Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 15655 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: March 18, 2010. 

Lawrence E. Starfield, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2010–6801 Filed 3–29–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0746; FRL–9131–8] 

RIN 2060–AP91 

Requirements for Control Technology 

Determinations for Major Sources in 

Accordance With Clean Air Act 

Sections, Sections 112(g) and 112(j) 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend 

the rule governing case-by-case 

emission limits for major sources of 

hazardous air pollutants under section 

112(j) of the Clean Air Act. Specifically, 

we are proposing revisions to the 

section 112(j) rule to clarify and 

streamline the process for establishing 

case-by-case emission limits in the case 

of the complete vacatur of a section 

112(d) rule applicable to a major source 

category initially listed pursuant to 

section 112(c)(1). In addition, we are 

also proposing revisions that would 

eliminate provisions of the section 

112(j) rule that have become obsolete or 

are redundant. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 29, 2010, unless a public 

hearing is requested by April 14, 2010. 

If a hearing is requested on the proposed 

amendments, written comments must be 

received by May 14, 2010. Under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, comments on 

the information collection provisions 

are best assured of having full effect if 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) receives a copy of your 

comments on or before April 29, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2009–0746, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Agency Web Site: http:// 

www.epa.gov/oar/docket.html. Follow 

the instructions for submitting 

comments on the EPA Air and Radiation 

Docket Web Site. 

• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 

Include Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2009–0746 in the subject line of the 

message. 

• Fax: Fax your comments to: (202) 

566–9744, Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2009–0746. 

• Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and 

Information Center, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460, Docket ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0746. Please 

include a total of two copies. In 

addition, please mail a copy of your 

comments on the information collection 

provisions to the Office of Information 

and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: Desk 

Officer for EPA, 725 17th St., NW., 

Washington, DC 20503. 

• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center, 

Public Reading Room, EPA West, Room 

3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, 

Washington, DC 20460. Such deliveries 

are only accepted during the Docket’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009– 

0746. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

For additional instructions on 

submitting comments, see the ‘‘Public 

Participation’’ heading of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

15656 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

EPA Center EPA Docket Center, 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW., Room 3334, 

Washington, DC 20460. The 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, and the telephone 

number for the Air Docket is (202) 566– 

1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Rick Colyer, Sector Policies and 

Programs Division, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards (D205–02), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; 

telephone number: (919) 541–5262; fax 

number: (919) 541–5600; e-mail address: 

colyer.rick@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does This Action Apply to Me? 

The regulated categories and entities 

potentially affected by the proposed 

amendments include: 

Category NAICS * code Examples of regulated entities 

Polyvinyl Chloride and Copolymers Production.325211 Facilities that polymerize vinyl chloride monomer to produce polyvinyl chloride 

and/or copolymer products. 

Brick and Structural Clay Products .......... 327121 Brick and structural clay tile manufacturing facilities. 

Brick and Structural Clay Products; Clay 

Ceramics.

327122 Ceramic wall and floor tile manufacturing facilities and extruded tile manufacturing facilities. 

Brick and Structural Clay Products .......... 327123 Other structural clay products manufacturing facilities. 

Clay Ceramics .......................................... 327111 Vitreous plumbing fixtures (sanitaryware) manufacturing facilities. 

Any industry or institution using a boiler 

or process heater.

321 Manufacturers of lumber and wood products. 

322 Pulp and paper mills. 

325 Chemical manufacturers. 

324 Petroleum refiners and manufacturers of coal products. 

316, 326, 339 Manufacturers of rubber and miscellaneous plastic products. 

331 Steel works, blast furnaces. 

332 Electroplating, plating, polishing, anodizing, and coloring. 

336 Manufacturers of motor vehicle parts and accessories. 

221 Electric, gas, and sanitary services. 

622 Health services. 

611 Educational services. 

Industry ..................................................... .............................. Sources in a source category ‘‘initially listed’’ and regulated under any other 

section 112(d) emission standard for hazardous air pollutants that is completely vacated by the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. 

* North American Industry Classification System. 

This table is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide 

for readers regarding entities likely to be 

affected by this action. If you have any 

questions regarding the applicability of 

this action to a particular entity or 

operation at your facility, consult either 

the air permit authority for the entity or 

your EPA regional representative as 

listed in 40 CFR 63.13 of subpart A of 

this part (General Provisions). 

B. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly 

mark the part or all of the information 

that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD ROM the specific information that is 

claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

• Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

• Follow directions—The agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

• Explain why you agree or disagree, 

suggest alternatives, and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

• If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

• Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

C. Where can I get a copy of this 

document? 

In addition to being available in the 

docket, an electronic copy of this 

proposed action will also be available 

on the Worldwide Web (WWW) through 

the Technology Transfer Network 

(TTN). Following signature, a copy of 

this proposed action will be posted on 

the TTN’s policy and guidance page for 

newly proposed or promulgated rules at 

the following address: http:// 

www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/. The TTN 

provides information and technology 

exchange in various areas of air 

pollution control. 

D. When would a public hearing occur? 

If anyone contacts EPA requesting to 

speak at a public hearing concerning the 

proposed rule by April 14, 2010, we will 

hold a public hearing on April 19, 2010. 

If you are interested in attending the 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 15657 

1See, e.g., Federal Title V permit for Veolia ES, 

Technical Services L.L.C. with a Section 112(j) limit 

for a gas-fired boiler to (STATEMENT OF BASIS, 

Air Pollution Control Title V Permit to Operate 

Permit No. V–IL–1716300103–08–01, EPA Docket 

ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2008–0235–0285.3) and 

materials developed in support of EPA’s request to 

OMB for renewal of the Section 112(j) Information 

Collection Request (ICR).(‘‘Information Collection 

Request for Requirements for Control Technology 

Determinations from Major Sources in Accordance 

with Clean Air Act Sections, Sections 112(g) and 

112(j)—Supporting Statement’’ EPA Docket ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0038–0092), ‘‘Reply in 

Support of Motion for Voluntary Vacatur and 

Remand’’ and ‘‘Opposition to Petitioners’ CrossMotion to Establish Deadline to Govern Remand’’ in 

Natural Resources Defense Council, et. al. v. EPA 

(No. 04–1385 and consolidated cases) and ‘‘EPA’s 

Petition for Panel Rehearing’’ in Mossville 

Environmental Action Now and Sierra Club v. EPA, 

(No. 02–1282). 2 If only some of the MACT standards within a 

section 112(d) rule applicable to a source category 

are vacated, EPA’s view is that section 112(j) is not 

applicable to such source category because there is 

‘‘a standard’’ in place. 

public hearing, contact Ms. Joan Rogers 

at (919) 541–4487 to verify that a 

hearing will be held. If a public hearing 

is held, it will be held at 10 a.m. at the 

EPA’s Environmental Research Center 

Auditorium, Research Triangle Park, 

NC, or an alternate site nearby. 

II. Background Information for 

Proposed Amendments 

A. What is section 112(j)? 

Section 112(j) of the Clean Air Act as 

amended in 1990 (CAA) provides 

generally that major sources in a listed 

category or subcategory for which EPA 

fails to promulgate section 112(d) 

MACT (Maximum Achievable Control 

Technology) standards by deadlines 

established pursuant to sections 

112(e)(1) and (3) of the CAA must 

submit permit applications beginning 18 

months after such deadlines, and that 

Federal or State permit writers must 

then determine on a case-by-case basis 

an emission limitation equivalent to the 

limitation that would apply if an 

emission standard had been issued in a 

timely manner under CAA section 

112(d) of the Act. See CAA 112(j)(2)–(5). 

States (with approved title V 

operating permit programs) or EPA will 

issue permits containing MACT 

emission limitations determined on a 

case-by-case basis to be equivalent to 

what would have been promulgated by 

EPA. Regulations implementing section 

112(j) were originally promulgated by 

EPA in 1994 and amended several times 

since then; they are contained in 

subpart B, 40 CFR 63.50 through 63.56. 

B. Applicability of Section 112(j) When 

a Section 112(d) Rule for Major Sources 

Is Vacated in Its Entirety 

The United States Court of Appeals 

for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. 

Circuit) vacated the national emission 

standards for hazardous air pollutants 

(NESHAP) for the Polyvinyl Chloride 

and Copolymers Production (‘‘PVC’’), 

Brick and Structural Clay Products 

Manufacturing (‘‘Brick’’), Clay Ceramics 

Manufacturing (‘‘Clay Ceramics’’), and 

the Industrial, Commercial and 

Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters 

(‘‘Boilers’’) source categories. (See 

Mossville Environmental Action Now v. 

EPA, 370 F.3d. 1232 (D.C.Cir. 2004), 

Sierra Club v. EPA, 479 F.3d. 875 (D.C. 

Cir. 2007) and NRDC v. EPA, 489 F.3d. 

1250 (D.C. Cir. 2007), respectively.) The 

Court vacated each of these regulations 

in their entirety and issued the mandate 

effectuating the vacatur of the PVC 

standards on May 11, 2005, the mandate 

effectuating the vacatur of the Brick and 

Clay Ceramics standards on June 18, 

2007, and the mandate effectuating the 

vacatur of the Boilers standards on July 

30, 2007. 

EPA’s long-standing position is that 

the ‘‘hammer’’ requirements of CAA 

section 112(j) apply in the case of a 

complete vacatur of a section 112(d) 

rule for a major source initially listed 

pursuant to section 112(c)(1).1 This 

position is supported by Congressional 

intent reflected in the overall structure 

of the CAA as amended in 1990. 

Congress amended the CAA in 1990 

by naming 190 hazardous air pollutants 

and requiring EPA to promulgate 

emission standards to reduce emissions 

of these and any additional hazardous 

air pollutants subsequently identified by 

EPA. 42 U.S.C. 7412(b)(1), (d). Congress 

first directed EPA to list categories and 

subcategories of major sources that emit 

one or more hazardous air pollutants. 42 

U.S.C. 7412(c). EPA was next required 

to establish technology-based MACT 

standards for the listed categories and 

subcategories of major sources. Id. 

§ 7412(d), (e). 

Congress further required that these 

standards be promulgated ‘‘as 

expeditiously as practicable’’ on a 

phased schedule, with standards for all 

source categories promulgated by 

November 15, 2000. 42 U.S.C. 

7412(e)(1)(E). Section 112(j) was enacted 

to ensure that these major sources 

would be subject to case-by-case MACT 

standards even if no national MACT 

standards were in place after the 

deadlines established pursuant to 

section 112(e). 

In light of Congressional intent that 

sources in listed source categories be 

subject to either national or case-by-case 

MACT standards, EPA’s view is that 

when a section 112(d) rule establishing 

MACT standards is vacated in its 

entirety after such deadlines, there has 

been, in effect, a ‘‘[f]ailure to promulgate 

a standard’’ within the meaning of 

section 112(j)(2).2 This view is also 

supported by case law that establishes 

that to vacate means to annul or make 

void and is a reasonable interpretation 

of section 112(j). See, e.g., Action on 

Smoking Health v. CAB, 713 F.2d 795, 

797–800 (D.C. Cir. 1983). 

C. What source categories would be 

affected? 

These amendments would 

immediately affect sources in any 

source category ‘‘initially listed’’ in 1992 

(57 FR 31576, 15991; July 16, 1992) for 

which all applicable MACT standards 

have been vacated, namely, MACT 

standards for PVC, Brick, Clay Ceramics, 

and Boilers. In addition, the 

amendments would apply to sources in 

any source category ‘‘initially listed’’ in 

1992 (57 FR 31576, 15991; July 16, 

1992) for which a section 112(d) rule 

establishing MACT standards is 

completely vacated in the future. It is 

important to note that section 112(j) and 

EPA’s section 112(j) regulations will 

apply only where there has been or is 

in the future a vacatur of a section 

112(d) rule establishing MACT 

standards. EPA has issued section 

112(d) MACT standards for all source 

categories ‘‘initially listed’’ and thus a 

failure to promulgate within the 

meaning of section 112(j) can only arise 

in the future if the entire MACT 

regulation for such a source category is 

completely vacated. Thus, the 

provisions in the current section 112(j) 

regulations that are premised upon 

schedules established for issuance of 

MACT standards for ‘‘initially listed’’ 

source categories are obsolete or 

unnecessary and are revised or 

eliminated in today’s proposal. 

III. Summary of Proposed Amendments 

We are proposing these amendments 

to clarify and streamline the process for 

sources and permitting authorities to 

follow in establishing case-by-case 

emissions limitations under section 

112(j) in the case of complete vacatur of 

a section 112(d) MACT standard. There 

has been confusion and uncertainty 

among some permitting authorities and 

sources as to how section 112(j) and 

EPA’s regulations implementing section 

112(j) apply in the case of a complete 

vacatur of a section 112(d) rule 

establishing MACT standards, 

especially with respect to the timing of 

the application process. The 

amendments we are proposing today 

will clarify how the section 112(j) 

regulations apply in the case of such 

vacatur. We note that EPA’s proposed 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

15658 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

3 40 CFR 63.52(a) applies to sources subject to 

section 112(j) as of the section 112(j) deadline. 

4As explained in section III. D. of this preamble, 

we are deleting 63.52(a)(2) of the current rule. 

revisions are limited primarily to 

revisions that will clarify and streamline 

the application process when section 

112(j) is triggered by a complete vacatur. 

The proposed revisions will also remove 

obsolete or redundant regulatory 

language. EPA is not revising or seeking 

comment on any other provision of the 

section 112(j) regulations. 

A. Clarification of Applicability of 

Section 112(j) 

As discussed above in Section II.B., 

EPA’s long-standing position is that 

section 112(j) applies in the case of the 

complete vacatur of a section 112(d) 

rule establishing MACT standards for an 

initially listed major source. We are 

proposing language changes within the 

rule to clarify the applicability of 

section 112(j) in the case of such a 

complete vacatur. Specifically, we are 

proposing to revise the definition of the 

affected source to identify the triggering 

mechanism for section 112(j) from when 

‘‘the Administrator has failed to 

promulgate emission standards by the 

section 112(j) deadline’’ to when ‘‘there 

is no section 112(d) standard in place on 

or after the section 112(j) deadline.’’ 

This is consistent with EPA’s view that 

when there has been a complete vacatur 

of a section 112(d) rule establishing 

MACT standards, there has been in 

effect a ‘‘[f]ailure to promulgate a 

standard’’ within the meaning of section 

112(j). 

We are also proposing minor revisions 

to the regulations to further clarify the 

applicability of section 112(j) and to 

reduce redundancies. For example, 

where the rule language refers to section 

112(d) or (h) standards, as in the 

definition of ‘‘Equivalent Emission 

Limitation,’’ we are proposing to delete 

the reference to 112(h) to eliminate 

redundancy because a 112(h) standard 

falls within the definition of a 112(d) 

standard (see section 112(d)(2)(D)). 

Further, we are proposing to add a 

definition of ‘‘Listed Source Category or 

Subcategory’’ to clarify which source 

categories would be potentially subject 

to section 112(j) in the event that a 

section 112(d) rule for a major source is 

vacated in its entirety. This definition 

would specify that only those categories 

and subcategories on the initial 1992 

source category list would be potentially 

affected. Section 112(j) applies to 

categories or subcategories of sources 

that are subject to a schedule for 

promulgation of MACT standards 

pursuant to section 112(e)(1) and (3) 

(See section 112(j)(2)). The scheduling 

requirements of section 112(e)(1) and 

(e)(3) apply to categories and 

subcategories of sources ‘‘initially listed’’ 

for regulation pursuant to section 

112(c)(1). Thus, source categories listed 

after the initial listing (such as coal-and 

oil-fired electric generating units) that 

were not initially listed pursuant to 

section 112(c)(1) and thus are not 

covered by the schedules in section 112 

(e)(1) and (e)(3), are not subject to 

section 112(j). See 57 FR 31576, 15991 

(July 16, 1992) (initial source category 

list) and 58 FR 63941 (Dec. 3, 1993) 

(schedule establishing deadlines for the 

promulgation of emission standards for 

the categories of sources initially listed 

pursuant to section 112(c)(1) and (3)). 

B. Permit Application Content 

We are proposing to streamline the 

permit application by combining the 

Part 1 and Part 2 permit application. 

The original section 112(j) rule had a 

single permit application. We created 

the bifurcated process in 2003 (68 FR 

32586; May 30, 2003) to allow a source 

additional time to compile the 

information necessary for the permitting 

authority to make a MACT floor 

determination. We find this bifurcation 

to be unnecessary now that section 

112(j) is only applicable to sources in 

source categories for which a section 

112(d) rule has been or will be vacated 

in its entirety. As discussed below, 

under the circumstances surrounding 

complete vacatur of a section 112(d) 

rule, many sources will have already 

compiled and submitted to the 

permitting authority the information 

required by a section 112(j) application. 

We are proposing no other changes to 

the permit application content. 

However, we are proposing to retain the 

requirement that sources seeking 

equivalency determinations pursuant to 

63.52(e)(2)(ii) submit information that 

would be submitted as part of a Part 1 

application under the current rule, i.e., 

the information set out at 63.53(a)(1)– 

(4). Today’s proposal changes that 

heading for section 63.53(a) from ‘‘Part 

1 MACT application’’ to ‘‘Section 112(g) 

equivalency determination request.’’ 

C. Section 112(j) Permit Application 

Deadline 

We are proposing to establish the 

deadline for submittal of a permit 

application to obtain a section 112(j) 

limit in the case of a complete vacatur 

by redefining ‘‘Section 112(j) Deadline.’’ 

For those source categories for which 

the mandate effectuating the complete 

vacatur of the MACT rule was issued 

over 18 months ago, namely the Boilers, 

Brick, Clay Ceramics, and PVC source 

categories, we are proposing to revise 40 

CFR 63.52(a) 3 to require that sources in 

those categories submit permit 

applications the earlier of 90 days after 

promulgation of these amendments or 

the date by which the source’s 

permitting authority has requested in 

writing a section 112(j) Part 2 

application. 

We have selected 90 days consistent 

with the timing set forth in 40 CFR 

63.52(a)(2) of the current rule.4 The 

above proposed approach recognizes 

that there may have been some 

uncertainty as to the application of 

section 112(j) after the complete vacatur 

of the PVC, Brick, Clay Ceramics, and 

Boiler MACT standards. Under the 

existing section 112(j) regulations, 

where a source subject to section 112(j) 

as of the section 112(j) deadline is not 

able to ‘‘reasonably determine’’ that one 

or more sources at the major source 

belong in the category or subcategory 

subject to section 112(j), pursuant to 

section 40 CFR 63.52(a)(2) of the current 

regulations, notification by the 

permitting authority initiates the 30-day 

period for submittal of a Part 1 

application. Under such circumstances, 

the current rule provides that the Part 2 

application is due 60 days after the date 

that the Part 1 application is due (40 

CFR 63.52(e)(1)). EPA is proposing to 

revise the regulation to provide that for 

sources in the PVC, Brick, Clay 

Ceramics and Boiler source categories 

subject to section 112(j) as of the section 

112(j) deadline, a section 112(j) 

application is due the earlier of 90 days 

after the date of promulgation of the 

revisions or by the date specified by the 

source’s permitting authority for 

submittal of a Part 2 permit application. 

In either case, sources will have had at 

least 90 days notice of the obligation to 

submit a section 112(j) application. If a 

section 112(d) rule establishing 

emission standards for a category of 

major sources is vacated in the future, 

we are proposing that permit 

applications be submitted within 18 

months after the date of the court 

mandate effectuating the complete 

vacatur of the standards applicable to 

such sources covered by 40 CFR 

63.52(a) (sources subject to section 

112(j) as of the 112(j) deadline). 

We believe that these deadlines 

would provide sufficient time for the 

source owner or operator to prepare a 

permit application for submittal. 

Sources in the PVC, Brick, Clay 

Ceramics and Boilers source categories 

that were unsure of the applicability of 

section 112(j) have at least 90 days 

notice of their obligation to complete 

the permit application process as 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 15659 

contemplated by the current regulations. 

This proposed rule also serves to 

provide notice of when applications 

will be due if these rule amendments 

are promulgated as proposed. Further, 

many sources will have had much more 

notice by virtue of communications 

with permitting authorities. If a section 

112(d) rule establishing emission 

standards for a major source category is 

vacated in the future, a source would 

have up to 18 months after the date of 

the mandate effectuating the vacatur to 

prepare its permit application. Eighteen 

months is consistent with the timing for 

submittal of section 112(j) permit 

applications provided for in section 

112(j)(2) of the CAA. 

In both cases sources and permitting 

authorities should already have most, if 

not all, of the information required to be 

included in the application for a section 

112(j) case-by-case limit. Sources that 

were subject to the vacated PVC, Brick, 

Clay Ceramics and Boilers standards 

should have previously compiled and 

provided information to the permitting 

authority in the process of obtaining 

their title V permit conditions for 

meeting the standards before such 

standards were vacated. Pulling the 

existing information together in a permit 

application for case-by-case MACT and 

reviewing it prior to submittal to the 

permitting authority should add little 

additional burden. This is also likely to 

be the case in the event of any future 

vacaturs, especially given the 18 month 

period for submittal of applications. 

EPA seeks comments on the 90 day 

period and whether a longer or shorter 

time period for submission of 

applications is appropriate for the PVC, 

Brick, Clay Ceramics and Boiler source 

categories. We also are seeking 

comments on our proposal to establish 

an earlier deadline when a permitting 

authority has notified a source in the 

PVC, Brick, Clay Ceramics and Boiler 

source categories that it is obligated to 

submit a Part 2 application on a date 

that falls before 90 days after 

promulgation of the final rule. We 

further solicit comment on whether the 

deadline for applications should be 90 

days after promulgation of the final rule 

in every case for the PVC, Brick, Clay 

Ceramics and Boiler source categories. 

D. Elimination of Current Provisions 

Relating to Questions of Applicability in 

§ 63.52(a)(2), (d)(1), and (e)(2) 

The current rule provides for the 

owner or operator of a source to request 

an applicability determination from a 

permitting authority in the event that 

they are unsure whether or not the 

source is in a covered category or 

subcategory. 

We are proposing to eliminate 

applicability determination requests. 

The provisions governing applicability 

determinations have become obsolete 

because they are premised upon and 

tied to dates and time periods in the 

section 112(j) regulations that have 

expired (See § 63.52(e)(2)(i)). Further, 

we believe requests for applicability 

determinations are no longer necessary. 

With the exception of some sources that 

were subject to the vacated Boilers 

MACT, sources should know whether or 

not they are within a source category for 

a vacated rule because the definition of 

source in the vacated rule should 

provide sufficient guidance as to 

applicability. Some portion of boilers 

that were subject to the vacated boiler 

MACT rule, however, may be 

designated solid waste incineration 

units if they combust solid waste, as 

that term is defined in section 129(g). 

The Agency is in the process of defining 

the term ‘‘solid waste’’ under Subtitle D 

of the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA). We anticipate 

that there will be further clarification of 

that issue by the time sources have to 

submit section 112(j) permit 

applications in light of EPA’s intent to 

propose a rule defining the term ‘‘solid 

waste’’ under Subtitle D of RCRA by 

April 2010. 

Sources are free to consult with 

permitting authorities to resolve 

applicability issues before submitting a 

section 112(j) permit application or can 

submit a section 112(j) application as a 

protective measure and work with the 

permitting authority during the 

completeness determination phase to 

resolve applicability issues. 

For the same reason, we are 

eliminating section 63.52(a)(2) of the 

current rule. As explained above, 

section 63.52(a)(2) of the current rule 

provides that, when a source is not able 

to ‘‘reasonably determine’’ that one or 

more sources at the major source belong 

in the category or subcategory subject to 

section 112(j), notification by the 

permitting authority initiates the 30-day 

period for submittal of a Part 1 

application. For the reasons explained 

above, we believe that there should not 

be uncertainty as to the obligation to 

submit a section 112(j) permit 

application. As noted above, if there is 

uncertainty, the source can consult with 

the permitting authority to resolve such 

issues before submittal of a section 

112(j) application or submit a section 

112(j) application as a protective 

measure and work with the permitting 

authority during the completeness 

determination phase to resolve 

applicability issues. 

E. Other Minor Edits 

We have made minor edits and 

corrections to the definition of 

‘‘Available Information.’’ One correction 

identifies ‘‘8’’ information sources 

instead of the erroneous ‘‘5’’ in the last 

sentence prior to the list. The second 

correction is to replace the term ‘‘Part 2 

MACT’’ application to ‘‘Permit’’ 

application to conform with the 

streamlining discussed in section III.B. 

Finally, in information source(5), we 

have revised language from ‘‘Aerometric 

Information Retrieval System (AIRS)’’ 

which no longer exists, by providing an 

example EPA database, the ‘‘Air Facility 

Subsystem.’’ 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ because it 

may raise novel legal or policy issues. 

Accordingly, EPA submitted this action 

to OMB for review under Executive 

Order 12866, and any changes made in 

response to OMB recommendations 

have been documented in the docket for 

this action. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The information collection 

requirements in this proposed rule have 

been submitted for approval to OMB 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 

U.S.C. 3501, et seq. The Information 

Collection Request (ICR) document 

prepared by EPA has been assigned EPA 

ICR number 1648.07. 

The permit application requirements 

in the proposed rule are required in 

subpart B of part 63. All information 

submitted to EPA pursuant to the 

information collection requirements for 

which a claim of confidentiality is made 

is safeguarded according to CAA section 

114(c) and the Agency’s implementing 

regulations at 40 CFR part 2, subpart B. 

The proposed information collection 

requirements consist of a title V permit 

application or revision, or a request for 

a section 112(g) equivalency 

determination. 

We estimate that these amendments 

would affect about 19 PVC sources, 122 

Brick and Structural Clay sources, 8 

Clay Ceramics sources, and 15,500 

individual Boilers. 

The annual burden for this 

information collection averaged over the 

first 3 years of this ICR is estimated to 

total 83,670 labor hours per year at a 

cost of $6.59 million for the estimated 

total number of sources. Burden is 

defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

15660 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

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 EPA’s regulations in 40 

CFR part 63 are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 

To comment on the Agency’s need for 

this information, the accuracy of the 

provided burden estimates, and any 

suggested methods for minimizing 

respondent burden, EPA has established 

a public docket for this rule, which 

includes this ICR, under Docket ID 

number EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0746. 

Submit any comments related to the ICR 

to EPA and OMB. See ADDRESSES

section at the beginning of this notice 

for where to submit comments to EPA. 

Send comments to OMB at the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget, 725 

17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. 

Since OMB is required to make a 

decision concerning the ICR between 30 

and 60 days after March 30, 2010, a 

comment to OMB is best assured of 

having its full effect if OMB receives it 

by April 29, 2010. The final rule will 

respond to any OMB or public 

comments on the information collection 

requirements contained in this proposal. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

generally requires an agency to prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any 

rule subject to notice and comment 

rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act or any 

other statute unless the agency certifies 

that the rule would not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small not-for-profit enterprises, and 

small governmental jurisdictions. 

For the purposes of assessing the 

impacts of the proposed amendments on 

small entities, small entity is defined as: 

(1) A small business that meets the 

Small Business Administration size 

standards for small businesses found at 

13 CFR 121.201 (less than 500, 750, or 

1,000 employees depending on the 

category); (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. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of the proposed amendments on 

small entities, I certify that this action 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. These proposed amendments 

merely clarify the application process 

for obtaining case-by-case MACT limits 

in the case of complete vacatur of a 

112(d) MACT rule. The requirements of 

the current rule and the amendments 

proposed today implement existing 

CAA requirements and do not impose 

additional requirements not already 

required by the CAA. Therefore, this 

rule does not impose any new costs. 

Section 112(j) of the Clean Air Act 

requires sources to submit applications 

for case-by-case limits and requires 

permitting authorities to develop caseby-case limits (See 112(j)(3)–(5)). These 

proposed amendments do not establish 

any new section 112 standards. Case-bycase standards are developed by the 

permitting authority, which in most 

cases is a State. In addition, as is 

explained above, these proposed 

amendments narrow the applicability of 

the current section 112(j) regulations to 

major sources in source categories for 

which a MACT standard was 

promulgated and subsequently vacated 

in its entirety. Further, because this rule 

only applies to source categories for 

which a MACT standard was 

promulgated and subsequently vacated, 

permitting authorities and sources 

should already have a significant 

amount of the information required in 

the permit application for a case-by-case 

MACT limit. Sources that were subject 

to the vacated PVC, Brick, Clay 

Ceramics and Boilers standards should 

have previously compiled and provided 

information to the permitting authority 

in the process of obtaining their title V 

permit conditions for meeting the 

standards before such standards were 

vacated. Pulling the existing 

information together in a permit 

application for case-by-case MACT and 

reviewing it prior to submittal to the 

permitting authority should add little 

additional burden. This is also likely to 

be the case in the event of any future 

vacaturs. Sources are allowed to 

reference previously submitted 

information. Additional effort could 

include pulling the information 

together, reviewing the information, and 

submitting the application. EPA does 

not expect this additional effort to be 

significant. In addition, sources can 

recommend emission limitations and 

other requirements, but the proposed 

amendments do not require this. 

Finally, this certification is consistent 

with EPA’s certification that the current 

112(j) would not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

We continue to be interested in the 

potential impacts of the proposed 

amendments on small entities and 

welcome comments on issues related to 

such impacts. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

This action contains no Federal 

mandates under the provisions of Title 

II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531– 

1538 for State, local, and tribal 

governments or the private sector. This 

action imposes no enforceable duty on 

any State, local, tribal governments or 

the private sector. 

This action is also not subject to the 

requirements of section 203 of UMRA 

because it contains no regulatory 

requirements that might significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments not 

otherwise required by the CAA. The 

proposed amendments contain no 

requirements that apply to such 

governments, and impose no obligations 

upon them. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

These proposed amendments do 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. This action 

implements existing CAA requirements 

on owners and operators of specified 

major sources and does not impose 

additional requirements on State and 

local governments not specified in the 

CAA. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does 

not apply to these proposed 

amendments. 

In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, 

and consistent with EPA policy to 

promote communications between EPA 

and State and local government, EPA 

specifically solicits comments on the 

proposed amendments from State and 

local officials. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). This action would 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. 

The action implements existing CAA 

requirements on owners and operators 

of specified major sources and does not 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 15661 

impose additional requirements on 

tribal governments not already required 

by the CAA. Thus, Executive Order 

13175 does not apply to this action. 

EPA specifically solicits additional 

comment on this proposed action from 

tribal officials. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

(62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 

applying to those regulatory actions that 

concern health or safety risks, such that 

the analysis required under section 5– 

501 of the Order has the potential to 

influence the regulation. This action is 

not subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it is based solely on technology 

performance. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not a ‘‘significant energy 

action’’ as defined in Executive Order 

13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001)), 

because it is not likely to have a 

significant adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy. Further, 

we have concluded that these proposed 

amendments are not likely to have any 

adverse energy impacts. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104– 

113 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to 

use voluntary consensus standards 

(VCS) in its regulatory activities unless 

to do so would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

VCS are technical standards (e.g., 

materials specifications, test methods, 

sampling procedures, and business 

practices) that are developed or adopted 

by VCS bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency decides 

not to use available and applicable VCS. 

This proposed rulemaking does not 

involve technical standards. Therefore, 

EPA is not considering the use of any 

voluntary consensus standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) establishes Federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

Federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this action 

will not have disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority or 

low-income populations because it 

increases the level of environmental 

protection for all affected populations 

without having any disproportionately 

high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on any 

population, including any minority or 

low-income population. The proposed 

amendments require permitting 

authorities to develop case-by-case 

emission limits for all sources in each 

source category for which standards 

have been vacated. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Hazardous 

substances, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: March 24, 2010. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations is 

proposed to be amended as follows: 

PART 63—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 63 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart B—[Amended] 

2. Section 63.50 is amended by: 

a. Revising the first sentence of 

paragraph (a)(2)(i); 

b. Revising paragraph (c); and 

c. Revising the first sentence of 

paragraph (d) to read as follows: 

§ 63.50 Applicability. 

(a) * * * 

(2) * * * 

(i) The owner or operator of affected 

sources within a listed source category 

or subcategory under this part that are 

located at a major source that is subject 

to an approved title V permit program 

and for which there is no section 112(d) 

emission standard in place on or after 

the section 112(j) deadline. * * * 

* * * * * 

(c) The procedures in §§ 63.50 

through 63.56 apply for each affected 

source only after its section 112(j) 

deadline has passed and there is no 

generally applicable Federal standard 

governing that source under section 

112(d) of the Act. If a generally 

applicable Federal standard governing 

that source is in place, the owner or 

operator of the affected source and the 

permitting authority are not required to 

take further action to develop an 

equivalent emission limitation under 

section 112(j) of the Act. 

(d) Any final equivalent emission 

limitation for an affected source which 

is issued by the permitting authority 

pursuant to §§ 63.50 through 63.56 prior 

to promulgation of a generally 

applicable Federal standard governing 

that source under section 112(d) of the 

Act shall be deemed an applicable 

Federal requirement adopted pursuant 

to section 112(j) of the Act. * * * 

3. Section 63.51 is amended by: 

a. Revising the definition of Affected 

source; 

b. Revising the definition of Available 

information; 

c. Revising the definition of 

Equivalent emission limitation; 

d. Revising the definition of Section 

112(j) deadline; and 

e. Adding in alphabetical order a 

definition for Listed source category or 

subcategory to read as follows: 

§ 63.51 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

Affected source means the collection 

of equipment, activities, or both within 

a single contiguous area and under 

common control that is in a listed 

source category or subcategory for 

which there is no section 112(d) 

emission standard on or after the section 

112(j) deadline, and that is addressed by 

an applicable MACT emission 

limitation established pursuant to this 

subpart. 

Available information means, for 

purposes of conducting a MACT floor 

finding and identifying control 

technology options under this subpart, 

any information that is available as of 

the date on which the first permit 

application under this subpart is filed 

for a source in the relevant source 

category or subcategory in the State or 

jurisdiction; and, pursuant to the 

requirements of this subpart, is 

additional relevant information that can 

be expeditiously provided by the 

Administrator, is submitted by the 

applicant or others prior to or during the 

public comment period on the section 

112(j) equivalent emission limitation for 

that source, or information contained in 

any of the information sources in 

paragraphs (1) through (8) of this 

definition. 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

15662 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

(1) A relevant proposed regulation, 

including all supporting information; 

(2) Relevant background information 

documents for a draft or proposed 

regulation; 

(3) Any relevant regulation, 

information or guidance collected by the 

Administrator establishing a MACT 

floor finding and/or MACT 

determination; 

(4) Relevant data and information 

available from the Clean Air Technology 

Center developed pursuant to section 

112(l)(3) of the Act; 

(5) Relevant data and information 

contained in EPA databases such as the 

Air Facility Subsystem; 

(6) Any additional information that 

can be expeditiously provided by the 

Administrator; 

(7) Any information provided by 

applicants in an application for a 

permit, permit modification, 

administrative amendment, or Notice of 

MACT Approval pursuant to the 

requirements of this subpart; and 

(8) Any additional relevant 

information provided by the applicant. 

* * * * * 

Equivalent emission limitation means 

an emission limitation, established 

under section 112(j) of the Act, which 

is equivalent to the MACT standard that 

EPA would have promulgated under 

section 112(d) of the Act. 

Listed source category or subcategory 

means a source category or subcategory 

initially listed pursuant to section 

112(c)(1) at 57 FR 31576, 15991 (July 16, 

1992). 

* * * * * 

Section 112(j) deadline means: 

(1) for a source in the Polyvinyl 

Chloride and Copolymers Production, 

Brick and Structural Clay Products 

Manufacturing, Clay Ceramics 

Manufacturing, or the Industrial, 

Commercial and Institutional Boilers 

and Process Heaters source category, the 

earlier of [THE DATE 90 DAYS AFTER 

THE PROMULGATION DATE IN THE 

FEDERAL REGISTER] or the date by 

which the source’s permitting authority 

has requested in writing a section 112(j) 

permit application containing the 

information set out in section 63.53(b); 

or 

(2) for any other major source in a 

listed source category or subcategory, 18 

months after the date of a court mandate 

effectuating the complete vacatur of a 

section 112(d) rule applicable to such 

source. 

* * * * * 

4. Section 63.52 is amended by: 

a. Revising the first sentence of 

paragraph (a) introductory text; 

b. Revising paragraph (a)(1); 

c. Removing paragraph (a)(2) and 

redesignating paragraph (a)(3) as (a)(2); 

d. Revising newly designated 

paragraph (a)(2) introductory text; 

e. Revising the first sentence of newly 

designated paragraph (a)(2)(i); 

f. Revising the second sentence of 

newly designated paragraph (a)(2)(ii); 

g. Revising the first sentence of 

paragraph (b)(1); 

h. Revising the third sentence of 

paragraph (b)(2); 

i. Revising the first sentence of 

paragraph (b)(3); 

j. Revising the first sentence of 

paragraph (b)(4); 

k. Revising paragraph (c) introductory 

text; 

l. Revising the first sentence of 

paragraph (c)(2); 

m. Revising paragraph (d); 

n. Revising paragraphs (e)(1), (e)(2), 

(e)(3), and (e)(4); and 

o. Revising paragraph (g) to read as 

follows: 

§ 63.52 Approval process for new and 

existing affected sources. 

(a) Sources subject to section 112(j) as 

of the section 112(j) deadline. The 

requirements of paragraph (a)(1) of this 

section apply to major sources that 

include, as of the section 112(j) 

deadline, one or more sources in a 

category or subcategory for which there 

is no section 112(d) emission standard 

in place on or after the section 112(j) 

deadline. * * * 

(1) The owner or operator must 

submit an application for a title V 

permit or for a revision to an existing 

title V permit or a pending title V permit 

meeting the requirements of § 63.53(b) 

by the section 112(j) deadline unless the 

owner or operator has submitted a 

request for 112(g) equivalency 

determination under paragraph (a)(2) of 

this section. 

(2) The requirements in paragraphs 

(a)(2)(i) through (ii) of this section apply 

when the owner or operator has 

obtained a title V permit that 

incorporates a case-by-case MACT 

determination by the permitting 

authority under section 112(g) or has 

submitted a title V permit application 

for a revision that incorporates a caseby-case MACT determination under 

section 112(g), but has not submitted an 

application for a title V permit revision 

that addresses the emission limitation 

requirements of section 112(j). 

(i) When the owner or operator has a 

title V permit that incorporates a caseby-case MACT determination by the 

permitting authority under section 

112(g), the owner or operator must 

submit a request meeting the 

requirements of § 63.53(a) for a title V 

permit revision within 30 days of the 

section 112(j) deadline. * * * 

(ii) * * * Within 30 days of issuance 

of that title V permit, the owner or 

operator must submit a request meeting 

the requirements of § 63.53(a) for an 

equivalency determination. * * * 

(b) * * * 

(1) When one or more sources in a 

category or subcategory subject to the 

requirements of this subpart are 

installed at a major source, or result in 

the source becoming a major source due 

to the installation, and the installation 

does not invoke section 112(g) 

requirements, the owner or operator 

must submit an application meeting the 

requirements of § 63.53(b) within 30 

days of startup of the source. * * * 

(2) * * * Within 30 days of issuance 

of that title V permit, the owner or 

operator must submit a request meeting 

the requirements of § 63.53(a) for an 

equivalency determination. * * * 

(3) The owner or operator of an area 

source that, due to a relaxation in any 

federally enforceable emission 

limitation (such as a restriction on hours 

of operation), increases its potential to 

emit hazardous air pollutants such that 

the source becomes a major source that 

is subject to this subpart, must submit 

an application meeting the requirements 

of § 63.53(b) for a title V permit or for 

an application for a title V permit 

revision within 30 days after the date 

that such source becomes a major 

source. * * * 

(4) On or after April 5, 2002, if the 

Administrator establishes a lesser 

quantity emission rate under section 

112(a)(1) of the Act that results in an 

area source becoming a major source 

that is subject to this subpart, then the 

owner or operator of such a major 

source must submit an application 

meeting the requirements of § 63.53(b) 

for a title V permit or for a change to an 

existing title V permit or pending title 

V permit on or before the date 6 months 

after the date that such source becomes 

a major source. * * * 

(c) Sources that have a title V permit 

addressing section 112(j) requirements. 

The requirements of paragraphs (c)(1) 

and (2) of this section apply to major 

sources within a listed source category 

or subcategory for which there is no 

section 112(d) emission standard in 

place on or after the section 112(j) 

deadline, and the owner or operator has 

a permit meeting the section 112(j) 

requirements, and where changes occur 

at the major source to equipment, 

activities, or both, subsequent to the 

section 112(j) deadline. 

* * * * * 

(2) If the title V permit does not 

contain the appropriate requirements 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 15663 

that address the events that occur under 

paragraph (c) of this section subsequent 

to the section 112(j) deadline, then the 

owner or operator must submit an 

application for a revision to the existing 

title V permit that meets the 

requirements of § 63.53(b). * * * 

(d) Requests for notice of MACT 

approval. In addition to meeting the 

requirements of paragraphs (a), (b), and 

(c) of this section, the owner or operator 

of a new affected source may submit an 

application for a Notice of MACT 

Approval before construction, pursuant 

to § 63.54. 

(e) * * * 

(1) Permit applications must be 

reviewed by the permitting authority 

according to procedures established in 

§ 63.55. The resulting MACT 

determination must be incorporated into 

the source’s title V permit according to 

procedures established under title V, 

and any other regulations approved 

under title V in the jurisdiction in 

which the affected source is located. 

(2) As specified in paragraphs (a) and 

(b) of this section, an owner or operator 

who has submitted a request meeting 

the requirements of § 63.53(a) may 

request a determination by the 

permitting authority of whether 

emission limitations adopted pursuant 

to a prior case-by-case MACT 

determination under section 112(g) that 

apply to one or more sources at a major 

source in a relevant category or 

subcategory are substantially as effective 

as the emission limitations which the 

permitting authority would otherwise 

adopt pursuant to section 112(j) for the 

source in question. Each request for an 

equivalency determination under this 

paragraph (e)(2) will be construed in the 

alternative as a complete application for 

an equivalent emission limitation under 

section 112(j). The process for 

determination by the permitting 

authority of whether the emission 

limitations in the prior case-by-case 

MACT determination are substantially 

as effective as the emission limitations 

which the permitting authority would 

otherwise adopt under section 112(j) 

must include the opportunity for full 

public, EPA, and affected State review 

prior to a final determination. If the 

permitting authority determines that the 

emission limitations in the prior caseby-case MACT determination are 

substantially as effective as the emission 

limitations which the permitting 

authority would otherwise adopt under 

section 112(j), then the permitting 

authority must adopt the existing 

emission limitations in the permit as the 

emission limitations to effectuate 

section 112(j) for the source in question. 

If more than 3 years remain on the 

current title V permit, the owner or 

operator must submit an application for 

a title V permit revision to make any 

conforming changes in the permit 

required to adopt the existing emission 

limitations as the section 112(j) MACT 

emission limitations. If less than 3 years 

remain on the current title V permit, any 

required conforming changes must be 

made when the permit is renewed. If the 

permitting authority determines that the 

emission limitations in the prior caseby-case MACT determination under 

section 112(g) are not substantially as 

effective as the emission limitations 

which the permitting authority would 

otherwise adopt for the source in 

question under section 112(j), the 

permitting authority must make a new 

MACT determination and adopt a title 

V permit incorporating an appropriate 

equivalent emission limitation under 

section 112(j). Such a determination 

constitutes final action for purposes of 

judicial review under 40 CFR 

70.4(b)(3)(x) and corresponding State 

title V program provisions. 

(3) Within 60 days of submittal of the 

permit application, the permitting 

authority must notify the owner or 

operator in writing whether the 

application is complete or incomplete. 

The permit application shall be deemed 

complete on the date it was submitted 

unless the permitting authority notifies 

the owner or operator in writing within 

60 days of the submittal that the permit 

application is incomplete. A permit 

application is complete if it is sufficient 

to begin processing the application for 

a title V permit addressing section 112(j) 

requirements. In the event that the 

permitting authority disapproves a 

permit application or determines that 

the application is incomplete, the owner 

or operator must revise and resubmit the 

application to meet the objections of the 

permitting authority. The permitting 

authority must specify a reasonable 

period in which the owner or operator 

is required to remedy the deficiencies in 

the disapproved or incomplete 

application. This period may not exceed 

6 months from the date the owner or 

operator is first notified that the 

application has been disapproved or is 

incomplete. 

(4) Following submittal of a permit 

application, the permitting authority 

may request additional information 

from the owner or operator. The owner 

or operator must respond to such 

requests in a timely manner. 

* * * * * 

(g) Permit issuance dates. The 

permitting authority must issue a title V 

permit meeting section 112(j) 

requirements within 18 months after 

submittal of the complete permit 

application. 

* * * * * 

5. Section 63.53 is amended by: 

a. Revising the section heading; 

b. Revising paragraph (a) introductory 

text; and 

c. Revising paragraphs (b) 

introductory text, (b)(1), (b)(2), and 

(b)(3) introductory text. 

§ 63.53 Section 112(g) equivalency 

determination requests and application 

content for case-by-case MACT 

determinations. 

(a) Section 112(g) equivalency 

determination request. A section 112(g) 

equivalency determination request must 

contain the information in paragraphs 

(a)(1) through (4) of this section. 

* * * * * 

(b) Permit application. (1) In 

compiling a permit application, the 

owner or operator may cross-reference 

specific information in any prior 

submission by the owner or operator to 

the permitting authority, but in crossreferencing such information the owner 

or operator may not presume favorable 

action on any prior application or 

request which is still pending. In 

compiling a permit application, the 

owner or operator may also crossreference any part of a standard 

proposed by the Administrator pursuant 

to section 112(d) of the Act for any 

category or subcategory which includes 

sources to which the permit application 

applies. 

(2) The permit application for a 

MACT determination must contain the 

information in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) 

through (b)(2)(vi) of this section. 

(i) The information required by 

paragraph (a) of this section if a request 

for 112(g) equivalency was not 

previously submitted. 

(ii) For a new affected source, the 

anticipated date of startup of operation. 

(iii) Each emission point or group of 

emission points at the affected source 

which is part of a category or 

subcategory for which a permit 

application is required, and each of the 

hazardous air pollutants emitted at 

those emission points. When the 

Administrator has proposed a standard 

pursuant to section 112(d) of the Act for 

a category or subcategory, such 

information may be limited to those 

emission points and hazardous air 

pollutants which would be subject to 

control under the proposed standard. 

(iv) Any existing Federal, State, or 

local limitations or requirements 

governing emissions of hazardous air 

pollutants from those emission points 

which are part of a category or 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS

15664 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 60 / Tuesday, March 30, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

subcategory for which a permit 

application is required. 

(v) For each identified emission point 

or group of affected emission points, an 

identification of control technology in 

place. 

(vi) Any additional emission data or 

other information specifically requested 

by the permitting authority. 

(3) The permit application for a 

MACT determination may, but is not 

required to, contain the following 

information: 

* * * * * 

§ 63.54 [Amended] 

6. Section 63.54 is amended by 

removing the first sentence of the 

introductory text of the section. 

7. Section 63.55 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (a) introductory text 

and (b) to read as follows: 

§ 63.55 Maximum achievable control 

technology (MACT) determinations for 

affected sources subject to case-by-case 

determination of equivalent emission 

limitations. 

(a) Requirements for permitting 

authorities. The permitting authority 

must determine whether the permit 

application is complete or an 

application for a Notice of MACT 

Approval is approvable. In either case, 

when the application is complete or 

approvable, the permitting authority 

must establish hazardous air pollutant 

emissions limitations equivalent to the 

limitations that would apply if an 

emission standard had been issued in a 

timely manner under section 112(d) of 

the Act. The permitting authority must 

establish these emissions limitations 

consistent with the following 

requirements and principles: 

* * * * * 

(b) Reporting to EPA. The owner or 

operator must submit additional copies 

of its application for a title V permit, 

permit revision, or Notice of MACT 

Approval, whichever is applicable, to 

the EPA at the same time the material 

is submitted to the permitting authority. 

8. Section 63.56 is amended by 

revising the first sentence of paragraph 

(b), and paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) to read 

as follows: 

§ 63.56 Requirements for case-by-case 

determination of equivalent emission 

limitations after promulgation of 

subsequent MACT standard. 

* * * * * 

(b) If the Administrator promulgates a 

relevant emission standard under 

section 112(d) of the Act that is 

applicable to a source after the date a 

permit is issued pursuant to § 63.52 or 

§ 63.54, the permitting authority must 

incorporate requirements of that 

standard in the title V permit upon its 

next renewal. * * * 

(c) * * * 

(1) If the Administrator promulgates 

an emission standard under section 

112(d) that is applicable to an affected 

source after the date a permit 

application under this paragraph is 

approved under § 63.52 or § 63.54, the 

permitting authority is not required to 

change the emission limitation in the 

permit to reflect the promulgated 

standard if the permitting authority 

determines that the level of control 

required by the emission limitation in 

the permit is substantially as effective as 

that required by the promulgated 

standard pursuant to § 63.1(e). 

(2) If the Administrator promulgates 

an emission standard under section 

112(d) of the Act that is applicable to an 

affected source after the date a permit 

application is approved under § 63.52 or 

§ 63.54, and the level of control required 

by the promulgated standard is less 

stringent than the level of control 

required by any emission limitation in 

the prior case-by-case MACT 

determination, the permitting authority 

is not required to incorporate any less 

stringent emission limitation of the 

promulgated standard in the title V 

permit and may in its discretion 

consider any more stringent provisions 

of the MACT determination to be 

applicable legal requirements when 

issuing or revising such a title V permit. 

Table 1 to Subpart B of Part 63— 

[Removed] 

9. Table 1 to Subpart B of part 63 is 

removed. 

Table 2 to Subpart B of Part 63— 

[Removed] 

10. Table 2 to Subpart B of part 63 is 

removed. 

[FR Doc. 2010–7041 Filed 3–29–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND 

COMMUNITY SERVICE 

45 CFR Parts 2527, 2551, and 2552 

RIN 3045–AA51 

Serve America Act Amendments to the 

National and Community Service Act 

of 1990 and the Domestic Volunteer 

Service Act of 1973 

AGENCY: Corporation for National and 

Community Service. 

ACTION: Proposed rule with request for 

comments; correction. 

SUMMARY: The Corporation for National 

and Community Service (the 

Corporation) is correcting a proposed 

rule to implement changes to the 

operation of the National Service Trust 

and the Senior Corps programs under 

the Serve America Act, that appeared in 

the Federal Register of February 23, 

2010 (75 FR 8013). That document 

incorrectly amended 45 CFR 2527.10(c) 

by removing current paragraph (c)(2). 

Additionally, there were two 

misstatements in the preamble. First, in 

an example to illustrate the limitation 

on the value of education awards an 

individual may receive, the preamble 

stated that a person who had previously 

earned the aggregate value of 1.71 

awards could enroll in a quarter-time, 

minimum-time, reduced part-time, or 

Silver Scholar position. The inclusion of 

reduced part-time as an option in this 

example was in error. Second, the 

preamble incorrectly described the 

hardship waiver for Senior Companion 

and Foster Grandparent programs in the 

preamble. This document corrects the 

interim final rule by revising the 

preamble language providing an 

example of the aggregate value of 

education awards and the language 

describing the hardship waiver for 

Senior Companion and Foster 

Grandparent programs and by revising 

the instructions for 45 CFR 2527.10. 

DATES: To be sure your comments are 

considered, they must reach the 

Corporation on or before April 26, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Amy Borgstrom, Docket Manager, 

Corporation for National and 

Community Service, (202) 606–6930, 

TDD (202) 606–3472. Persons with 

visual impairments may request this 

document in an alternate format. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. 

2010–3385, beginning on page 8013 in 

the Federal Register of Thursday, 

February 23, 2010, make the following 

corrections: 

1. In the Supplementary Information 

section, on page 8019, revise the second 

paragraph of the second column to read 

as follows: 

Using the example above, if an individual 

had received an aggregate value of 1.71 

awards in the past, that individual may be 

eligible to enroll in a quarter-time, minimumtime, or Silver Scholar position, but would 

not be eligible to enroll in a part-time or fulltime position, since the value of a part-time 

award, .5, plus 1.71, is greater than 2. 

2. In the Supplementary Information 

section, on page 8023, in the second 

column, revise the paragraph entitled 

‘‘Hardship Waiver Permitted for Cost 

Reimbursement Cap for Senior 

Companion and Foster Grandparent 

Programs (§§ 2552.92, 2552.92)’’ to read 

as follows: 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS