and beginning and ending dates of the reporting 
period.
    (4) Any changes to the information listed in Sec. 63.2382(d)(1) 
that have occurred since the submittal of the Notification of 
Compliance Status.
    (5) If you had a SSM during the reporting period and you took 
actions consistent with your SSM plan, the Compliance report must 
include the information described in Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(i).
    (6) If there are no deviations from any emission limitation or 
operating limit that applies to you and there are no deviations from 
the requirements for work practice standards, a statement that there 
were no deviations from the emission limitations, operating limits, or 
work practice standards during the reporting period.
    (7) If there were no periods during which the CMS was out of 
control as specified in Sec. 63.8(c)(7), a statement that there were no 
periods during which the CMS was out of control during the reporting 
period.
    (8) For closed vent systems and control devices used to control 
emissions, the information specified in paragraphs (c)(8)(i) and (ii) 
of this section for those planned routine maintenance activities that 
would require the control device to not meet the applicable emission 
limit.
    (i) A description of the planned routine maintenance that is 
anticipated to be performed for the control device during the next 6 
months. This description must include the type of maintenance 
necessary, planned frequency of maintenance, and lengths of maintenance 
periods.
    (ii) A description of the planned routine maintenance that was 
performed for the control device during the previous 6 months. This 
description must include the type of maintenance performed and the 
total number of hours during those 6 months that the control device did 
not meet the applicable emission limit due to planned routine 
maintenance.
    (9) A listing of all emission sources that are part of the affected 
source but are not subject to any of the emission limitations, 
operating limits, or work practice standards of this subpart.
    (10) A listing of all transport vehicles into which organic liquids 
were loaded at affected transfer racks during the previous 6 months for 
which vapor tightness documentation as required in Sec. 63.2390(d) was 
not on file at the facility.
    (d) Subsequent Compliance reports. Subsequent Compliance reports 
must contain the information in paragraphs (c)(1) through (10) of this 
section and, where applicable, the information in paragraphs (d)(1) 
through (3) of this section.
    (1) For each deviation from an emission limitation occurring at an 
affected source where you are using a CMS to comply with an emission 
limitation in this subpart, you must include in the Compliance report 
the applicable information in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through (xii) of 
this section. This includes periods of SSM.
    (i) The date and time that each malfunction started and stopped.
    (ii) The dates and times that each CMS was inoperative, except for 
zero (low-level) and high-level checks.
    (iii) For each CMS that was out of control, the information in Sec. 
63.8(c)(8).
    (iv) The date and time that each deviation started and stopped, and 
whether each deviation occurred during a period of SSM, or during 
another period.

[[Page 5069]]

    (v) A summary of the total duration of the deviations during the 
reporting period, and the total duration as a percentage of the total 
emission source operating time during that reporting period.
    (vi) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations during the 
reporting period into those that are due to startup, shutdown, control 
equipment problems, process problems, other known causes, and other 
unknown causes.
    (vii) A summary of the total duration of CMS downtime during the 
reporting period, and the total duration of CMS downtime as a 
percentage of the total emission source operating time during that 
reporting period.
    (viii) An identification of each organic HAP that was potentially 
emitted during each deviation based on the known organic HAP contained 
in the liquid(s).
    (ix) A brief description of the emission source(s) at which the CMS 
deviation(s) occurred.
    (x) A brief description of each CMS that was out of control during 
the period.
    (xi) The date of the latest certification or audit for each CMS.
    (xii) A brief description of any changes in CMS, processes, or 
controls since the last reporting period.
    (2) Include in the Compliance report the information in paragraphs 
(d)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section, as applicable.
    (i) For each storage tank and transfer rack subject to control 
requirements, include periods of planned routine maintenance during 
which the control device did not comply with the applicable emission 
limits in Table 2 to this subpart.
    (ii) For each storage tank controlled with a floating roof, include 
a copy of the inspection record (required in Sec. 63.1065(b)) when 
inspection failures occur.
    (iii) If you elect to use an extension for a floating roof 
inspection in accordance with Sec. 63.1063(c)(2)(iv)(B) or (e)(2), 
include the documentation required by those paragraphs.
    (3) Include in the Compliance report each new operating scenario 
which has occurred since the time period covered by the last Compliance 
report. For each new operating scenario, you must provide verification 
that the established operating conditions for any associated control 
device have not been exceeded and that any required calculations and 
engineering analyses have been performed.
    (e) Each affected source that has obtained a title V operating 
permit pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71 must report all 
deviations as defined in this subpart in the semiannual monitoring 
report required by 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A). If 
an affected source submits a Compliance report pursuant to Table 11 to 
this subpart along with, or as part of, the semiannual monitoring 
report required by 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), and 
the Compliance report includes all required information concerning 
deviations from any emission limitation in this subpart, we will 
consider submission of the Compliance report as satisfying any 
obligation to report the same deviations in the semiannual monitoring 
report. However, submission of a Compliance report will not otherwise 
affect any obligation the affected source may have to report deviations 
from permit requirements to the applicable title V permitting 
authority.


Sec. 63.2390  What records must I keep?

    (a) You must keep all records identified in subpart SS of this part 
and in Table 12 to this subpart that are applicable, including records 
related to notifications and reports, SSM, performance tests, CMS, and 
performance evaluation plans.
    (b) You must keep the records required to show continuous 
compliance, as required in subpart SS of this part and in Tables 8 
through 10 to this subpart, with each emission limitation, operating 
limit, and work practice standard that applies to you.
    (c) For each transport vehicle into which organic liquids are 
loaded at an affected transfer rack, you must keep the applicable 
records in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) For transport vehicles equipped with vapor collection 
equipment, the documentation described in 40 CFR 60.505(b), except that 
the test title is: Transport Vehicle Pressure Test-EPA Reference Method 
27.
    (2) For transport vehicles without vapor collection equipment, 
current certification in accordance with the U.S. DOT pressure test 
requirements in 49 CFR part 180 for cargo tanks or 49 CFR 173.31 for 
tank cars.
    (3) You must keep records of the actual annual facility-level 
organic liquid loading volume through transfer racks out of the 
facility to document the applicability of the emission limitations in 
Table 2, items 7 through 10, to this subpart.


Sec. 63.2394  In what form and how long must I keep my records?

    (a) Your records must be in a form suitable and readily available 
for expeditious inspection and review according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1). In 
addition, on-site records may be stored in electronic form at a 
separate location from the site provided they can be accessed and 
printed at the site within 1 hour after a request by the applicable 
title V permitting authority.
    (b) As specified in Sec. 63.10(b)(1), you must keep your files of 
all information (including all reports and notifications) for at least 
5 years following the date of each occurrence, measurement, 
maintenance, corrective action, report, or record.
    (c) You must keep each record on site for at least 2 years after 
the date of each occurrence, measurement, maintenance, corrective 
action, report, or record, according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1). You may keep 
the records off site for the remaining 3 years.

Other Requirements and Information


Sec. 63.2396  What compliance options do I have if part of my plant is 
subject to both this subpart and another subpart?

    (a) Compliance with other regulations for storage tanks.
    (1)(i) After the compliance dates specified in Sec. 63.2342, if you 
have a storage tank that is subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb, not 
as the result of another 40 CFR part 63 subpart, and that storage tank 
is in OLD operation, you must meet all of the requirements of this 
subpart for that storage tank when the storage tank is in OLD 
operation.
    (ii) If you have a storage tank that is in compliance with 40 CFR 
part 60, subpart Kb, as the result of complying with another 40 CFR 
part 63 subpart, that storage tank is not subject to this subpart.
    (2) After the compliance dates specified in Sec. 63.2342, if you 
have a storage tank that is subject to 40 CFR part 61, subpart Y, and 
that storage tank is in OLD operation, you must meet all of the 
requirements of this subpart for that storage tank when the storage 
tank is in OLD operation.
    (b) Compliance with other regulations for transfer racks. After the 
compliance dates specified in Sec. 63.2342, if you have a transfer rack 
that is subject to 40 CFR part 61, subpart BB, and that transfer rack 
is in OLD operation, you must meet the all of the requirements of this 
subpart for that transfer rack when the transfer rack is in OLD 
operation.
    (c) Compliance with other regulations for equipment leak 
components.
    (1) After the compliance dates specified in Sec. 63.2342, if you 
have pumps, valves, or sampling connections that are subject to a 40 
CFR part 60 subpart, and those pumps, valves, and sampling connections 
are in OLD operation and in organic liquids service,

[[Page 5070]]

as defined in this subpart, you must comply with the provisions of each 
subpart for those equipment leak components.
    (2) After the compliance dates specified in Sec. 63.2342, if you 
have pumps, valves, or sampling connections subject to 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart GGG, and those pumps, valves, and sampling connections are in 
OLD operation and in organic liquids service, as defined in this 
subpart, you may elect to comply with the provisions of this subpart 
for all such equipment leak components. You must identify in the 
Notification of Compliance Status required by Sec. 63.2382(b) the 
provisions with which you will comply.
    (d) [Reserved]
    (e) Overlap with other regulations for monitoring, recordkeeping, 
or reporting with respect to control devices. After the compliance 
dates specified in Sec. 63.2342, if any control device subject to this 
subpart is also subject to monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting 
requirements of another 40 CFR part 63 subpart, the owner or operator 
must be in compliance with the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting 
requirements of this subpart EEEE. If complying with the monitoring, 
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements of the other subpart 
satisfies the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements of 
this subpart, the owner or operator may elect to continue to comply 
with the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements of the 
other subpart. In such instances, the owner or operator will be deemed 
to be in compliance with the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting 
requirements of this subpart. The owner or operator must identify the 
other subpart being complied with in the Notification of Compliance 
Status required by Sec. 63.2382(b).


Sec. 63.2398  What parts of the General Provisions apply to me?

    Table 12 to this subpart shows which parts of the General 
Provisions in Sec.Sec. 63.1 through 63.15 apply to you.


Sec. 63.2402  Who implements and enforces this subpart?

    (a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) or a delegated authority 
such as your State, local, or eligible tribal agency. If the EPA 
Administrator has delegated authority to your State, local, or eligible 
tribal agency, then that agency, as well as the EPA, has the authority 
to implement and enforce this subpart. You should contact your EPA 
Regional Office (see list in Sec. 63.13) to find out if this subpart is 
delegated to your State, local, or eligible tribal agency.
    (b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority for this 
subpart to a State, local, or eligible tribal agency under 40 CFR part 
63, subpart E, the authorities contained in paragraphs (b)(1) through 
(4) of this section are retained by the EPA Administrator and are not 
delegated to the State, local, or eligible tribal agency.
    (1) Approval of alternatives to the nonopacity emission 
limitations, operating limits, and work practice standards in Sec. 
63.2346(a) through (c) under Sec. 63.6(g).
    (2) Approval of major alternatives to test methods under Sec. 
63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f) and as defined in Sec. 63.90.
    (3) Approval of major alternatives to monitoring under Sec. 63.8(f) 
and as defined in Sec. 63.90.
    (4) Approval of major alternatives to recordkeeping and reporting 
under Sec. 63.10(f) and as defined in Sec. 63.90.


Sec. 63.2406  What definitions apply to this subpart?

    Terms used in this subpart are defined in the CAA, in Sec. 63.2, 
and in this section. If the same term is defined in another subpart and 
in this section, it will have the meaning given in this section for 
purposes of this subpart.
    Actual annual average temperature, for organic liquids, means the 
temperature determined using the following methods:
    (1) For heated or cooled storage tanks, use the calculated annual 
average temperature of the stored organic liquid as determined from a 
design analysis of the storage tank.
    (2) For ambient temperature storage tanks:
    (i) Use the annual average of the local (nearest) normal daily mean 
temperatures reported by the National Climatic Data Center; or
    (ii) Use any other method that the EPA approves.
    Annual average true vapor pressure means the equilibrium partial 
pressure exerted by the total organic HAP in the stored or transferred 
organic liquid. For the purpose of determining if a liquid meets the 
definition of an organic liquid, the vapor pressure is determined using 
standard conditions of 77 degrees F and 29.92 inches of mercury. For 
the purpose of determining whether an organic liquid meets the 
applicability criteria in Table 2, items 1 through 6, to this subpart, 
use the actual annual average temperature as defined in this subpart. 
The vapor pressure value in either of these cases is determined:
    (1) In accordance with methods described in American Petroleum 
Institute Publication 2517, Evaporative Loss from External Floating-
Roof Tanks (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14);
    (2) Using standard reference texts;
    (3) By the American Society for Testing and Materials Method D2879-
83, 96 (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 63.14); or
    (4) Using any other method that the EPA approves.
    Cargo tank means a liquid-carrying tank permanently attached and 
forming an integral part of a motor vehicle or truck trailer. This term 
also refers to the entire cargo tank motor vehicle or trailer. For the 
purpose of this subpart, vacuum trucks used exclusively for maintenance 
or spill response are not considered cargo tanks.
    Closed vent system means a system that is not open to the 
atmosphere and is composed of piping, ductwork, connections, and, if 
necessary, flow-inducing devices that transport gas or vapors from an 
emission point to a control device. This system does not include the 
vapor collection system that is part of some transport vehicles or the 
loading arm or hose that is used for vapor return. For transfer racks, 
the closed vent system begins at, and includes, the first block valve 
on the downstream side of the loading arm or hose used to convey 
displaced vapors.
    Combustion device means an individual unit of equipment, such as a 
flare, oxidizer, catalytic oxidizer, process heater, or boiler, used 
for the combustion of organic emissions.
    Container means a portable unit in which a material can be stored, 
transported, treated, disposed of, or otherwise handled. Examples of 
containers include, but are not limited to, drums and portable cargo 
containers known as ``portable tanks'' or ``totes.''
    Control device means any combustion device, recovery device, 
recapture device, or any combination of these devices used to comply 
with this subpart. Such equipment or devices include, but are not 
limited to, absorbers, adsorbers, condensers, and combustion devices. 
Primary condensers, steam strippers, and fuel gas systems are not 
considered control devices.
    Crude oil means any of the naturally occurring liquids commonly 
referred to as crude oil, regardless of specific physical properties. 
Only those crude oils downstream of the first point of custody transfer 
after the production field are considered crude oils in this subpart.
    Custody transfer means the transfer of hydrocarbon liquids after 
processing and/or treatment in the producing operations, or from 
storage tanks or

[[Page 5071]]

automatic transfer facilities to pipelines or any other forms of 
transportation.
    Design evaluation means a procedure for evaluating control devices 
that complies with the requirements in Sec. 63.985(b)(1)(i).
    Deviation means any instance in which an affected source subject to 
this subpart, or portion thereof, or an owner or operator of such a 
source:
    (1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this 
subpart including, but not limited to, any emission limitation 
(including any operating limit) or work practice standard;
    (2) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to 
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart, and that is 
included in the operating permit for any affected source required to 
obtain such a permit; or
    (3) Fails to meet any emission limitation (including any operating 
limit) or work practice standard in this subpart during SSM.
    Emission limitation means an emission limit, opacity limit, 
operating limit, or visible emission limit.
    Equipment leak component means each pump, valve, and sampling 
connection system used in organic liquids service at an OLD operation. 
Valve types include control, globe, gate, plug, and ball. Relief and 
check valves are excluded.
    Gasoline means any petroleum distillate or petroleum distillate/
alcohol blend having a Reid vapor pressure of 27.6 kilopascals (4.0 
pounds per square inch absolute (psia)) or greater which is used as a 
fuel for internal combustion engines. Aviation gasoline is included in 
this definition.
    In organic liquids service means that an equipment leak component 
contains or contacts organic liquids having 5 percent by weight or 
greater of the organic HAP listed in Table 1 to this subpart.
    On-site or on site means, with respect to records required to be 
maintained by this subpart or required by another subpart referenced by 
this subpart, that records are stored at a location within a major 
source which encompasses the affected source. On-site includes, but is 
not limited to, storage at the affected source to which the records 
pertain, storage in central files elsewhere at the major source, or 
electronically available at the site.
    Organic liquid means:
    (1) Any non-crude oil liquid or liquid mixture that contains 5 
percent by weight or greater of the organic HAP listed in Table 1 to 
this subpart, as determined using the procedures specified in Sec. 
63.2354(c).
    (2) Any crude oils downstream of the first point of custody 
transfer.
    (3) Organic liquids for purposes of this subpart do not include the 
following liquids:
    (i) Gasoline (including aviation gasoline), kerosene (No. 1 
distillate oil), diesel (No. 2 distillate oil), asphalt, and heavier 
distillate oils and fuel oils;
    (ii) Any fuel consumed or dispensed on the plant site directly to 
users (such as fuels for fleet refueling or for refueling marine 
vessels that support the operation of the plant);
    (iii) Hazardous waste;
    (iv) Wastewater;
    (v) Ballast water: or
    (vi) Any non-crude oil liquid with an annual average true vapor 
pressure less than 0.7 kilopascals (0.1 psia).
    Organic liquids distribution (OLD) operation means the combination 
of activities and equipment used to store or transfer organic liquids 
into, out of, or within a plant site regardless of the specific 
activity being performed. Activities include, but are not limited to, 
storage, transfer, blending, compounding, and packaging.
    Permitting authority means one of the following:
    (1) The State Air Pollution Control Agency, local agency, or other 
agency authorized by the EPA Administrator to carry out a permit 
program under 40 CFR part 70; or
    (2) The EPA Administrator, in the case of EPA-implemented permit 
programs under title V of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7661) and 40 CFR part 71.
    Plant site means all contiguous or adjoining surface property that 
is under common control, including surface properties that are 
separated only by a road or other public right-of-way. Common control 
includes surface properties that are owned, leased, or operated by the 
same entity, parent entity, subsidiary, or any combination.
    Research and development facility means laboratory and pilot plant 
operations whose primary purpose is to conduct research and development 
into new processes and products, where the operations are under the 
close supervision of technically trained personnel, and which are not 
engaged in the manufacture of products for commercial sale, except in a 
de minimis manner.
    Responsible official means responsible official as defined in 40 
CFR 70.2 and 40 CFR 71.2, as applicable.
    Safety device means a closure device such as a pressure relief 
valve, frangible disc, fusible plug, or any other type of device that 
functions exclusively to prevent physical damage or permanent 
deformation to a unit or its air emission control equipment by venting 
gases or vapors directly to the atmosphere during unsafe conditions 
resulting from an unplanned, accidental, or emergency event.
    Shutdown means the cessation of operation of an OLD affected 
source, or portion thereof, required or used to comply with this 
subpart, or the emptying and degassing of a storage tank. Shutdown as 
defined here includes, but is not limited to, events that result from 
periodic maintenance, replacement of equipment, or repair.
    Startup means the setting in operation of an OLD affected source, 
or portion thereof, for any purpose. Startup also includes the placing 
in operation of any individual piece of equipment required or used to 
comply with this subpart including, but not limited to, control devices 
and monitors.
    Storage tank means a stationary unit that is constructed primarily 
of nonearthen materials (such as wood, concrete, steel, or reinforced 
plastic) that provide structural support and is designed to hold a bulk 
quantity of liquid. Storage tanks do not include:
    (1) Units permanently attached to conveyances such as trucks, 
trailers, rail cars, barges, or ships;
    (2) Pressure vessels designed to operate in excess of 204.9 
kilopascals and without emissions to the atmosphere;
    (3) Bottoms receiver tanks;
    (4) Surge control vessels;
    (5) Vessels storing wastewater; or
    (6) Reactor vessels associated with a manufacturing process unit.
    Tank car means a car designed to carry liquid freight by rail, and 
including a permanently attached tank.
    Transfer rack means a single system used to load organic liquids 
into transport vehicles. It includes all loading arms, pumps, meters, 
shutoff valves, relief valves, and other piping and equipment necessary 
for the transfer operation. Transfer equipment and operations that are 
physically separate (i.e., do not share common piping, valves, and 
other equipment) are considered to be separate transfer racks.
    Transport vehicle means a cargo tank or tank car.
    Vapor balancing system means a piping system that collects organic 
HAP vapors displaced from transport vehicles during loading and routes 
the collected vapors to the storage tank from which the liquid being 
loaded originated or compresses the vapors for feeding into a chemical 
manufacturing process unit.
    Vapor collection system means any equipment located at the source 
(i.e., at the OLD operation) that is not open to

[[Page 5072]]

the atmosphere; that is composed of piping, connections, and, if 
necessary, flow-inducing devices; and that is used for containing and 
conveying vapors displaced during the loading of transport vehicles to 
a control device or for vapor balancing. This does not include any of 
the vapor collection equipment that is installed on the transport 
vehicle.
    Vapor-tight transport vehicle means a transport vehicle that has 
been demonstrated to be vapor-tight. To be considered vapor-tight, a 
transport vehicle equipped with vapor collection equipment must undergo 
a pressure change of no more than 250 pascals (1 inch of water) within 
5 minutes after it is pressurized to 4,500 pascals (18 inches of 
water). This capability must be demonstrated annually using the 
procedures specified in EPA Method 27 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A. 
For all other transport vehicles, vapor tightness is demonstrated by 
performing the U.S. DOT pressure test procedures for tank cars and 
cargo tanks.
    Work practice standard means any design, equipment, work practice, 
or operational standard, or combination thereof, that is promulgated 
pursuant to section 112(h) of the CAA.

Tables to Subpart EEEE of Part 63

    You must use the organic HAP information listed in the following 
table to determine which of the liquids handled at your facility meet 
the HAP content criteria in the definition of Organic Liquid in Sec. 
63.2406.

  Table 1 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.--Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Compound name                          CAS No.\1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2,4-D salts and esters.....................................      94-75-7
Acetaldehyde...............................................      75-07-0
Acetonitrile...............................................      75-05-8
Acetophenone...............................................      98-86-2
Acrolein...................................................     107-02-8
Acrylamide.................................................      79-06-1
Acrylic acid...............................................      79-10-7
Acrylonitrile..............................................     107-13-1
Allyl chloride.............................................     107-05-1
Aniline....................................................      62-53-3
Benzene....................................................      71-43-2
Biphenyl...................................................      92-52-4
Butadiene (1,3-)...........................................     106-99-0
Carbon tetrachloride.......................................      56-23-5
Chloroacetic acid..........................................      79-11-8
Chlorobenzene..............................................     108-90-7
2-Chloro-1,3-butadiene (Chloroprene).......................     126-99-8
Chloroform.................................................      67-66-3
m-Cresol...................................................     108-39-4
o-Cresol...................................................      95-48-7
p-Cresol...................................................     106-44-5
Cresols/cresylic acid......................................    1319-77-3
Cumene.....................................................      98-82-8
Dibenzofurans..............................................     132-64-9
Dibutylphthalate...........................................      84-74-2
Dichloroethane (1,2-) (Ethylene dichloride) (EDC)..........     107-06-2
Dichloropropene (1,3-).....................................     542-75-6
Diethanolamine.............................................     111-42-2
Diethyl aniline (N,N-).....................................     121-69-7
Diethylene glycol monobutyl ether..........................     112-34-5
Diethylene glycol monomethyl ether.........................     111-77-3
Diethyl sulfate............................................      64-67-5
Dimethyl formamide.........................................      68-12-2
Dimethylhydrazine (1,1-)...................................      57-14-7
Dioxane (1,4-) (1,4-Diethyleneoxide).......................     123-91-1
Epichlorohydrin (1-Chloro-2,3-epoxypropane)................     106-89-8
Epoxybutane (1,2-).........................................     106-88-7
Ethyl acrylate.............................................     140-88-5
Ethylbenzene...............................................     100-41-4
Ethyl chloride (Chloroethane)..............................      75-00-3
Ethylene dibromide (Dibromomethane)........................     106-93-4
Ethylene glycol............................................     107-21-1
Ethylene glycol dimethyl ether.............................     110-71-4
Ethylene glycol monomethyl ether...........................     109-86-4
Ethylene glycol monomethyl ether acetate...................     110-49-6
Ethylene glycol monophenyl ether...........................     122-99-6
Ethylene oxide.............................................      75-21-8
Ethylidene dichloride (1,1-Dichloroethane).................      75-34-3
Formaldehyde...............................................      50-00-0
Hexachloroethane...........................................      67-72-1
Hexane.....................................................     110-54-3
Hydroquinone...............................................     123-31-9
Isophorone.................................................      78-59-1
Maleic anhydride...........................................     108-31-6
Methanol...................................................      67-56-1
Methyl chloride (Chloromethane)............................      74-87-3

[[Page 5073]]

 
Methylene chloride (Dichloromethane).......................      75-09-2
Methylenedianiline (4,4'-).................................     101-77-9
Methylene diphenyl diisocyanate............................     101-68-8
Methyl ethyl ketone (2-Butanone) (MEK).....................      78-93-3
Methyl hydrazine...........................................      60-34-4
Methyl isobutyl ketone (Hexone) (MIBK).....................     108-10-1
Methyl methacrylate........................................      80-62-6
Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE).............................    1634-04-4
Naphthalene................................................      91-20-3
Nitrobenzene...............................................      98-95-3
Phenol.....................................................     108-9-52
Phthalic anhydride.........................................      85-44-9
Polycyclic organic matter..................................      50-32-8
Propionaldehyde............................................     123-38-6
Propylene dichloride (1,2-Dichloropropane).................      78-87-5
Propylene oxide............................................      75-56-9
Quinoline..................................................      91-22-5
Styrene....................................................     100-42-5
Styrene oxide..............................................      96-09-3
Tetrachloroethane (1,1,2,2-)...............................      79-34-5
Tetrachloroethylene (Perchloroethylene)....................     127-18-4
Toluene....................................................     108-88-3
Toluene diisocyanate (2,4-)................................     584-84-9
o-Toluidine................................................      95-53-4
Trichlorobenzene (1,2,4-)..................................     120-82-1
Trichloroethane (1,1,1-) (Methyl chloroform)...............      71-55-6
Trichloroethane (1,1,2-) (Vinyl trichloride)...............      79-00-5
Trichloroethylene..........................................      79-01-6
Triethylamine..............................................     121-44-8
Trimethylpentane (2,2,4-)..................................     540-84-1
Vinyl acetate..............................................     108-05-4
Vinyl chloride (Chloroethylene)............................      75-01-4
Vinylidene chloride (1,1-Dichloroethylene).................      75-35-4
Xylene (m-)................................................     108-38-3
Xylene (o-)................................................      95-47-6
Xylene (p-)................................................     106-42-3
Xylenes (isomers and mixtures).............................    1330-20-7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ CAS numbers refer to the Chemical Abstracts Services registry number
  assigned to specific compounds, isomers, or mixtures of compounds.

    As stated in Sec. 63.2346, you must comply with the emission limits 
for the organic liquids distribution emission sources as follows:

                              Table 2 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.--Emission Limits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       If you own or operate . . .                       And if . . .                    Then you must . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. A storage tank at an existing affected  a. The stored organic liquid is not       i. Reduce emissions of
 source with a capacity [ge]18.9 cubic      crude oil and if the annual average       organic HAP (or, upon
 meters (5,000 gallons) and <189.3 cubic    true vapor pressure of the total Table    approval, TOC) by 95
 meters (50,000 gallons).                   1 organic HAP in the stored organic       weight-percent or, as an
                                            liquid is [ge]27.6 kilopascals (4.0       option, to an exhaust
                                            psia) and <76.6 kilopascals (11.1         concentration less than or
                                            psia).                                    equal to 20 parts per
                                                                                      million by volume, on a
                                                                                      dry basis corrected to 3%
                                                                                      oxygen for combustion
                                                                                      devices using supplemental
                                                                                      combustion air, by venting
                                                                                      emissions through a closed
                                                                                      vent system to any
                                                                                      combination of control
                                                                                      devices meeting the
                                                                                      applicable requirements of
                                                                                      40 CFR part 63, subpart
                                                                                      SS; OR
                                           ........................................  ii. Comply with the work
                                                                                      practice standards
                                                                                      specified in Table 4 to
                                                                                      this subpart, item 1.a,
                                                                                      for tanks storing the
                                                                                      liquids described in that
                                                                                      table.
                                           b. The stored organic liquid is crude     i. See the requirement in
                                            oil.                                      item 1.a.i or 1.a.ii of
                                                                                      this table.
2. A storage tank at an existing affected  a. The stored organic liquid is not       i. See the requirement in
 source with a capacity [ge]189.3 cubic     crude oil and if the annual average       item 1.a.i or 1.a.ii of
 meters (50,000 gallons).                   true vapor pressure of the total Table    this table.
                                            1 organic HAP in the stored organic
                                            liquid is <76.6 kilopascals (11.1
                                            psia).
                                           b. The stored organic liquid is crude     i. See the requirement in
                                            oil.                                      item 1.a.i or 1.a.ii of
                                                                                      this table.

[[Page 5074]]

 
3. A storage tank at a reconstructed or    a. The stored organic liquid is not       i. See the requirement in
 new affected source with a capacity        crude oil and if the annual average       item 1.a.i or 1.a.ii of
 [ge]18.9 cubic meters (5,000 gallons)      true vapor pressure of the total Table    this table.
 and <37.9 cubic meters (10,000 gallons).   1 organic HAP in the stored organic
                                            liquid is [ge]27.6 kilopascals (4.0
                                            psia) and <76.6 kilopascals (11.1
                                            psia).
                                           b. The stored organic liquid is crude     i. See the requirement in
                                            oil.                                      item 1.a.i or 1.a.ii of
                                                                                      this table.
4. A storage tank at a reconstructed or    a. The stored organic liquid is not       i. See the requirement in
 new affected source with a capacity        crude oil and if the annual average       item 1.a.i or 1.a.ii of
 [ge]37.9 cubic meters (10,000 gallons)     true vapor pressure of the total Table    this table.
 and <189.3 cubic meters (50,000            1 organic HAP in the stored organic
 gallons).                                  liquid is [ge]0.7 kilopascals (0.1
                                            psia) and <76.6 kilopascals (11.1
                                            psia).
                                           b. The stored organic liquid is crude     i. See the requirement in
                                            oil.                                      item 1.a.i or 1.a.ii of
                                                                                      this table.
5. A storage tank at a reconstructed or    a. The stored organic liquid is not       i. See the requirement in
 new affected source with a capacity        crude oil and if the annual average       item 1.a.i or 1.a.ii of
 [ge]189.3 cubic meters (50,000 gallons).   true vapor pressure of the total Table    this table.
                                            1 organic HAP in the stored organic
                                            liquid is <76.6 kilopascals (11.1
                                            psia).
                                           b. The stored organic liquid is crude     i. See the requirement in
                                            oil.                                      item 1.a.i or 1.a.ii of
                                                                                      this table.
6. A storage tank at an existing,          a. The stored organic liquid is not       i. Reduce emissions of
 reconstructed, or new affected source      crude oil and if the annual average       organic HAP (or, upon
 meeting the capacity criteria specified    true vapor pressure of the total Table    approval, TOC) by 95
 in Table 2, items 1 through 5 of this      1 organic HAP in the stored organic       weight-percent or, as an
 subpart.                                   liquid is [ge]76.6 kilopascals (11.1      option, to an exhaust
                                            psia).                                    concentration less than or
                                                                                      equal to 20 parts per
                                                                                      million by volume, on a
                                                                                      dry basis corrected to 3%
                                                                                      oxygen for combustion
                                                                                      devices using supplemental
                                                                                      combustion air, by venting
                                                                                      emissions through a closed
                                                                                      vent system to any
                                                                                      combination of control
                                                                                      devices meeting the
                                                                                      applicable requirements of
                                                                                      40 CFR part 63, subpart
                                                                                      SS.
7. A transfer rack at an existing          a. The organic HAP content of the         i. Reduce emissions of
 facility where the total actual annual     organic liquid through the transfer       organic HAP (or, upon
 facility-level organic liquid loading      rack is at least 98% by weight.           approval, TOC) from the
 volume through transfer racks out of the                                             loading of organic liquids
 facility is between 800,000 gallons and                                              by venting emissions
 less than 10 million gallons.                                                        through a closed vent
                                                                                      system to any combination
                                                                                      of control devices
                                                                                      achieving 98 weight-
                                                                                      percent HAP reduction, or
                                                                                      as an option to an exhaust
                                                                                      concentration less than or
                                                                                      equal to 20 parts per
                                                                                      million by volume, on a
                                                                                      dry basis corrected to 3%
                                                                                      oxygen for combustion
                                                                                      devices using supplemental
                                                                                      combustion air; AND
                                           ........................................  ii. Vent emissions through
                                                                                      a closed vent system to
                                                                                      any combination of control
                                                                                      devices meeting the
                                                                                      applicable requirements of
                                                                                      40 CFR part 63, subpart
                                                                                      SS, AND
                                           ........................................  iii. Comply with the work
                                                                                      practice standards
                                                                                      specified in Table 4 to
                                                                                      this subpart, item 2.
8. A transfer rack at an existing          ........................................  i. See the requirements in
 facility where the total actual annual                                               items 7.a.i through
 facility-level organic liquid loading                                                7.a.iii of this table.
 volume through transfer racks out of the
 facility is [ge]10 million gallons.
9. A transfer rack at a new facility       a. The organic HAP content of the         i. See the requirements in
 where the total actual annual facility-    organic liquid through the transfer       items 7.a.i through
 level organic liquid loading volume        rack is at least 25% by weight and the    7.a.iii of this table.
 through transfer racks out of the          transfer rack is used for transferring
 facility is less than 800,000 gallons.     organic liquids into transport
                                            vehicles.
                                           b. The transfer rack is used for the      i. Comply with the
                                            filling of containers with a capacity     provisions of Sec.Sec.
                                            equal to or greater than 55 gallons.      63.924 through 63.927 of
                                                                                      40 CFR part 63, Subpart PP-
                                                                                      -National Emission
                                                                                      Standards for Containers,
                                                                                      Container Level 3
                                                                                      controls.
10. A transfer rack at a new facility      a. The transfer rack is used for          i. See the requirements in
 where the total actual annual facility-    transferring organic liquids into         items 7.a.i through
 level organic liquid loading volume        transport vehicles.                       7.a.iii of this table.
 through transfer racks out of the
 facility is equal to or greater than
 800,000 gallons.
                                           b. The transfer rack is used for the      i. Comply with the
                                            filling of containers with a capacity     provisions of Sec.Sec.
                                            equal to or greater than 55 gallons.      63.924 through 63.927 of
                                                                                      40 CFR part 63, Subpart PP-
                                                                                      -National Emission
                                                                                      Standards for Containers,
                                                                                      Container Level 3
                                                                                      controls.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 5075]]

    As stated in Sec. 63.2346(e), you must comply with the operating 
limits for existing, reconstructed, or new affected sources as follows:

 Table 3 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.--Operating Limits--High Throughput
                             Transfer Racks
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   For each existing, each
 reconstructed, and each new                 You must . . .
 affected source using . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. A thermal oxidizer to       Maintain the daily average fire box or
 comply with an emission        combustion zone temperature greater than
 limit in Table 2 to this       or equal to the reference temperature
 subpart.                       established during the design evaluation
                                or performance test that demonstrated
                                compliance with the emission limit.
2. A catalytic oxidizer to     a. Replace the existing catalyst bed
 comply with an emission        before the age of the bed exceeds the
 limit in Table 2 to this       maximum allowable age established during
 subpart.                       the design evaluation or performance
                                test that demonstrated compliance with
                                the emission limit; AND
                               b. Maintain the daily average temperature
                                at the inlet of the catalyst bed greater
                                than or equal to the reference
                                temperature established during the
                                design evaluation or performance test
                                that demonstrated compliance with the
                                emission limit; AND
                               c. Maintain the daily average temperature
                                difference across the catalyst bed
                                greater than or equal to the minimum
                                temperature difference established
                                during the design evaluation or
                                performance test that demonstrated
                                compliance with the emission limit.
3. An absorber to comply with  a. Maintain the daily average
 an emission limit in Table 2   concentration level of organic compounds
 to this subpart.               in the absorber exhaust less than or
                                equal to the reference concentration
                                established during the design evaluation
                                or performance test that demonstrated
                                compliance with the emission limit; OR
                               b. Maintain the daily average scrubbing
                                liquid temperature less than or equal to
                                the reference temperature established
                                during the design evaluation or
                                performance test that demonstrated
                                compliance with the emission limit; AND
                               c. Maintain the difference between the
                                specific gravities of the saturated and
                                fresh scrubbing fluids greater than or
                                equal to the difference established
                                during the design evaluation or
                                performance test that demonstrated
                                compliance with the emission limit.
4. A condenser to comply with  a. Maintain the daily average
 an emission limit in Table 2   concentration level of organic compounds
 to this subpart.               at the condenser exit less than or equal
                                to the reference concentration
                                established during the design evaluation
                                or performance test that demonstrated
                                compliance with the emission limit; OR
                               b. Maintain the daily average condenser
                                exit temperature less than or equal to
                                the reference temperature established
                                during the design evaluation or
                                performance test that demonstrated
                                compliance with the emission limit.
5. An adsorption system with   a. Maintain the daily average
 adsorbent regeneration to      concentration level of organic compounds
 comply with an emission        in the adsorber exhaust less than or
 limit in Table 2 to this       equal to the reference concentration
 subpart                        established during the design evaluation
                                or performance test that demonstrated
                                compliance with the emission limit; OR
                               b. Maintain the total regeneration stream
                                mass flow during the adsorption bed
                                regeneration cycle greater than or equal
                                to the reference stream mass flow
                                established during the design evaluation
                                or performance test that demonstrated
                                compliance with the emission limit; AND
                               c. Before the adsorption cycle commences,
                                achieve and maintain the temperature of
                                the adsorption bed after regeneration
                                less than or equal to the reference
                                temperature established during the
                                design evaluation or performance test
                                that demonstrated compliance with the
                                emission limit; AND
                               d. Achieve a pressure reduction during
                                each adsorption bed regeneration cycle
                                greater than or equal to the pressure
                                reduction established during the design
                                evaluation or performance test that
                                demonstrated compliance with the
                                emission limit.
6. An adsorption system        a. Maintain the daily average
 without adsorbent              concentration level of organic compounds
 regeneration to comply with    in the adsorber exhaust less than or
 an emission limit in Table 2   equal to the reference concentration
 to this subpart.               established during the design evaluation
                                or performance test that demonstrated
                                compliance with the emission limit; OR
                               b. Replace the existing adsorbent in each
                                segment of the bed with an adsorbent
                                that meets the replacement
                                specifications established during the
                                design evaluation or performance test
                                before the age of the adsorbent exceeds
                                the maximum allowable age established
                                during the design evaluation or
                                performance test that demonstrated
                                compliance with the emission limit; AND
                               c. Maintain the temperature of the
                                adsorption bed less than or equal to the
                                reference temperature established during
                                the design evaluation or performance
                                test that demonstrated compliance with
                                the emission limit.
7. A flare to comply with an   a. Comply with the equipment and
 emission limit in Table 2 to   operating requirements in Sec.
 this subpart.                  63.987(a); AND
                               b. Conduct an initial flare compliance
                                assessment in accordance with Sec.
                                63.987(b); AND
                               c. Install and operate monitoring
                                equipment as specified in Sec.
                                63.987(c).
8. Another type of control     Submit a monitoring plan as specified in
 device to comply with an       Sec.Sec. 63.995(c) and 63.2366(c), and
 emission limit in Table 2 to   monitor the control device in accordance
 this subpart.                  with that plan.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated in Sec. 63.2346, you may elect to comply with one of the 
work practice standards for existing, reconstructed, or new affected 
sources in the following table. If you elect to do so, . . .

[[Page 5076]]



      Table 4 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.--Work Practice Standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              For each . . .                       You must . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Storage tank at an existing,             a. Comply with the
 reconstructed, or new affected source       requirements of 40 CFR part
 meeting any set of tank capacity and        63, subpart WW (control
 organic HAP vapor pressure criteria         level 2), if you elect to
 specified in Table 2 to this subpart,       meet 40 CFR part 63,
 items 1 through 5.                          subpart WW (control level 2
                                             ), requirements as an
                                             alternative to the emission
                                             limit in Table 2 to this
                                             subpart, items 1 through 5;
                                             OR
                                            b. Comply with the
                                             requirements of Sec. 63.984
                                             in 40 CFR part 63, subpart
                                             SS, for routing emissions
                                             to a fuel gas system or
                                             back to the process.
2. Transfer rack at an existing,            a. If the option of a vapor
 reconstructed, or new affected source       balancing system is
 meeting the facility-level organic liquid   selected, install and
 loading volume and transfer rack HAP        operate a system that meets
 content for organic liquids specified in    the requirements in Table 7
 Table 2 to this subpart, items 7 through    to this subpart, item 3.b;
 9.                                          OR
                                            b. Comply with the
                                             requirements of Sec. 63.984
                                             in 40 CFR part 63, subpart
                                             SS, for routing emissions
                                             to a fuel gas system or
                                             back to the process.
3. Pump, valve, and sampling connection     Comply with the requirements
 that operates in organic liquids service    for pumps, valves, and
 at least 300 hours per year at an           sampling connections in 40
 existing, reconstructed, or new affected    CFR part 63, subpart TT
 source.                                     (control level 1), subpart
                                             UU (control level 2), or
                                             subpart H.
4. Transport vehicles equipped with vapor   Follow the steps in 40 CFR
 collection equipment,                       60.502(e) to ensure that
                                             organic liquids are loaded
                                             only into vapor-tight
                                             transport vehicles, and
                                             comply with the provisions
                                             in 40 CFR Sec. 60.502(f),
                                             (g), (h), and (i), except
                                             substitute the term
                                             transport vehicle at each
                                             occurrence of tank truck or
                                             gasoline tank truck in
                                             those paragraphs.
5. Transport vehicles without vapor         Ensure that organic liquids
 collection equipment,                       are loaded only into
                                             transport vehicles that
                                             have a current
                                             certification in accordance
                                             with the U.S. DOT pressure
                                             test requirements in 49 CFR
                                             180 (cargo tanks) or 49 CFR
                                             173.31 (tank cars).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated in Sec.Sec. 63.2354(a) and 63.2362, you must comply with 
the requirements for performance tests and design evaluations for 
existing, reconstructed, or new affected sources as follows:

         Table 5 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.--Requirements for Performance Tests and Design Evaluations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                According to the
                    You must conduct   According to . .                      To determine . .      following
    For . . .            . . .                .             Using . . .             .           requirements . .
                                                                                                       .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each existing,  a. A performance   i. Sec. 63.985(b)  (1) EPA Method 1   (A) Sampling port  (i) Sampling
 each               test to            (1)(ii), Sec.      or 1A in           locations and      sites must be
 reconstructed,     determine the      63.988(b), Sec.    appendix A of 40   the required       located at the
 and each new       organic HAP (or,   63.990(b), or      CFR part 60, as    number of          inlet and outlet
 affected source    upon approval,     Sec. 63.995(b).    appropriate.       traverse points.   of each control
 using a nonflare   TOC) control                                                                device if
 control device     efficiency of                                                               complying with
 to comply with     each nonflare                                                               the control
 an emission        control device,                                                             efficiency
 limit in Table 2   OR the exhaust                                                              requirement or
 to this subpart,   concentration of                                                            at the outlet of
 items 1 through    each combustion                                                             the control
 9.                 device; OR                                                                  device if
                                                                                                complying with
                                                                                                the exhaust
                                                                                                concentration
                                                                                                requirement; AND
                                                                                               (ii) The outlet
                                                                                                sampling site
                                                                                                must be located
                                                                                                at each control
                                                                                                device prior to
                                                                                                any releases to
                                                                                                the atmosphere.
                   .................  .................  (2) EPA Method 2,  (A) Stack gas      See the
                                                          2A, 2C, 2D, 2F,    velocity and       requirements in
                                                          or 2G in           volumetric flow    items
                                                          appendix A of 40   rate.              1.a.i.(1)(A) (i)
                                                          CFR part 60, as                       and (ii) of this
                                                          appropriate.                          table.
                   .................  .................  (3) EPA Method 3   (A) Concentration  See the
                                                          or 3B in           of CO2 and O2      requirements in
                                                          appendix A of 40   and dry            items
                                                          CFR part 60, as    molecular weight   1.a.i.(1)(A) (i)
                                                          appropriate.       of the stack       and (ii) of this
                                                                             gas.               table.
                   .................  .................  (4) EPA Method 4   (A) Moisture       See the
                                                          in appendix A of   content of the     requirements in
                                                          40 CFR part 60.    stack gas.         items
                                                                                                1.a.i.(1)(A) (i)
                                                                                                and (ii) of this
                                                                                                table.

[[Page 5077]]

 
                   .................  .................  (5) EPA Method     (A) Total organic  (i) The organic
                                                          18, 25, or 25A     HAP (or, upon      HAP used for the
                                                          in appendix A of   approval, TOC),    calibration gas
                                                          40 CFR part 60,    or form-aldehyde   for EPA Method
                                                          as appropriate,    emissions.         25A must be the
                                                          or EPA Method                         single organic
                                                          316 in appendix                       HAP representing
                                                          A of 40 CFR part                      the largest
                                                          63 for measuring                      percent by
                                                          form-aldehyde.                        volume of
                                                                                                emissions; AND
                                                                                               (ii) During the
                                                                                                performance
                                                                                                test, you must
                                                                                                establish the
                                                                                                operating
                                                                                                parameter limits
                                                                                                within which
                                                                                                total organic
                                                                                                HAP (or, upon
                                                                                                approval, TOC)
                                                                                                emissions are
                                                                                                reduced by the
                                                                                                required weight-
                                                                                                percent or, as
                                                                                                an option for
                                                                                                nonflare
                                                                                                combustion
                                                                                                devices, to 20
                                                                                                ppmv exhaust
                                                                                                concentration.
                   b. A design        Sec.               .................  .................  During a design
                    evaluation (for    63.985(b)(1)(i).                                         evaluation, you
                    nonflare control                                                            must establish
                    devices) to                                                                 the operating
                    determine the                                                               parameter limits
                    organic HAP (or,                                                            within which
                    upon approval,                                                              total organic
                    TOC) control                                                                HAP, (or, upon
                    efficiency of                                                               approval, TOC)
                    each nonflare                                                               emissions are
                    control device,                                                             reduced by at
                    or the exhaust                                                              least 95 weight-
                    concentration of                                                            percent or as an
                    each combustion                                                             option to 20
                    control device.                                                             ppmv exhaust
                                                                                                concentration.
2. Each transport  A performance      .................  EPA Method 27 in   vapor tightness.   The pressure
 vehicle that you   test to                               appendix A of 40                      change in the
 own or operate     determine the                         CFR part 60.                          tank must be no
 that is equipped   vapor tightness                                                             more than 250
 with vapor         of the tank and                                                             pascals (1 inch
 collection         then repair as                                                              of water) in 5
 equipment and      needed until it                                                             minutes after it
 loads organic      passes the test.                                                            is pressurized
 liquids at an                                                                                  to 4,500 pascals
 affected                                                                                       (18 inches of
 transfer rack at                                                                               water).
 an existing,
 reconstructed,
 or new affected
 source.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated in Sec.Sec. 63.2370(a) and 63.2382(b), you must show 
initial compliance with the emission limits for existing, 
reconstructed, or new affected sources as follows:

                  Table 6 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.--Initial Compliance With Emission Limits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                        You have demonstrated
              For each . . .                For the following emission limit . . .   initial compliance if . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Storage tank at an existing,            Reduce total organic HAP (or, upon        Total organic HAP (or, upon
 reconstructed, or new affected source      approval, TOC) emissions by at least 95   approval, TOC) emissions,
 meeting either set of tank capacity and    weight-percent, or as an option for       based on the results of
 liquid organic HAP vapor pressure          combustion devices to an exhaust          the performance testing or
 criteria specified in Table 2 to this      concentration of [le]20 ppmv.             design evaluation
 subpart, items 1 through 6                                                           specified in Table 5 to
                                                                                      this subpart, item 1.a or
                                                                                      1.b, respectively, are
                                                                                      reduced by at least 95
                                                                                      weight-percent or as an
                                                                                      option to an exhaust
                                                                                      concentration [le]20 ppmv.
2. Transfer rack at an existing,           Reduce total organic HAP (or, upon        Total organic HAP (or, upon
 reconstructed, or new affected source      approval, TOC) emissions by at least 98   approval, TOC) emissions,
 meeting the facility-level organic         weight-percent, or as an option for       based on the results of
 liquid loading volume and transfer rack    combustion devices to an exhaust          the performance testing or
 HAP content for organic liquids criteria   concentration of [le]20 ppmv.             design evaluation
 specified in Table 2 to this subpart,                                                specified in Table 5 to
 items 7 through 9.                                                                   this subpart, item 1.a or
                                                                                      1.b, respectively, are
                                                                                      reduced by at least 98
                                                                                      weight-percent or as an
                                                                                      option for combustion
                                                                                      devices to an exhaust
                                                                                      concentration of [le]20
                                                                                      ppmv.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 5078]]


              Table 7 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.--Initial Compliance With Work Practice Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                        You have demonstrated
              For each . . .                             If you . . .                initial compliance if . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Storage tank at an existing affected    a. Install a floating roof or equivalent  i. After emptying and
 source meeting either set of tank          control that meets the requirements in    degassing, you visually
 capacity and liquid organic HAP vapor      Table 4 to this subpart, item 1.a.        inspect each internal
 pressure criteria specified in Table 2                                               floating roof before the
 to this subpart, items 1 or 2.                                                       refilling of the storage
                                                                                      tank and perform seal gap
                                                                                      inspections of the primary
                                                                                      and secondary rim seals of
                                                                                      each external floating
                                                                                      roof within 90 days after
                                                                                      the refilling of the
                                                                                      storage tank.
                                           b. Route emissions to a fuel gas system   i. You meet the
                                            or back to the process.                   requirements in Sec.
                                                                                      63.984(b) and submit the
                                                                                      statement of connection
                                                                                      required by Sec.
                                                                                      63.984(c).
2. Storage tank at a reconstructed or new  a. Install a floating roof or equivalent  i. You visually inspect
 affected source meeting any set of tank    control that meets the requirements in    each internal floating
 capacity and liquid organic HAP vapor      Table 4 to this subpart, item 1.a.        roof before the initial
 pressure criteria specified in Table 2                                               filling of the storage
 to this subpart, items 3 through 5.                                                  tank, and perform seal gap
                                                                                      inspections of the primary
                                                                                      and secondary rim seals of
                                                                                      each external floating
                                                                                      roof within 90 days after
                                                                                      the initial filling of the
                                                                                      storage tank.
                                           b. Route emissions to a fuel gas system   i. See item 1.b.i of this
                                            or back to the process.                   table.
3. Transfer rack at an existing,           a. Load organic liquids only into         i. You comply with the
 reconstructed, or new affected source      transport vehicles having current vapor   provisions specified in
 that meets the facility-level organic      tightness certification as described in   Table 4 to this subpart,
 liquid loading volume and transfer rack    Table 4 to this subpart, item 4.a and     item 4.a and item 5.a, as
 HAP content for organic liquids criteria   item 5.a.                                 applicable.
 specified in Table 2 to this subpart,
 items 7 through 9.
                                           b. Install and operate a vapor balancing  i. You design and operate
                                            system.                                   the vapor balancing system
                                                                                      to route organic HAP
                                                                                      vapors displaced from
                                                                                      loading of organic liquids
                                                                                      into transport vehicles to
                                                                                      the appropriate storage
                                                                                      tank or process unit.
4. Equipment leak component, as defined    a. Carry out a leak detection and repair  i. You specify which one of
 in Sec. 63.2406, that operates in          program or equivalent control according   the control programs
 organic liquids service [ge] 300 hours     to one of the subparts listed in Table    listed in Table 4 to this
 per year at an existing, reconstructed,    4 to this subpart, item 3.a.              subpart you have selected,
 or new affected source.                                                              OR
                                                                                     ii. Provide written
                                                                                      specifications for your
                                                                                      equivalent control
                                                                                      approach.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated in Sec.Sec. 63.2378(a) and (b) and 63.2390(b), you must 
show continuous compliance with the emission limits for existing, 
reconstructed, or new affected sources according to the following 
table:

                 Table 8 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With Emission Limits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                         You must demonstrate
              For each . . .                For the following emission limit . . .    continuous compliance by .
                                                                                                 . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Storage tank at an existing,            a. Reduce total organic HAP (or, upon     i. Performing CMS
 reconstructed, or new affected source      approval, TOC) emissions from the         monitoring and collecting
 meeting any set of tank capacity and       closed vent system and control device     data according to Sec.Sec.
 liquid organic HAP vapor pressure          by 95 weight-percent or greater, or as    63.2366, 63.2374, and
 criteria specified in Table 2 to this      an option to 20 ppmv or less of total     63.2378; AND
 subpart, items 1 through 6.                organic HAP (or, upon approval, TOC) in  ii. Maintaining the
                                            the exhaust of combustion devices.        operating limits
                                                                                      established during the
                                                                                      design evaluation or
                                                                                      performance test.
2. Transfer rack at an existing,           Reduce total organic HAP (or, upon        See the compliance
 reconstructed, or new affected source      approval, TOC) emissions from the         demonstration in items
 that meets the facility-level organic      closed vent system and control device     1.a.i and ii of this
 liquid loading volume and transfer rack    by 98 weight-percent or greater, or as    table.
 HAP content for organic liquids criteria   an option to 20 ppmv or less of organic
 specified in Table 2, to this supbart      HAP (or, upon approval, TOC) in the
 items 7 through 9.                         exhaust of combustion devices.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated in Sec. 63.2378(a) and (b) and 63.2390(b), you must show 
continuous compliance with the operating limits for existing, 
reconstructed, or new affected sources according to the following 
table:

[[Page 5079]]



Table 9 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With Operating Limits--High Throughput Transfer Racks
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                         You must demonstrate
  For each existing, reconstructed, and     For the following operating limit . . .   continuous compliance by .
   each new affected source using . . .                                                          . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. A thermal oxidizer to comply with an    a. Maintain the daily average fire box    i. Continuously monitoring
 emission limit in Table 2 to this          or combustion zone, as applicable,        and recording fire box or
 subpart.                                   temperature greater than or equal to      combustion zone, as
                                            the reference temperature established     applicable, temperature
                                            during the design evaluation or           every 15 minutes and
                                            performance test that demonstrated        maintaining the daily
                                            compliance with the emission limit.       average fire box
                                                                                      temperature greater than
                                                                                      or equal to the reference
                                                                                      temperature established
                                                                                      during the design
                                                                                      evaluation or performance
                                                                                      test that demonstrated
                                                                                      compliance with the
                                                                                      emission limit; AND
                                                                                     ii. Keeping the applicable
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.998.
2. A catalytic oxidizer to comply with an  a. Replace the existing catalyst bed      i. Replacing the existing
 emission limit in Table 2 to this          before the age of the bed exceeds the     catalyst bed before the
 subpart.                                   maximum allowable age established         age of the bed exceeds the
                                            during the design evaluation or           maximum allowable age
                                            performance test that demonstrated        established during the
                                            compliance with the emission limit.       design evaluation or
                                                                                      performance test that
                                                                                      demonstrated compliance
                                                                                      with the emission limit;
                                                                                      AND
                                                                                     ii. Keeping the applicable
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.998.
                                           b. Maintain the daily average             i. Continuously monitoring
                                            temperature at the inlet of the           and recording the
                                            catalyst bed greater than or equal to     temperature at the inlet
                                            the reference temperature established     of the catalyst bed at
                                            during the design evaluation or           least every 15 minutes and
                                            performance test that demonstrated        maintaining the daily
                                            compliance with the emission limit.       average temperature at the
                                                                                      inlet of the catalyst bed
                                                                                      greater than or equal to
                                                                                      the reference temperature
                                                                                      established during the
                                                                                      design evaluation or
                                                                                      performance test that
                                                                                      demonstrated compliance
                                                                                      with the emission limit;
                                                                                      AND
                                           ........................................  ii. Keeping the applicable
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.998.
                                           c. Maintain the daily average             i. Continuously monitoring
                                            temperature difference across the         and recording the
                                            catalyst bed greater than or equal to     temperature at the outlet
                                            the minimum temperature difference        of the catalyst bed every
                                            established during the design             15 minutes and maintaining
                                            evaluation or performance test that       the daily average
                                            demonstrated compliance with the          temperature difference
                                            emission limit.                           across the catalyst bed
                                                                                      greater than or equal to
                                                                                      the minimum temperature
                                                                                      difference established
                                                                                      during the design
                                                                                      evaluation or performance
                                                                                      test that demonstrated
                                                                                      compliance with the
                                                                                      emission limit; AND
                                                                                     ii. Keeping the applicable
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.998.
3. An absorber to comply with an emission  a. Maintain the daily average             Continuously monitoring the
 limit in Table 2 to this subpart.          concentration level of organic            organic concentration in
                                            compounds in the absorber exhaust less    the absorber exhaust and
                                            than or equal to the reference            maintaining the daily
                                            concentration established during the      average concentration less
                                            design evaluation or performance test     than or equal to the
                                            that demonstrated compliance with the     reference concentration
                                            emission limit; OR                        established during the
                                                                                      design evaluation or
                                                                                      performance test that
                                                                                      demonstrated compliance
                                                                                      with the emission limit.
                                           b. Maintain the daily average scrubbing   Continuously monitoring the
                                            liquid temperature less than or equal     scrubbing liquid
                                            to the reference temperature              temperature and
                                            established during the design             maintaining the daily
                                            evaluation or performance test that       average temperature less
                                            demonstrated compliance with the          than or equal to the
                                            emission limit; AND                       reference temperature
                                                                                      established during the
                                                                                      design evaluation or
                                                                                      performance test that
                                                                                      demonstrated compliance
                                                                                      with the emission limit;
                                                                                      AND
                                           c. Maintain the difference between the    Maintaining the difference
                                            specific gravities of the saturated and   between the specific
                                            fresh scrubbing fluids greater than or    gravities greater than or
                                            equal to the difference established       equal to the difference
                                            during the design evaluation or           established during the
                                            performance test that demonstrated        design evaluation or
                                            compliance with the emission limit.       performance test that
                                                                                      demonstrated compliance
                                                                                      with the emission limit.

[[Page 5080]]

 
4. A condenser to comply with an emission  a. Maintain the daily average             Continuously monitoring the
 limit in Table 2 to this subpart.          concentration level of organic            organic concentration at
                                            compounds at the exit of the condenser    the condenser exit and
                                            less than or equal to the reference       maintaining the daily
                                            concentration established during the      average concentration less
                                            design evaluation or performance test     than or equal to the
                                            that demonstrated compliance with the     reference concentration
                                            emission limit; OR                        established during the
                                                                                      design evaluation or
                                                                                      performance test that
                                                                                      demonstrated compliance
                                                                                      with the emission limit.
                                           b. Maintain the daily average condenser   i. Continuously monitoring
                                            exit temperature less than or equal to    and recording the
                                            the reference temperature established     temperature at the exit of
                                            during the design evaluation or           the condenser at least
                                            performance test that demonstrated        every 15 minutes and
                                            compliance with the emission limit.       maintaining the daily
                                                                                      average temperature less
                                                                                      than or equal to the
                                                                                      reference temperature
                                                                                      established during the
                                                                                      design evaluation or
                                                                                      performance test that
                                                                                      demonstrated compliance
                                                                                      with the emission limit;
                                                                                      AND
                                           ........................................  ii. Keeping the applicable
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.998.
5. An adsorption system with adsorbent     a. Maintain the daily average             i. Continuously monitoring
 regeneration to comply with an emission    concentration level of organic            the daily average organic
 limit in Table 2 to this subpart.          compounds in the adsorber exhaust less    concentration in the
                                            than or equal to the reference            adsorber exhaust and
                                            concentration established during the      maintaining the
                                            design evaluation or performance test     concentration less than or
                                            that demonstrated compliance with the     equal to the reference
                                            emission limit.                           concentration; AND
                                                                                     ii. Keeping the applicable
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.998.
                                           b. Maintain the total regeneration        Maintaining the total
                                            stream mass flow during the adsorption    regeneration stream mass
                                            bed regeneration cycle greater than or    flow during the adsorption
                                            equal to the reference stream mass flow   bed regeneration cycle
                                            established during the design             greater than or equal to
                                            evaluation or performance test that       the reference stream mass
                                            demonstrated compliance with the          flow established during
                                            emission limit; AND                       the design evaluation or
                                                                                      performance test that
                                                                                      demonstrated compliance
                                                                                      with the emission limit;
                                                                                      AND
                                           c. Before the adsorption cycle            Maintaining the temperature
                                            commences, achieve and maintain the       of the adsorption bed
                                            temperature of the adsorption bed after   after regeneration less
                                            regeneration less than or equal to the    than or equal to the
                                            reference temperature established         reference temperature
                                            during the design evaluation or           established during the
                                            performance test AND                      design evaluation or
                                                                                      performance test that
                                                                                      demonstrated compliance
                                                                                      with the emission limit
                                                                                      AND
                                            achieve greater than or equal to the     Achieving greater than or
                                            pressure reduction during the             equal to the pressure
                                            adsorption bed regeneration cycle         reduction during the
                                            established during the design             regeneration cycle
                                            evaluation or performance test that       established during the
                                            demonstrated compliance with the          design evaluation or
                                            emission limit.                           performance test that
                                                                                      demonstrated compliance
                                                                                      with the emission limit;
                                                                                      AND
                                                                                     ii. Keeping the applicable
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.998.
6. An adsorption system without adsorbent  a. Maintain the daily average
 regeneration to comply with an emission    concentration level of organic
 limit in Table 2 to this subpart.          compounds in the adsorber exhaust less
                                            than or equal to the reference
                                            concentration established during the
                                            design evaluation or performance test
                                            that demonstrated compliance with the
                                            emission limit; OR Continuously
                                            monitoring the organic concentration in
                                            the adsorber exhaust and maintaining
                                            the concentration less than or equal to
                                            the reference concentration.
                                           b. Replace the existing adsorbent in      i. Replacing the existing
                                            each segment of the bed before the age    adsorbent in each segment
                                            of the adsorbent exceeds the maximum      of the bed before the age
                                            allowable age established during the      of the adsorbent exceeds
                                            design evaluation or performance test     the maximum allowable age
                                            that demonstrated compliance with the     established during the
                                            emission limit; AND                       design evaluation or
                                                                                      performance test that
                                                                                      demonstrated compliance
                                                                                      with the emission limit;
                                                                                      AND
                                                                                     ii. Keeping the applicable
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.998.

[[Page 5081]]

 
                                           c. Maintain the temperature of the        i. Maintaining the
                                            adsorption bed less than or equal to      temperature of the
                                            the reference temperature established     adsorption bed less than
                                            during the design evaluation or           or equal to the reference
                                            performance test that demonstrated        temperature established
                                            compliance with the emission limit.       during the design
                                                                                      evaluation or performance
                                                                                      test that demonstrated
                                                                                      compliance with the
                                                                                      emission limit; AND
                                                                                     ii. Keeping the applicable
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.998.
7. A flare to comply with an emission      a. Maintain a pilot flame in the flare    i. Continuously operating a
 limit in Table 2 to this subpart.          at all times that vapors may be vented    device that detects the
                                            to the flare (Sec. 63.11(b)(5)).          presence of the pilot
                                                                                      flame; AND
                                                                                     ii. Keeping the applicable
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.998.
                                           b. Maintain a flare flame at all times    i. Maintaining a flare
                                            that vapors are being vented to the       flame at all times that
                                            flare (Sec. 63.11(b)(5)).                 vapors are being vented to
                                                                                      the flare; AND
                                                                                     ii. Keeping the applicable
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.998.
                                           c. Operate the flare with no visible      i. Operating the flare with
                                            emissions, except for up to 5 minutes     no visible emissions
                                            in any 2 consecutive hours (Sec.          exceeding the amount
                                            63.11(b)(4)).                             allowed; AND
                                                                                     ii. Keeping the applicable
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.998.
                                           d. Operate the flare with an exit         i. Operating the flare
                                            velocity that is within the applicable    within the applicable exit
                                            limits in Sec. 63.11(b)(6), (7), and      velocity limits; AND
                                            (8).                                     ii. Keeping the applicable
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.998.
                                           e. Operate the flare with a net heating   i. Operating the flare with
                                            value of the gas being combusted          the gas net heating value
                                            greater than the applicable minimum       within the applicable
                                            value in Sec. 63.11(b)(6)(ii).            limit; AND
                                                                                     ii. Keeping the applicable
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.998.
8. Another type of control device to       Submit a monitoring plan as specified in  Submitting a monitoring
 comply with an emission limit in Table 2   Sec.Sec. 63.995(c) and 63.2366(c), and    plan and monitoring the
 to this subpart.                           monitor the control device in             control device according
                                            accordance with that plan.                to that plan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated in Sec.Sec. 63.2378(a) and (b) and 63.2386(c)(6), you 
must show continuous compliance with the work practice standards for 
existing, reconstructed, or new affected sources according to the 
following table:

            Table 10 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.--Continuous Compliance With Work Practice Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                         You must demonstrate
              For each . . .                   For the following standard . . .       continuous compliance by .
                                                                                                 . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Internal floating roof (IFR) storage    a. Install a floating roof designed and   i. Visually inspecting the
 tank at an existing, reconstructed, or     operated according to the applicable      floating roof deck, deck
 new affected source meeting any set of     specifications in Sec. 63.1063(a) and     fittings, and rim seals of
 tank capacity and vapor pressure           (b).                                      each IFR: once per year,
 criteria specified in Table 2 to this                                                and each time the storage
 subpart, items 1 through 5.                                                          tank is completely emptied
                                                                                      and degassed, or every 10
                                                                                      years, whichever occurs
                                                                                      first (Sec. 63.1063(c)(1),
                                                                                      (d), and (e)); AND
                                                                                     ii. Keeping the tank
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.1065.
2. External floating roof (EFR) storage    a. See the standard in item 1.a of this   i. Visually inspecting the
 tank at an existing, reconstructed, or     table.                                    floating roof deck, deck
 new affected source meeting any set of                                               fittings, and rim seals of
 tank capacity and vapor pressure                                                     each EFR each time the
 criteria specified in Table 2 to this                                                storage tank is completely
 subpart, items 1 through 5.                                                          emptied and degassed, or
                                                                                      every 10 years, whichever
                                                                                      occurs first (Sec.
                                                                                      63.1063(c)(2), (d), and
                                                                                      (e)); AND
                                                                                     ii. Performing seal gap
                                                                                      measurements on the
                                                                                      secondary seal of each EFR
                                                                                      at least once every year,
                                                                                      and on the primary seal of
                                                                                      each EFR at least every 5
                                                                                      years (Sec. 63.1063(c)(2),
                                                                                      (d), and (e)); AND
                                                                                     iii. Keeping the tank
                                                                                      records required in
                                                                                      $63.1065.
3. IFR or EFR tank at an existing,         a. Repair the conditions causing storage  i. Repairing conditions
 reconstructed, or new affected source      tank inspection failures (Sec.            causing inspection
 meeting any set of tank capacity and       63.1063(e)).                              failures: before refilling
 vapor pressure criteria specified in                                                 the storage tank with
 Table 2 to this subpart, items 1 through                                             organic liquid, or within
 5.                                                                                   45 days (or up to 105 days
                                                                                      with extensions) for a
                                                                                      tank containing organic
                                                                                      liquid; AND
                                                                                     ii. Keeping the tank
                                                                                      records required in Sec.
                                                                                      63.1065(b).

[[Page 5082]]

 
4. Transfer rack at an existing,           a. Ensure that organic liquids are        i. Ensuring that organic
 reconstructed, or new affected source      loaded into transport vehicles in         liquids are loaded into
 that meets the facility-level organic      accordance with the requirements in       transport vehicles in
 liquid loading volume and transfer rack    Table 4 to this subpart, items 2.a,       accordance with the
 HAP content for organic liquids criteria   2.b, and 2.c.                             requirements in Table 4 to
 specified in Table 2 to this subpart,                                                this subpart, items 2.a,
 items 7 through 9.                                                                   2.b, and 2.c.
                                           b. Install and operate a vapor balancing  i. Monitoring each
                                            system.                                   potential source of vapor
                                                                                      leakage in the system
                                                                                      quarterly during the
                                                                                      loading of a transport
                                                                                      vehicle using the methods
                                                                                      and procedures described
                                                                                      in the rule requirements
                                                                                      selected for the work
                                                                                      practice standard for
                                                                                      equipment leak components
                                                                                      as specified in Table 4 to
                                                                                      this subpart, item 3. An
                                                                                      instrument reading of 500
                                                                                      ppmv defines a leak.
                                                                                      Repair of leaks is
                                                                                      performed according to the
                                                                                      repair requirements
                                                                                      specified in your selected
                                                                                      equipment leak standards.
5. Equipment leak component, as defined    a. Comply with the requirements of 40     i. Carrying out a leak
 in Sec. 63.2406, that operates in          CFR part 63, subpart TT, UU, or H.        detection and repair
 organic liquids service at least 300                                                 program in accordance with
 hours per year.                                                                      one of the subparts listed
                                                                                      in item 5.a of this table.
6. Storage tank at an existing,            a. Route emissions to a fuel gas system   i. Continuing to meet the
 reconstructed, or new affected source      or back to the process.                   requirements specified in
 meeting any of the tank capacity and                                                 Sec. 63.984(b).
 vapor pressure criteria specified in
 Table 2 to this subpart, items 1 through
 6.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated in Sec. 63.2386(a), (b), and (f), you must submit 
compliance reports and startup, shutdown, and malfunction reports 
according to the following table:

                         Table 11 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.--Requirements for Reports
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                      You must submit the report
        You must submit a(n) . . .               The report must contain . . .                  . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Compliance report, or Periodic Report.  a. The information specified in Sec.      Semiannually, and it must
                                            63.2386(c), (d), and (e). If you had a    be postmarked by January
                                            startup, shutdown, or malfunction         31 or July 31, in
                                            during the reporting period and you       accordance with Sec.
                                            took actions consistent with your SSM     63.2386(b).
                                            plan, the report must also include the
                                            information in Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(i).
                                           b. The information required by 40 CFR     See the submission
                                            part 63, subpart TT, UU, or H, as         requirement in item 1.a of
                                            applicable, for pumps, valves, and        this table.
                                            sampling connections.
                                           c. The information required by Sec.       See the submission
                                            63.999(c).                                requirement in item 1.a of
                                                                                      this table.
                                           d. The information specified in Sec.      See the submission
                                            63.1066(b) including: notification of     requirement in item 1.a of
                                            inspection, inspection results,           this table.
                                            requests for alternate devices, and
                                            requests for extensions, as applicable.
2. Immediate startup, shutdown, and        a. The information required in Sec.       i. By FAX or telephone
 malfunction report if you had a startup,   63.10(d)(5)(ii).                          within 2 working days
 shutdown, or malfunction during the                                                  after starting actions
 reporting period, and you took an action                                             inconsistent with the
 that was not consistent with your SSM                                                plan; AND
 plan.                                                                               ii. By letter within 7
                                                                                      working days after the end
                                                                                      of the event unless you
                                                                                      have made alternative
                                                                                      arrangements with the
                                                                                      permitting authority (Sec.
                                                                                      63.10(d)(5)(ii)).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As stated in Sec.Sec. 63.2382 and 63.2398, you must comply with the 
applicable General Provisions requirements as follows:

                                Table 12 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart EEEE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Citation                            Subject                          Brief description                      Applies to subpart EEEE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1...............................  Applicability.............  Initial applicability determination;            Yes.
                                                                       Applicability after standard established;
                                                                       Permit requirements; Extensions,
                                                                       Notifications.
Sec. 63.2...............................  Definitions...............  Definitions for part 63 standards.............  Yes.
Sec. 63.3...............................  Units and Abbreviations...  Units and abbreviations for part 63 standards.  Yes.
Sec. 63.4...............................  Prohibited Activities and   Prohibited activities; Circumvention,           Yes.
                                           Circumvention.              Severability.

[[Page 5083]]

 
Sec. 63.5...............................  Construction/               Applicability; Applications; Approvals........  Yes.
                                           Reconstruction.
Sec. 63.6(a)............................  Compliance with Standards/  GP apply unless compliance extension; GP apply  Yes.
                                           O&M Applicability.          to area sources that become major.
Sec. 63.6(b)(1)-(4).....................  Compliance Dates for New    Standards apply at effective date; 3 years      Yes.
                                           and Reconstructed Sources.  after effective date; upon startup; 10 years
                                                                       after construction or reconstruction
                                                                       commences for section 112(f).
Sec. 63.6(b)(5).........................  Notification..............  Must notify if commenced construction or        Yes.
                                                                       reconstruction after proposal.
Sec. 63.6(b)(6).........................  [Reserved].
Sec. 63.6(b)(7).........................  Compliance Dates for New    Area sources that become major must comply      Yes.
                                           and Reconstructed Area      with major source standards immediately upon
                                           Sources That Become Major.  becoming major, regardless of whether
                                                                       required to comply when they were an area
                                                                       source.
Sec. 63.6(c)(1)-(2).....................  Compliance Dates for        Comply according to date in this subpart,       Yes.
                                           Existing Sources.           which must be no later than 3 years after
                                                                       effective date; for section 112(f) standards,
                                                                       comply within 90 days of effective date
                                                                       unless compliance extension.
Sec. 63.6(c)(3)-(4).....................  [Reserved].
Sec. 63.6(c)(5).........................  Compliance Dates for        Area sources that become major must comply      Yes.
                                           Existing Area Sources       with major source standards by date indicated
                                           That Become Major.          in this subpart or by equivalent time period
                                                                       (e.g., 3 years).
Sec. 63.6(d)............................  [Reserved].
Sec. 63.6(e)(1).........................  Operation & Maintenance...  Operate to minimize emissions at all times;     Yes.
                                                                       correct malfunctions as soon as practicable;
                                                                       and operation and maintenance requirements
                                                                       independently enforceable; information
                                                                       Administrator will use to determine if
                                                                       operation and maintenance requirements were
                                                                       met.
Sec. 63.6(e)(2).........................  [Reserved].
Sec. 63.6(e)(3).........................  Startup, Shutdown, and      Requirement for SSM plan; content of SSM plan;  Yes; however, the 2-day reporting
                                           Malfunction (SSM) Plan.     actions during SSM.                             requirement in paragraph Sec.
                                                                                                                       63.6(e)(3)(iv) does not apply.
Sec. 63.6(f)(1).........................  Compliance Except During    You must comply with emission standards at all  Yes.
                                           SSM.                        times except during SSM.
Sec. 63.6(f)(2)-(3).....................  Methods for Determining     Compliance based on performance test,           Yes.
                                           Compliance.                 operation and maintenance plans, records,
                                                                       inspection.
Sec. 63.6(g)(1)-(3).....................  Alternative Standard......  Procedures for getting an alternative standard  Yes.
Sec. 63.6(h)(1).........................  Compliance with Opacity/    You must comply with opacity/VE standards at    No.
                                           Visible Emission (VE)       all times except during SSM.
                                           Standards.
Sec. 63.6(h)(2)(i)......................  Determining Compliance      If standard does not state test method, use     No.
                                           with Opacity/VE Standards.  EPA Method 9 for opacity in appendix A of
                                                                       part 60 of this chapter and EPA Method 22 for
                                                                       VE in appendix A of part 60 of this chapter.
Sec. 63.6(h)(2)(ii).....................  [Reserved].
Sec. 63.6(h)(2)(iii)....................  Using Previous Tests to     Criteria for when previous opacity/VE testing   No.
                                           Demonstrate Compliance      can be used to show compliance with this
                                           with Opacity/VE Standards.  subpart.
Sec. 63.6(h)(3).........................  [Reserved].
Sec. 63.6(h)(4).........................  Notification of Opacity/VE  Must notify Administrator of anticipated date   No.
                                           Observation Date.           of observation.
Sec. 63.6(h)(5)(i), (iii)-(v)...........  Conducting Opacity/VE       Dates and schedule for conducting opacity/VE    No.
                                           Observations.               observations.
Sec. 63.6(h)(5)(ii).....................  Opacity Test Duration and   Must have at least 3 hours of observation with  No.
                                           Averaging Times.            thirty 6-minute averages.
Sec. 63.6(h)(6).........................  Records of Conditions       Must keep records available and allow           No.
                                           During Opacity/VE           Administrator to inspect.
                                           Observations.
Sec. 63.6(h)(7)(i)......................  Report Continuous Opacity   Must submit COMS data with other performance    No.
                                           Monitoring System (COMS)    test data.
                                           Monitoring Data from
                                           Performance Test.
Sec. 63.6(h)(7)(ii).....................  Using COMS Instead of EPA   Can submit COMS data instead of EPA Method 9    No.
                                           Method 9.                   results even if rule requires EPA Method 9 in
                                                                       appendix A of part 60 of this chapter, but
                                                                       must notify Administrator before performance
                                                                       test.
Sec. 63.6(h)(7)(iii)....................  Averaging Time for COMS     To determine compliance, must reduce COMS data  No.
                                           During Performance Test.    to 6-minute averages.

[[Page 5084]]

 
Sec. 63.6(h)(7)(iv).....................  COMS Requirements.........  Owner/operator must demonstrate that COMS       No.
                                                                       performance evaluations are conducted
                                                                       according to Sec. 63.8(e); COMS are properly
                                                                       maintained and operated according to Sec.
                                                                       63.8(c) and data quality as Sec. 63.8(d).
Sec. 63.6(h)(7)(v)......................  Determining Compliance      COMS is probable but not conclusive evidence    No.
                                           with Opacity/VE Standards.  of compliance with opacity standards, even if
                                                                       EPA Method 9 observation shows otherwise.
                                                                       Requirements for COMS to be probable evidence-
                                                                       proper maintenance, meeting Performance
                                                                       Specification 1 in appendix B of part 60 of
                                                                       this chapter, and data have not been altered.
Sec. 63.6(h)(8).........................  Determining Compliance      Administrator will use all COMS, EPA Method 9   Yes.
                                           with Opacity/VE Standards.  (in appendix A of part 60 of this chapter),
                                                                       and EPA Method 22 (in appendix A of part 60
                                                                       of this chapter) results, as well as
                                                                       information about operation and maintenance
                                                                       to determine compliance.
Sec. 63.6(h)(9).........................  Adjusted Opacity Standard.  Procedures for Administrator to adjust an       Yes.
                                                                       opacity standard.
Sec. 63.6(i)(1)-(14)....................  Compliance Extension......  Procedures and criteria for Administrator to    Yes.
                                                                       grant compliance extension.
Sec. 63.6(j)............................  Presidential Compliance     President may exempt any source from            Yes.
                                           Exemption.                  requirement to comply with this subpart.
Sec. 63.7(a)(2).........................  Performance Test Dates....  Dates for conducting initial performance        Yes.
                                                                       testing; must conduct 180 days after
                                                                       compliance date.
Sec. 63.7(a)(3).........................  Section 114 Authority.....  Adminsitrator may require a performance test    Yes.
                                                                       under CAA section 114 at any time.
Sec. 63.7(b)(1).........................  Notification of             Must notify Administrator 60 days before the    Yes.
                                           Performance Test.           test.
Sec. 63.7(b)(2).........................  Notification of             If you have to reschedule performance test,     Yes.
                                           Rescheduling.               must notify Administrator of rescheduled date
                                                                       as soon as practicable and without delay.
Sec. 63.7(c)............................  Quality Assurance (QA)/     Requirement to submit site-specific test plan   Yes.
                                           Test Plan.                  60 days before the test or on date
                                                                       Administrator agrees with; test plan approval
                                                                       procedures; performance audit requirements;
                                                                       internal and external QA procedures for
                                                                       testing.
Sec. 63.7(d)............................  Testing Facilities........  Requirements for testing facilities...........  Yes.
Sec. 63.7(e)(1).........................  Conditions for Conducting   Performance tests must be conducted under       Yes.
                                           Performance Tests.          representative conditions; cannot conduct
                                                                       performance tests during SSM.
Sec. 63.7(e)(2).........................  Conditions for Conducting   Must conduct according to this subpart and EPA  Yes.
                                           Performance Tests.          test methods unless Administrator approves
                                                                       alternative.
Sec. 63.7(e)(3).........................  Test Run Duration.........  Must have three test runs of at least 1 hour    Yes; however, for transfer racks
                                                                       each; compliance is based on arithmetic mean    per Sec.Sec. 63.987(b)(3)(i)(A)-
                                                                       of three runs; conditions when data from an     (B) and 63.997(e)(1)(v)(A)-(B)
                                                                       additional test run can be used.                provide exceptions to the
                                                                                                                       requirement for test runs to be
                                                                                                                       at least 1 hour each.
Sec. 63.7(f)............................  Alternative Test Method...  Procedures by which Administrator can grant     Yes.
                                                                       approval to use an intermediate or major
                                                                       change, or alternative to a test method.
Sec. 63.7(g)............................  Performance Test Data       Must include raw data in performance test       Yes.
                                           Analysis.                   report; must submit performance test data 60
                                                                       days after end of test with the notification
                                                                       of compliance status; keep data for 5 years.
Sec. 63.7(h)............................  Waiver of Tests...........  Procedures for Administrator to waive           Yes.
                                                                       performance test.
Sec. 63.8(a)(1).........................  Applicability of            Subject to all monitoring requirements in       Yes.
                                           Monitoring Requirements.    standard.
Sec. 63.8(a)(2).........................  Performance Specifications  Performance Specifications in appendix B of 40  Yes.
                                                                       CFR part 60 apply.
Sec. 63.8(a)(3).........................  [Reserved].
Sec. 63.8(a)(4).........................  Monitoring of Flares......  Monitoring requirements for flares in Sec.      Yes; however, monitoring
                                                                       63.11.                                          requirements in Sec. 63.987(c)
                                                                                                                       also apply.
Sec. 63.8(b)(1).........................  Monitoring................  Must conduct monitoring according to standard   Yes.
                                                                       unless Administrator approves alternative.

[[Page 5085]]

 
Sec. 63.8(b)(2)-(3).....................  Multiple Effluents and      Specific requirements for installing            Yes.
                                           Multiple Monitoring         monitoring systems; must install on each
                                           Systems.                    affected source or after combined with
                                                                       another affected source before it is released
                                                                       to the atmosphere provided the monitoring is
                                                                       sufficient to demonstrate compliance with the
                                                                       standard; if more than one monitoring system
                                                                       on an emission point, must report all
                                                                       monitoring system results, unless one
                                                                       monitoring system is a backup.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1).........................  Monitoring System           Maintain monitoring system in a manner          Yes.
                                           Operation and Maintenance.  consistent with good air pollution control
                                                                       practices.
Sec. 63.8(c)(1)(i)-(iii)................  Routine and Predictable     Follow the SSM plan for routine repairs; keep   Yes.
                                           SSM.                        parts for routine repairs readily available;
                                                                       reporting requirements for SSM when action is
                                                                       described in SSM plan.
Sec. 63.8(c)(2)-(3).....................  Monitoring System           Must install to get representative emission or  Yes.
                                           Installation.               parameter measurements; must verify
                                                                       operational status before or at performance
                                                                       test.
Sec. 63.8(c)(4).........................  CMS Requirements..........  CMS must be operating except during breakdown,  Yes; however, COMS are not
                                                                       out-of control, repair, maintenance, and high-  applicable.
                                                                       level calibration drifts; COMS must have a
                                                                       minimum of one cycle of sampling and analysis
                                                                       for each successive 10-second period and one
                                                                       cycle of data recording for each successive 6-
                                                                       minute period; CEMS must have a minimum of
                                                                       one cycle of operation for each successive 15-
                                                                       minute period.
Sec. 63.8(c)(5).........................  COMS Minimum Procedures...  COMS minimum procedures.......................  No.
Sec. 63.8(c)(6)-(8).....................  CMS Requirements..........  Zero and high level calibration check           Yes.
                                                                       requirements. Out-of-control periods.
Sec. 63.8(d)............................  CMS Quality Control.......  Requirements for CMS quality control,           Yes.
                                                                       including calibration, etc.; must keep
                                                                       quality control plan on record for 5 years;
                                                                       keep old versions for 5 years after revisions.
Sec. 63.8(e)............................  CMS Performance Evaluation  Notification, performance evaluation test       Yes.
                                                                       plan, reports.
Sec. 63.8(f)(1)-(5).....................  Alternative Monitoring      Procedures for Administrator to approve         Yes.
                                           Method.                     alternative monitoring.
Sec. 63.8(f)(6).........................  Alternative to Relative     Procedures for Administrator to approve         Yes.
                                           Accuracy Test.              alternative relative accuracy tests for CEMS.
Sec. 63.8(g)............................  Data Reduction............  COMS 6-minute averages calculated over at       Yes; however, COMS are not
                                                                       least 36 evenly spaced data points; CEMS 1      applicable.
                                                                       hour averages computed over at least 4
                                                                       equally spaced data points; data that cannot
                                                                       be used in average.
Sec. 63.9(a)............................  Notification Requirements.  Applicability and State delegation............  Yes.
Sec. 63.9(b)(1)-(2), (4)-(5)............  Initial Notifications.....  Submit notification within 120 days after       Yes.
                                                                       effective date; notification of intent to
                                                                       construct/reconstruct, notification of
                                                                       commencement of construction/reconstruction,
                                                                       notification of startup; contents of each.
Sec. 63.9(c)............................  Request for Compliance      Can request if cannot comply by date or if      Yes.
                                           Extension.                  installed best available control technology
                                                                       or lowest achievable emission rate (BACT/
                                                                       LAER).
Sec. 63.9(d)............................  Notification of Special     For sources that commence construction between  Yes.
                                           Compliance Requirements     proposal and promulgation and want to comply
                                           for New Sources.            3 years after effective date.
Sec. 63.9(e)............................  Notification of             Notify Administrator 60 days prior............  Yes.
                                           Performance Test.
Sec. 63.9(f)............................  Notification of VE/Opacity  Notify Administrator 30 days prior............  No.
                                           Test.
Sec. 63.9(g)............................  Additional Notifications    Notification of performance evaluation;         Yes; however, there are no opacity
                                           When Using CMS.             notification about use of COMS data;            standards.
                                                                       notification that exceeded criterion for
                                                                       relative accuracy alternative.
Sec. 63.9(h)(1)-(6).....................  Notification of Compliance  Contents due 60 days after end of performance   Yes; however, there are no opacity
                                           Status.                     test or other compliance demonstration,         standards.
                                                                       except for opacity/VE, which are due 30 days
                                                                       after; when to submit to Federal vs. State
                                                                       authority.
Sec. 63.9(i)............................  Adjustment of Submittal     Procedures for Administrator to approve change  Yes.
                                           Deadlines.                  in when notifications must be submitted.
Sec. 63.9(j)............................  Change in Previous          Must submit within 15 days after the change...  Yes.
                                           Information.
Sec. 63.10(a)...........................  Recordkeeping/Reporting...  Applies to all, unless compliance extension;    Yes.
                                                                       when to submit to Federal vs. State
                                                                       authority; procedures for owners of more than
                                                                       one source.

[[Page 5086]]

 
Sec. 63.10(b)(1)........................  Recordkeeping/Reporting...  General requirements; keep all records readily  Yes.
                                                                       available; keep for 5 years.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(i)-(iv)................  Records Related to          Occurrence of each for operations (process      Yes.
                                           Startup, Shutdown, and      equipment); occurrence of each malfunction of
                                           Malfunction.                air pollution control equipment; maintenance
                                                                       on air pollution control equipment; actions
                                                                       during SSM.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(vi)-(xi)...............  CMS Records...............  Malfunctions, inoperative, out-of-control       Yes.
                                                                       periods.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xii)...................  Records...................  Records when under waiver.....................  Yes.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiii)..................  Records...................  Records when using alternative to relative      Yes.
                                                                       accuracy test.
Sec. 63.10(b)(2)(xiv)...................  Records...................  All documentation supporting initial            Yes.
                                                                       notification and notification of compliance
                                                                       status.
Sec. 63.10(b)(3)........................  Records...................  Applicability determinations..................  Yes.
Sec. 63.10(c)...........................  Records...................  Additional records for CMS....................  Yes.
Sec. 63.10(d)(1)........................  General Reporting           Requirement to report.........................  Yes.
                                           Requirements.
Sec. 63.10(d)(2)........................  Report of Performance Test  When to submit to Federal or State authority..  Yes.
                                           Results.
Sec. 63.10(d)(3)........................  Reporting Opacity or VE     What to report and when.......................  Yes.
                                           Observations.
Sec. 63.10(d)(4)........................  Progress Reports..........  Must submit progress reports on schedule if     Yes.
                                                                       under compliance extension.
Sec. 63.10(d)(5)........................  SSM Reports...............  Contents and submission.......................  Yes.
Sec. 63.10(e)(1)-(2)....................  Additional CMS Reports....  Must report results for each CEMS on a unit;    Yes; however, COMS are not
                                                                       written copy of CMS performance evaluation; 2-  applicable.
                                                                       3 copies of COMS performance evaluation.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)(i)-(iii)...............  Reports...................  Schedule for reporting excess emissions and     Yes; however, note that the title
                                                                       parameter monitor exceedance (now defined as    of the report is the compliance
                                                                       deviations).                                    report; deviations include excess
                                                                                                                       emissions and parameter
                                                                                                                       exceedances.
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)(iv)-(v)................  Excess Emissions Reports..  Requirement to revert to quarterly submission   Yes.
                                                                       if there is an excess emissions and parameter
                                                                       monitor exceedances (now defined as
                                                                       deviations); provision to request semiannual
                                                                       reporting after compliance for 1 year; submit
                                                                       report by 30th day following end of quarter
                                                                       or calendar half; if there has not been an
                                                                       exceedance or excess emissions (now defined
                                                                       as deviations), report contents in a
                                                                       statement that there have been no deviations;
                                                                       must submit report containing all of the
                                                                       information in Sec.Sec. 63.8(c)(7)-(8) and
                                                                       63.10(c)(5)-(13).
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)(vi)-(viii).............  Excess Emissions Report     Requirements for reporting excess emissions     Yes.
                                           and Summary Report.         for CMS (now called deviations); requires all
                                                                       of the information in Sec.Sec. 63.10(c)(5)-
                                                                       (13) and 63.8(c)(7)-(8).
Sec. 63.10(e)(4)........................  Reporting COMS Data.......  Must submit COMS data with performance test     No.
                                                                       data.
Sec. 63.10(f)...........................  Waiver for Recordkeeping/   Procedures for Administrator to waive.........  Yes.
                                           Reporting.
Sec. 63.11(b)...........................  Flares....................  Requirements for flares.......................  Yes; Sec. 63.987 requirements
                                                                                                                       apply, and the section references
                                                                                                                       Sec. 63.11(b).
Sec. 63.12..............................  Delegation................  State authority to enforce standards..........  Yes.
Sec. 63.13..............................  Addresses.................  Addresses where reports, notifications, and     Yes.
                                                                       requests are sent.
Sec. 63.14..............................  Incorporation by Reference  Test methods incorporated by reference........  Yes.
Sec. 63.15..............................  Availability of             Public and confidential information...........  Yes.
                                           Information.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 5087]]

[FR Doc. 04-2227 Filed 2-2-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>