54606 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 172 / Thursday, September 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 60 and 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0708, FRL–9900–76– 

OA] 

RIN 2060–AR90 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for 

Reciprocating Internal Combustion 

Engines; New Source Performance 

Standards for Stationary Internal 

Combustion Engines 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of reconsideration of 

final rule; request for public comment. 

SUMMARY: On January 30, 2013, the EPA 

finalized amendments to the national 

emission standards for hazardous air 

pollutants for stationary reciprocating 

internal combustion engines and the 

standards of performance for stationary 

internal combustion engines. 

Subsequently, the EPA received three 

petitions for reconsideration of the final 

rule. The EPA is announcing 

reconsideration of and requesting public 

comment on three issues raised in the 

petitions for reconsideration, as detailed 

in the Supplementary Information 

section of this notice of reconsideration. 

The EPA plans to issue a final decision 

on these issues as expeditiously as 

possible. The EPA is seeking comment 

only on the three issues. The EPA will 

not respond to any comments 

addressing any other issues or any other 

provisions of the final rule or any other 

rule. The EPA is not proposing any 

changes to its regulations in this notice 

of reconsideration. 

DATES: Comments. Comments must be 

received on or before November 4, 2013, 

or 30 days after date of public hearing 

if later. 

Public Hearing. If anyone contacts us 

requesting to speak at a public hearing 

by September 25, 2013, a public hearing 

will be held on October 7, 2013. If you 

are interested in attending the public 

hearing, contact Ms. Pamela Garrett at 

(919) 541–7966 to verify that a hearing 

will be held. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2008–0708, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (202) 566–1741. 

• Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and 

Information Center, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. Please include a 

total of two copies. The EPA requests a 

separate copy also be sent to the contact 

person identified below (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 

• Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation 

Docket and Information Center, U.S. 

EPA, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC. 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–2008– 

0708. The EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available on-line at 

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 www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means the EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to the EPA without 

going through www.regulations.gov, 

your email 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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

the 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. 

Public Hearing: If a public hearing is 

held, it will be held at the EPA’s 

campus located at 109 T.W. Alexander 

Drive in Research Triangle Park, NC or 

an alternate site nearby. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. The EPA also relies on 

documents in Docket ID Nos. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2002–0059, EPA–HQ–OAR–2005– 

0029, EPA–HQ–OAR–2005–0030, and 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0295, and 

incorporated those dockets into the 

record for this action. Although listed in 

the index, some information is not 

publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the Air and Radiation 

Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 

1301 Constitution Ave. NW., 

Washington, DC. 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: Ms. 

Melanie King, Energy Strategies Group, 

Sector Policies and Programs Division 

(D243–01), Environmental Protection 

Agency, Research Triangle Park, North 

Carolina 27711; telephone number: 

(919) 541–2469; facsimile number: (919) 

541–5450; email address: king.melanie@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Organization of this Document. The 

following outline is provided to aid in 

locating information in the preamble. 

I. General Information 

A. What is the source of authority for the 

reconsideration action? 

B. What entities are potentially affected by 

the reconsideration action? 

C. What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for the EPA? 

II. Background 

III. Discussion of the Issues Under 

Reconsideration 

A. Timing for Compliance With the ULSD 

Fuel Requirement for Emergency Engines 

B. Timing and Required Information for the 

Reporting Requirement for Emergency 

Engines 

C. Criteria for Operation for up to 50 Hours 

per Year for Non-Emergency Situations 

IV. Solicitation of Public Comment and 

Participation 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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 

Risks and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 172 / Thursday, September 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules 54607 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

I. General Information 

A. What is the source of authority for 

the reconsideration action? 

The statutory authority for this action 

is provided by sections 112 and 

307(d)(7)(B) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

as amended (42 U.S.C. 7412 and 

7607(d)(7)(B)). 

B. What entities are potentially affected 

by the reconsideration action? 

Categories and entities potentially 

regulated by this action include: 

Category NAICS1 Examples of regulated entities 

Any industry using a stationary reciprocating internal combustion engine.2211 Electric power generation, transmission, or distribution. 

1 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. To determine 

whether your engine is regulated by this 

action, you should examine the 

applicability criteria in 40 CFR 63.6585, 

40 CFR 60.4200, and 40 CFR 60.4230. 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. 

C. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for the EPA? 

Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to the EPA through 

regulations.gov or email. 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 the 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. Send or deliver 

information identified as CBI to only the 

following address: Ms. Melanie King, 

c/o OAQPS Document Control Officer 

(Room C404–02), U.S. EPA, Research 

Triangle Park, NC 27711, Attention 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– 

0708. 

Docket. The docket number for this 

notice of reconsideration is Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0708. 

World Wide Web (WWW). In addition 

to being available in the docket, an 

electronic copy of this notice of 

reconsideration will be posted on the 

WWW through the Technology Transfer 

Network Web site (TTN Web). 

Following signature, the EPA will post 

a copy of this notice of reconsideration 

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. 

II. Background 

On January 30, 2013, the EPA 

promulgated amendments to the 

national emission standards for 

hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for 

stationary reciprocating internal 

combustion engines (RICE) and the 

standards of performance (‘‘NSPS’’) for 

stationary internal combustion engines 

(ICE) (78 FR 6674). Following 

promulgation of the January 30, 2013, 

final rule, the EPA received three 

petitions for reconsideration pursuant to 

section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA. The 

EPA received a petition dated March 29, 

2013, from Calpine Corporation and 

PSEG Power LLC. The EPA received a 

petition dated April 1, 2013, from the 

Delaware Department of Natural 

Resources and Environmental Control 

(DE DNREC). Finally, the EPA received 

a petition dated April 1, 2013, from 

Clean Air Council, Citizens for 

Pennsylvania’s Future, Conservation 

Law Foundation, Environmental 

Defense Fund, Natural Resources 

Defense Council, Pace Energy and 

Climate Center, Sierra Club and West 

Harlem Environmental Action, Inc. 

(Clean Air Council et al.). The petitions 

are available for review in the 

rulemaking docket, see document 

numbers EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0708– 

1505, EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0708–1506 

and EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0708–1507. 

On June 28, 2013, the EPA issued letters 

to the petitioners granting 

reconsideration on three specific issues 

raised in the petitions for 

reconsideration and indicating that the 

agency would issue a Federal Register 

notice regarding the reconsideration 

process. This action requests comment 

on the three issues for which the EPA 

granted reconsideration. 

III. Discussion of the Issues Under 

Reconsideration 

The EPA finalized the NESHAP for 

several subcategories of existing 

stationary RICE on March 3, 2010, (75 

FR 9648) and August 20, 2010 (75 FR 

51570). The EPA received petitions for 

reconsideration and judicial review of 

the 2010 RICE NESHAP rulemakings. 

The EPA finalized amendments to the 

RICE NESHAP on January 30, 2013, (78 

FR 6674) to address certain issues raised 

in the petitions for reconsideration and 

judicial review of the 2010 RICE 

NESHAP, and also revised the NSPS for 

stationary ICE for consistency with the 

RICE NESHAP. 

The January 30, 2013, amendments 

established, among other things, fuel 

and reporting requirements for certain 

emergency engines used for emergency 

demand response and system reliability. 

The amendments also established 

conditions under which emergency 

engines could be used for up to 50 hours 

per calendar year in situations where 

the engine is dispatched by the local 

transmission and distribution system 

operator to mitigate local transmission 

and/or distribution limitations so as to 

avert potential voltage collapse or line 

overload that could lead to the 

interruption of power supply in a local 

area or region. The EPA received 

petitions for reconsideration of certain 

aspects of these requirements, and 

granted reconsideration of the following 

three issues to provide an additional 

opportunity for public comment: 

• Timing for compliance with the 

ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuel 

requirement for emergency compression 

ignition (CI) engines that operate or are 

contractually obligated to be available 

for more than 15 hours per calendar 

year for the purposes specified in 40 

CFR 63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and (iii) 

(emergency demand response and 

deviations of voltage or frequency of 5 

percent or more), or that operate for the 

purpose specified in 40 CFR 

63.6640(f)(4)(ii) (local system 

reliability). 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
54608 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 172 / Thursday, September 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

1See document number EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– 

0708–1459 in the rulemaking docket. 

2U.S. Energy Information Administration. 

Distillate Fuel Oil and Kerosene Sales by End Use. 

Available at http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_cons_

821use_dcu_nus_a.htm. 

• Timing and required information 

for the reporting requirement for 

emergency engines that operate or are 

contractually obligated to be available 

for more than 15 hours per calendar 

year for the purposes specified in 40 

CFR 63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and (iii), or that 

operate for the purpose specified in 40 

CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(ii), and the timing and 

required information for the analogous 

reporting requirement in the ICE NSPS. 

• Conditions in 40 CFR 

60.4211(f)(3)(i), 60.4243(d)(3)(i) and 

63.6640(f)(4)(ii) for operation for up to 

50 hours per calendar year in nonemergency situations as part of a 

financial arrangement with another 

entity. 

These issues are discussed in more 

detail in the following sections. 

A. Timing for Compliance With the 

ULSD Fuel Requirement for Emergency 

Engines 

The January 30, 2013, final rule 

included provisions that require 

existing stationary emergency CI RICE 

with a site rating of more than 100 brake 

horsepower (HP) and a displacement of 

less than 30 liters per cylinder that 

operate or are contractually obligated to 

be available for more than 15 hours per 

year (up to a maximum of 100 hours per 

year) for the purposes specified in 40 

CFR 63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and (iii) 

(emergency demand response and 

deviations of voltage or frequency of 5 

percent or more), or that operate for the 

purpose specified in 40 CFR 

63.6640(f)(4)(ii) (local system 

reliability), to use diesel fuel meeting 

the specifications of 40 CFR 80.510(b) 

beginning January 1, 2015, except that 

any existing diesel fuel purchased (or 

otherwise obtained) prior to January 1, 

2015, may be used until depleted. The 

specifications of 40 CFR 80.510(b) 

require that diesel fuel have a maximum 

sulfur content of 15 parts per million 

and either a minimum cetane index of 

40 or a maximum aromatic content of 35 

volume percent; this fuel is referred to 

as ULSD fuel. The EPA included the 

ULSD fuel requirement in the final rule 

in response to public comments 

expressing concerns about the emissions 

from emergency engines. As indicated 

in the January 30, 2013, final rule, the 

EPA believes that requiring cleaner fuel 

for these stationary emergency CI 

engines will significantly limit or 

reduce the emissions of regulated air 

pollutants emitted from these engines, 

further protecting public health and the 

environment. Information provided to 

the EPA by commenters 1 showed that 

the use of ULSD will significantly 

reduce emissions of air toxics, including 

metallic hazardous air pollutants (HAP) 

(e.g., nickel, zinc, lead) and benzene. 

The EPA added this fuel requirement 

beginning in January 2015, rather than 

upon initial implementation of the 

NESHAP for existing CI engines in May 

2013, to provide sources with 

appropriate lead time to institute these 

new requirements and make any 

physical adjustments to engines 

(including fuel seals) and other facilities 

like tanks or other containment 

structures, as well as any needed 

adjustments to contracts and other 

business activities, that may be 

necessitated by these new requirements. 

If these sources had been required to 

comply with the ULSD fuel requirement 

by their May 3, 2013, initial compliance 

date, they would have had only three 

months of lead time between 

promulgation and compliance. 

Although the EPA does not have 

information specifying the percentage of 

existing stationary emergency CI 

engines currently using residual fuel oil 

or non-ULSD distillate fuel, the most 

recent U.S. Energy Information 

Administration data available for sales 

of distillate and residual fuel oil to end 

users 2 show that significant amounts of 

non-ULSD are still being purchased by 

end users that typically operate 

stationary combustion sources, 

including stationary emergency CI 

engines. For the reasons indicated 

above, the EPA determined that 

additional lead time was warranted for 

these engines. 

The petitions for reconsideration from 

the DE DNREC and Clean Air Council et 

al. requested that the requirement to use 

ULSD fuel for certain emergency 

engines take effect beginning on the 

May 3, 2013, compliance date. The DE 

DNREC indicated in the petition that 

ULSD is already widely available and is 

likely the only diesel fuel available in 

most areas. The petition for 

reconsideration from Clean Air Council 

et al. disagreed with the EPA that 

significant lead time is needed for 

facilities to come into compliance with 

the ULSD fuel requirement and 

indicated that the EPA had offered no 

evidence that adjustments would be 

necessary to operate engines on ULSD. 

The EPA does not agree with the 

petitioners that there was no evidence 

in the record that adjustments may be 

necessary. According to the memo in 

the rulemaking docket titled, ‘‘Summary 

of Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Issues with 

Stationary Internal Combustion 

Engines’’ (document number EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2008–0708–0003), experience 

with the transition to ULSD for mobile 

CI engines showed that differences in 

the aromatic content of ULSD may 

require replacement of gaskets and seals 

to prevent fuel system leaks. Also, as 

discussed previously, information from 

the Energy Information Administration 

indicated that a significant percentage of 

diesel fuel being purchased is not 

ULSD. Thus, the record does reflect that 

significant lead time is necessary for 

facilities to come into compliance with 

the ULSD requirement. 

In addition, because the EPA included 

the requirement to use ULSD in the final 

rule in response to comments, the EPA 

believed it was appropriate to provide 

regulated parties sufficient time to 

conform to it, and the EPA did not 

believe that the 3 months advocated by 

petitioners was appropriate given the 

record information described above. 

Therefore, the EPA does not at this time 

agree that delaying the start of the ULSD 

fuel requirement until 2015 is 

inappropriate. 

However, in consideration of the fact 

that the public lacked the opportunity to 

comment on the timing of the ULSD fuel 

requirement, the EPA has granted 

reconsideration to provide an 

opportunity for public comment on the 

timing for compliance with the ULSD 

fuel requirement for emergency CI 

engines that operate or are contractually 

obligated to be available for more than 

15 hours per calendar year for the 

purposes specified in 40 CFR 

63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and (iii) (emergency 

demand response and deviations of 

voltage or frequency of 5 percent or 

more), or that operate for the purpose 

specified in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(ii) 

(local system reliability). The EPA 

specifically solicits comment on 

whether it would be reasonable to 

implement the requirement to use ULSD 

fuel earlier than January 1, 2015. The 

EPA requests comment on whether the 

use of ULSD is already widespread and 

whether facilities will need to make any 

physical adjustments to engines 

(including fuel seals) and other facilities 

like tanks or other containment 

structures, as well as any needed 

adjustments to contracts and other 

business activities, to comply with these 

new requirements. 

B. Timing and Required Information for 

the Reporting Requirement for 

Emergency Engines 

The January 30, 2013, final rule added 

a new provision to the RICE NESHAP 

that requires stationary emergency RICE 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 172 / Thursday, September 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules 54609 

with a site rating of more than 100 brake 

HP and a displacement of less than 30 

liters per cylinder that operate or are 

contractually obligated to be available 

for more than 15 hours per year (up to 

a maximum of 100 hours per year) for 

the purposes specified in 40 CFR 

63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and (iii) (emergency 

demand response and deviations of 

voltage or frequency of 5 percent or 

more), or that operate for the purpose 

specified in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(ii) 

(local system reliability), to report the 

following information annually to the 

EPA, beginning with operation during 

the 2015 calendar year: 

• Company name and address where 

the engine is located. 

• Date of the report and beginning 

and ending dates of the reporting 

period. 

• Engine site rating and model year. 

• Latitude and longitude of the 

engine in decimal degrees reported to 

the fifth decimal place. 

• Hours operated for emergency 

demand response and deviations of 

voltage or frequency of 5 percent or 

greater below standard, including the 

date, start time, and end time for engine 

operation for those purposes. 

• Number of hours the engine is 

contractually obligated to be available 

for emergency demand response and 

deviations of voltage or frequency of 5 

percent or greater below standard. 

• Hours spent for operation for local 

system reliability, including the date, 

start time and end time for engine 

operation for that purpose, the entity 

that dispatched the engine and the 

situation that necessitated the dispatch 

of the engine. 

• If there were no deviations from the 

fuel requirements (if any) that apply to 

the engine, a statement that there were 

no deviations from the fuel 

requirements during the reporting 

period. 

• If there were deviations from the 

fuel requirements that apply to the 

engine (if any), information on the 

number, duration, and cause of 

deviations, and the corrective action 

taken. 

A similar reporting requirement was 

also added to the ICE NSPS. This 

information is necessary to determine 

whether these engines are operating in 

compliance with the regulations and 

will assist the EPA and other interested 

stakeholders in assessing the impacts of 

the emissions from these engines. We 

included this reporting requirement in 

the final rule in response to public 

comments expressing concerns about 

the impacts of emissions from 

emergency engines. The EPA specified 

in the final rule that the first report must 

cover the calendar year 2015 and must 

be submitted no later than March 31, 

2016. Subsequent annual reports for 

each calendar year must be submitted 

no later than March 31 of the following 

calendar year. The EPA did not require 

reporting of operation prior to 2015 for 

two reasons: (1) To give the EPA time 

to develop the electronic reporting tool 

that facilities will use to submit this 

information and stakeholders will use to 

view the submitted information; and (2) 

to give facilities sufficient lead time to 

institute the necessary infrastructure to 

record and compile the information so 

that it can be submitted electronically to 

the EPA in the correct format. The 

petition for reconsideration from Clean 

Air Council et al. requested that the 

reporting requirement begin with the 

2013 calendar year, with the first report 

due in early 2014. Alternatively, Clean 

Air Council et al. requested that if the 

first report is not submitted until 2016, 

the report should include information 

on operation in 2013 and 2014, in 

addition to the information for 2015 that 

is already required. The petitioners also 

requested that the report include the 

type and amount of diesel fuel used in 

the engine. The petitioners indicated 

that collecting this information would 

enhance the EPA’s ability to assess the 

health impacts of the emissions from the 

engines. 

The EPA does not believe the 

petitioners have provided sufficient 

justification for the revisions in lead 

time provided in their request, and the 

EPA continues to believe that a lead 

time until the 2015 calendar year is 

appropriate, for the reasons stated 

above. The EPA also does not agree with 

the petitioners that the report should 

include the type and amount of diesel 

fuel used in the engine, because of the 

burden that would place on affected 

facilities. The sulfur content of the fuel 

in the tanks would be changing over 

time as the existing higher sulfur fuel is 

replaced with ULSD, and a facility 

would have to periodically sample its 

fuel tanks in order to determine the 

current sulfur content of the fuel. 

Facilities may need to install equipment 

such as fuel flow meters in order to 

determine the amount of diesel fuel 

used in their engines. 

However, in consideration of the fact 

that the public lacked the opportunity to 

comment on the timing and required 

information for the reporting 

requirement, the EPA has granted 

reconsideration to provide an 

opportunity for public comment on the 

timing and required information for the 

reporting requirement for emergency 

engines that operate or are contractually 

obligated to be available for more than 

15 hours per calendar year for the 

purposes specified in 40 CFR 

63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and (iii), or that operate 

for the purpose specified in 40 CFR 

63.6640(f)(4)(ii). The EPA requests 

comment on whether owners and 

operators of these engines should be 

required to report operation for the 

period between the compliance date and 

January 2015, and when it would be 

reasonable to submit the report. The 

EPA also solicits comment on whether 

the rule should require reporting of the 

amount and type of diesel fuel used in 

the engine. The EPA requests 

information on whether such a 

requirement would place an 

unreasonable burden on affected 

facilities. 

C. Criteria for Operation for Up to 50 

Hours per Year for Non-Emergency 

Situations 

The proposed amendments to the 

RICE NESHAP and ICE NSPS (June 7, 

2012; 77 FR 33812) specified two 

situations under which emergency 

engines could be used for up to 100 

hours per calendar year in nonemergency situations as part of a 

financial arrangement with another 

entity. The EPA proposed that owners 

and operators of stationary emergency 

engines could operate the engines when 

the Reliability Coordinator has declared 

an Energy Emergency Alert (EEA) Level 

2 as defined in the North American 

Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) 

Reliability Standard EOP–002–3, 

Capacity and Energy Emergencies, or 

during periods where there is a 

deviation of voltage or frequency of 5 

percent or more below standard voltage 

or frequency. Public commenters 

indicated that the proposed EEA Level 

2 and 5 percent voltage or frequency 

deviation triggers did not account for 

situations when the local balancing 

authority or transmission operator for 

the local electric system has determined 

that electric reliability is in jeopardy, 

and recommended that the EPA include 

additional situations where the local 

transmission and distribution system 

operator has determined that there are 

conditions that could lead to a blackout 

for the local area. The comments 

indicated that rural distribution lines 

are not configured in a typical grid 

pattern, but instead have distribution 

lines that can run well over 50 miles 

from a substation and regularly extend 

15 miles or longer. During periods of 

exceptionally heavy stress within the 

region or sub-region, electricity from 

regional power generators may not be 

available because of transmission 

constraints, according to the 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
54610 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 172 / Thursday, September 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

commenter. The comments indicated 

that in many cases, there may be only 

one transmission line that feeds the 

rural distribution system, and no 

alternative means to transmit power into 

the local system. In response to those 

comments and in recognition of the 

unique challenges faced by the local 

transmission and distribution system 

operators in rural areas, the revisions to 

the RICE NESHAP and ICE NSPS 

finalized on January 30, 2013, specified 

limited circumstances under which 

stationary emergency engines located at 

area sources of HAP could operate for 

up to 50 hours per year in nonemergency situations as part of a 

financial arrangement with another 

entity. The final amendments specified 

that up to 50 hours per calendar year 

can be used for non-emergency 

situations to supply power as part of a 

financial arrangement with another 

entity if all of the following conditions 

are met: 

• The engine is located at an area 

source of HAP; 

• the engine is dispatched by the 

local balancing authority or local 

transmission and distribution system 

operator; 

• the dispatch is intended to mitigate 

local transmission and/or distribution 

limitations so as to avert potential 

voltage collapse or line overloads that 

could lead to the interruption of power 

supply in a local area or region; 

• the dispatch follows reliability, 

emergency operation or similar 

protocols that follow specific NERC, 

regional, state, public utility 

commission or local standards or 

guidelines; 

• the power is provided only to the 

facility itself or to support the local 

transmission and distribution system; 

and 

• the owner or operator identifies and 

records the entity that dispatches the 

engine and the specific NERC, regional, 

state, public utility commission or local 

standards or guidelines that are being 

followed for dispatching the engine. 

The EPA added these provisions to the 

final RICE NESHAP and ICE NSPS in 

response to public comments on 

situations where the local transmission 

and distribution system operator has 

determined that there are conditions 

that could lead to a blackout for the 

local area where the ready availability of 

emergency engines is critical to system 

reliability. 

The petitions for reconsideration from 

Clean Air Council et al. and from 

Calpine and PSEG expressed concern 

that the conditions specified in the final 

rule for operation in non-emergency 

situations to supply power as part of a 

financial arrangement with another 

entity were too indistinct and expansive 

and would be difficult to enforce, which 

could lead to engines operating when 

there is no discernible threat to the grid. 

The petition from Calpine and PSEG 

expressed concern that the final rule did 

not provide any guidance for 

determining whether the dispatch of an 

engine is intended to mitigate local 

transmission and/or distribution 

limitations so as to avert potential 

voltage collapse or line overloads that 

could lead to the interruption of power 

supply in a local area or region. The 

petition from Clean Air Council et al. 

recommended that the EPA more clearly 

delineate the situations under which the 

engines could run to ensure that the 

engines are only dispatched during 

genuine grid emergencies, while still 

allowing local grid operators to address 

legitimate reliability concerns. The 

petitions did not provide suggestions as 

to what criteria the petitioners believe 

would be appropriate. 

Due to the public’s inability to 

comment on this issue, the EPA has 

granted reconsideration of the 

conditions in 40 CFR 60.4211(f)(3)(i), 

60.4243(d)(3)(i) and 63.6640(f)(4)(ii) for 

operation for up to 50 hours per 

calendar year in non-emergency 

situations as part of a financial 

arrangement with another entity, as well 

as the corresponding provisions in the 

ICE NSPS. The EPA welcomes 

comments on these provisions, 

including whether the provisions are 

necessary or appropriate and also 

whether the specific provisions 

delineating the situations where such 

use is permitted are appropriate as 

finalized or should be revised. If a 

commenter suggests revisions to the 

provisions, the commenter should 

provide detailed information supporting 

any such revision. 

IV. Solicitation of Public Comment and 

Participation 

The EPA seeks full public 

participation in arriving at its final 

decisions. At this time, the EPA is not 

proposing any specific revisions to the 

final RICE NESHAP or the ICE NSPS. 

However, the EPA requests public 

comment on the three issues under 

reconsideration. The EPA is seeking 

comment only on the three issues. The 

EPA will not respond to any comments 

addressing any other issues or any other 

provisions of the final rule or any other 

rule. 

Specifically, the EPA requests 

comment on the timing for compliance 

with the ULSD fuel requirement for 

existing emergency CI engines that 

operate or are contractually obligated to 

be available for more than 15 hours per 

calendar year for the purposes specified 

in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and (iii) 

(emergency demand response and 

deviations of voltage or frequency of 5 

percent or more, or that operate for the 

purpose specified in 40 CFR 

63.6640(f)(4)(ii) (local system 

reliability). The EPA requests comment 

on whether affected engines should be 

required to comply with the ULSD fuel 

requirement earlier than January 1, 

2015. In particular, the EPA invites 

comment on whether the lead time for 

a January 15, 2015, implementation date 

is unreasonably long, or conversely, if 

the lead time for an implementation 

date prior to January 1, 2015, would be 

unreasonably short. 

The EPA requests comment on the 

timing and required information for the 

reporting requirement for emergency 

engines that operate or are contractually 

obligated to be available for more than 

15 hours per calendar year for the 

purposes specified in 40 CFR 

63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and (iii), or that operate 

for the purpose specified in 40 CFR 

63.6640(f)(4)(ii), and the timing and 

required information for the analogous 

reporting requirement in the ICE NSPS. 

The EPA requests comment on whether 

the reporting should begin with 

operation in the 2015 calendar year, and 

whether the rule should require 

reporting of the amount and type of 

diesel fuel used in the engine. 

Finally, the EPA requests comment on 

the conditions in 40 CFR 

60.4211(f)(3)(i), 60.4243(d)(3)(i) and 

63.6640(f)(4)(ii) for operation for up to 

50 hours per calendar year in nonemergency situations as part of a 

financial arrangement with another 

entity. The EPA is particularly seeking 

comment on whether the criteria could 

be more clearly defined to eliminate any 

ambiguity regarding the situations 

under which engines can operate and to 

further limit the operation to situations 

where the reliability of the local system 

is threatened. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under the terms of 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and is therefore not 

subject to review under Executive 

Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011). 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 172 / Thursday, September 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules 54611 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden. The EPA 

is not proposing any new information 

collection activities (e.g., monitoring, 

reporting, recordkeeping) as part of this 

action. With this action, the EPA is 

seeking additional comments on three 

aspects of the final NESHAP and NSPS 

for stationary RICE (78 FR 6674, January 

30, 2013). The Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) has previously 

approved the information collection 

requirements contained in the existing 

regulations under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq. and has assigned OMB 

control number 2060–0548. The OMB 

control numbers for the EPA’s 

regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 

CFR part 9. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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 will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Small entities 

include small businesses, small 

organizations, and small governmental 

jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts 

of this action on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small business 

as defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s regulations at 13 CFR 

121.201; (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 this action on small entities, 

I certify that this action will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

This action will not impose any new 

requirements. This action seeks 

comment on three aspects of the final 

NESHAP and NSPS for stationary RICE 

without proposing any changes to the 

rules. We continue to be interested in 

the potential impacts of this action 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, or tribal 

governments or the private sector. The 

action imposes no enforceable duty on 

any state, local or tribal governments or 

the private sector. Therefore, this action 

is not subject to the requirements of 

sections 202 or 205 of the UMRA. 

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. This 

action requests comment on three 

aspects of the final NESHAP and NSPS 

for stationary RICE without proposing 

any changes to the rules. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the states, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the states, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. This action 

seeks comment on three aspects of the 

final NESHAP and NSPS for stationary 

RICE without proposing any changes to 

the rule. Thus, Executive Order 13132 

does not apply to this action. 

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 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. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

The 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 and not on health or safety 

risks. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 

2001)), because it is not a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–113, 

Section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272 note) 

directs the EPA to use voluntary 

consensus standards (VCS) in its 

regulatory activities, unless to do so 

would be inconsistent with applicable 

law or otherwise impractical. The VCS 

are technical standards (e.g., materials 

specifications, test methods, sampling 

procedures and business practices) that 

are developed or adopted by VCS 

bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the agency does not 

use available and applicable VCS. 

This action does not involve technical 

standards. Therefore, the EPA did not 

consider the use of any VCS. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 

(Feb. 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. 

The 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 does 

not affect the level of protection 

provided to human health or the 

environment. This action seeks 

comment on three aspects of the final 

NESHAP and NSPS for stationary RICE 

without proposing any changes to the 

rule. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 60 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Air pollution control, 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
54612 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 172 / Thursday, September 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

40 CFR Part 63 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Air pollution control, 

Hazardous substances, 

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: August 29, 2013. 

Gina McCarthy, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2013–21626 Filed 9–4–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 79 

[MB Docket No. 11–154; DA 13–1785] 

Closed Captioning of Internet ProtocolDelivered Video Programming: 

Implementation of the Twenty-First 

Century Communications and Video 

Accessibility Act of 2010 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of 

comment and reply comment period. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the 

Commission extends the deadline for 

filing comments and reply comments on 

the Commission’s Further Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (FNPRM) in this 

proceeding, which was published in the 

Federal Register on July 2, 2013. The 

extension will allow consumers and 

industry to engage in collaborative 

dialogue on the issues raised in the 

FNPRM and will facilitate the 

development of a more complete record. 

DATES: The comment and reply 

comment period for the proposed rule 

published July 2, 2013 (78 FR 39691) is 

extended. Submit comments on or 

before November 4, 2013, and submit 

reply comments on or before December 

4, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit reply 

comments, identified by MB Docket No. 

11–154, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Federal Communications 

Commission’s Electronic Comment 

Filing System (ECFS) Web site: http://

fjallfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Filings can be sent by hand or 

messenger delivery, by commercial 

overnight courier, or by first-class or 

overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All 

filings must be addressed to the 

Commission’s Secretary, Office of the 

Secretary, Federal Communications 

Commission. 

• People with Disabilities: Contact the 

FCC to request reasonable 

accommodations (accessible format 

documents, sign language interpreters, 

CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov 

or phone: (202) 418–0530 or TTY: (202) 

418–0432. For detailed instructions on 

submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of the Proposed Rule, 78 FR 

39691. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Maria Mullarkey, Maria.Mullarkey@

fcc.gov, of the Policy Division, Media 

Bureau, (202) 418–2120. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of the Commission’s Order in 

MB Docket No. 11–154, DA 13–1785, 

adopted and released on August 20, 

2013, which extends the comment and 

reply comment filing deadlines 

established in the FNPRM published 

under FCC No. 13–84 at 78 FR 39691, 

July 2, 2013. The full text of this 

document is available for public 

inspection and copying during regular 

business hours in the FCC Reference 

Center, Federal Communications 

Commission, 445 12th Street SW., Room 

CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554. 

Documents will be available 

electronically in ASCII, Microsoft Word, 

and/or Adobe Acrobat. The complete 

text may be purchased from the 

Commission’s copy contractor, 445 12th 

Street SW., Room CY–B402, 

Washington, DC 20554. Alternative 

formats are available for people with 

disabilities (Braille, large print, 

electronic files, audio format), by 

sending an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or 

calling the Commission’s Consumer and 

Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202) 

418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432 

(TTY). 

Background 

1. On June 14, 2013, the Commission 

released a Further Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (FNPRM) in MB Docket No. 

11–154. The FNPRM set deadlines for 

filing comments and reply comments at 

60 and 90 days, respectively, after 

publication of the FNPRM in the 

Federal Register. A summary of the 

FNPRM was published in the Federal 

Register on July 2, 2013. 78 FR 39691. 

Accordingly, the filing dates were 

established as September 3, 2013 for 

comments and September 30, 2013 for 

reply comments. On August 14, 2013, 

Telecommunications for the Deaf and 

Hard of Hearing, Inc. (TDI) et al. 

(collectively, Consumer Groups) filed a 

request to extend the comment deadline 

by 60 days and to extend the reply 

comment deadline by 30 days thereafter. 

Consumer Groups state that an 

extension is warranted because it will 

give consumers and consumer 

electronics industry members time to 

engage in a collaborative dialogue on 

the issues raised in the FNPRM before 

submitting comments and reply 

comments, and it will enable Consumer 

Groups to retain pro bono counsel to file 

comments and reply comments on their 

behalf. We grant the requested 

extension. 

2. As set forth in Section 1.46 of the 

Commission’s Rules, 47 CFR 1.46(a), the 

Commission’s policy is that extensions 

of time for filing comments in 

rulemaking proceedings shall not be 

routinely granted. In the instant case, 

however, we find that granting an 

extension of the comment and reply 

comment periods will serve the public 

interest by allowing consumer and 

industry representatives additional time 

to engage in collaborative consideration 

of the FNPRM issues and by facilitating 

the development of a more complete 

record. Further, given that the 

Commission has temporarily extended 

the deadline for compliance with the 

closed captioning rules for DVD and 

Blu-ray players and has not adopted 

apparatus synchronization 

requirements, we find that the request 

for 60 additional days for filing 

comments, with 30 days thereafter for 

filing reply comments, would not 

impose a burden on industry. 

Ordering Clauses 

Pursuant to Section 4(i) of the 

Communications Act of 1934, as 

amended, 47 U.S.C. 154(i), and Sections 

0.61, 0.283, and 1.46 of the 

Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 0.61, 0.283, 

and 1.46, the Motion for Extension of 

Time filed by Telecommunications for 

the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Inc. et al. 

is granted, the deadline to file 

comments in this proceeding is 

extended to November 4, 2013, and the 

deadline to file reply comments in this 

proceeding is extended to December 4, 

2013. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Thomas Horan, 

Chief of Staff, Media Bureau. 

[FR Doc. 2013–21648 Filed 9–4–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1