Friday, 

August 20, 2010 

Part III 

Environmental 

Protection Agency 

40 CFR Part 63 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for 

Reciprocating Internal Combustion 

Engines; Final Rule 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51570 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0708, FRL–9190–3] 

RIN 2060–AP36 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for 

Reciprocating Internal Combustion 

Engines 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is promulgating national 

emission standards for hazardous air 

pollutants for existing stationary spark 

ignition reciprocating internal 

combustion engines that either are 

located at area sources of hazardous air 

pollutant emissions or that have a site 

rating of less than or equal to 500 brake 

horsepower and are located at major 

sources of hazardous air pollutant 

emissions. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

October 19, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0708. EPA 

also relies on materials in Docket ID 

Nos. EPA–HQ–OAR–2002–0059, EPA– 

HQ–OAR–2005–0029, and EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2005–0030 and incorporates those 

dockets into the record for this final 

rule. All documents in the docket are 

listed on the http://www.regulations.gov 

Web site. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

http://www.regulations.gov or in hard 

copy at the EPA Headquarters Library, 

Room Number 3334, EPA West 

Building, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public 

Reading Room hours of operation are 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Eastern Standard 

Time (EST), Monday through Friday. 

The telephone number for the Public 

Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and 

the telephone number for the Air and 

Radiation Docket and Information 

Center 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; e-mail address 

king.melanie@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background Information Document. On 

March 5, 2009 (71 FR 9698), EPA 

proposed national emission standards 

for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) 

for existing stationary reciprocating 

internal combustion engines (RICE) that 

either are located at area sources of 

hazardous air pollutants (HAP) 

emissions or that have a site rating of 

less than or equal to 500 brake 

horsepower (HP) and are located at 

major sources of HAP emissions. A 

summary of the public comments on the 

proposal and EPA’s responses to the 

comments, as well as the Regulatory 

Impact Analysis Report, are available in 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– 

0708. 

Organization of This Document. The 

following outline is provided to aid in 

locating information in the preamble. 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

B. Where can I get a copy of this 

document? 

C. Judicial Review 

II. Background 

III. Summary of This Final Rule 

A. What is the source category regulated by 

this final rule? 

B. What are the pollutants regulated by this 

final rule? 

C. What are the final requirements? 

D. What are the operating limitations? 

E. What are the requirements for 

demonstrating compliance? 

F. What are the reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements? 

IV. Summary of Significant Changes Since 

Proposal 

A. Applicability 

B. Final Emission Standards 

C. Management Practices 

D. Startup, Shutdown and Malfunction 

E. Method 323 

F. Other 

V. Summary of Responses to Major 

Comments 

A. Applicability 

B. Emission Standards 

C. Management Practices 

D. Method 323 

E. Other 

VI. Summary of Environmental, Energy and 

Economic Impacts 

A. What are the air quality impacts? 

B. What are the cost impacts? 

C. What are the benefits? 

D. What are the economic impacts? 

E. What are the non-air health, 

environmental and energy impacts? 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

K. Congressional Review Act 

I. General Information 

A. Does this action apply to me? 

Regulated Entities. Categories and 

entities potentially regulated by this 

action include: 

Category NAICS1 Examples of regulated entities 

Any industry using a stationary internal combustion engine as defined in this final rule.2211 Electric power generation, transmission, or distribution. 

622110 Medical and surgical hospitals. 

48621 Natural gas transmission. 

211111 Crude petroleum and natural gas production. 

211112 Natural gas liquids producers. 

92811 National security. 

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 

regulated by this action. To determine 

whether your engine is regulated by this 

action, you should examine the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51571 

applicability criteria of this final rule. If 

you have any questions regarding the 

applicability of this action to a 

particular entity, consult the person 

listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

B. Where can I get a copy of this 

document? 

In addition to being available in the 

docket, an electronic copy of this final 

action will also be available on the 

Worldwide Web (WWW) through the 

Technology Transfer Network (TTN). 

Following signature, a copy of this final 

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. 

C. Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA), judicial review of this 

final rule is available only by filing a 

petition for review in the U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit by October 19, 2010. Under 

section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA, only an 

objection to this final rule that was 

raised with reasonable specificity 

during the period for public comment 

can be raised during judicial review. 

Moreover, under section 307(b)(2) of the 

CAA, the requirements established by 

this final rule may not be challenged 

separately in any civil or criminal 

proceedings brought by EPA to enforce 

these requirements. 

Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA 

further provides that ‘‘[o]nly an 

objection to a rule or procedure which 

was raised with reasonable specificity 

during the period for public comment 

(including any public hearing) may be 

raised during judicial review.’’ This 

section also provides a mechanism for 

us to convene a proceeding for 

reconsideration, ‘‘[i]f the person raising 

an objection can demonstrate to EPA 

that it was impracticable to raise such 

objection within [the period for public 

comment] or if the grounds for such 

objection arose after the period for 

public comment (but within the time 

specified for judicial review) and if such 

objection is of central relevance to the 

outcome of the rule.’’ Any person 

seeking to make such a demonstration to 

us should submit a Petition for 

Reconsideration to the Office of the 

Administrator, U.S. EPA, Room 3000, 

Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, with 

a copy to both the person(s) listed in the 

preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section, and the Associate 

General Counsel for the Air and 

Radiation Law Office, Office of General 

Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), U.S. EPA, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460. 

II. Background 

This action promulgates NESHAP for 

existing stationary spark ignition (SI) 

RICE with a site rating of less than or 

equal to 500 HP located at major 

sources, and existing stationary SI RICE 

of any site rating located at area sources. 

EPA is finalizing these standards to 

meet its statutory obligation to address 

HAP emissions from these sources 

under sections 112(d), 112(c)(3) and 

112(k) of the CAA. The final NESHAP 

for stationary RICE will be promulgated 

under 40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ, 

which already contains standards 

applicable to new and reconstructed 

stationary RICE and some existing 

stationary RICE. 

EPA promulgated NESHAP for 

existing, new, and reconstructed 

stationary RICE greater than 500 HP 

located at major sources on June 15, 

2004 (69 FR 33474). EPA promulgated 

NESHAP for new and reconstructed 

stationary RICE that are located at area 

sources of HAP emissions and for new 

and reconstructed stationary RICE that 

have a site rating of less than or equal 

to 500 HP that are located at major 

sources of HAP emissions on January 

18, 2008 (73 FR 3568). On March 3, 

2010, EPA promulgated NESHAP for 

existing stationary compression ignition 

(CI) RICE with a site rating of less than 

or equal to 500 HP located at major 

sources, existing non-emergency CI 

engines with a site rating greater than 

500 HP at major sources, and existing 

stationary CI RICE of any site rating 

located at area sources (75 FR 9674). 

III. Summary of This Final Rule 

A. What is the source category regulated 

by this final rule? 

This final rule addresses emissions 

from existing stationary SI engines less 

than or equal to 500 HP located at major 

sources and all existing stationary SI 

engines located at area sources. A major 

source of HAP emissions is generally a 

stationary source that emits or has the 

potential to emit 10 tons per year or 

more of any single HAP or 25 tons per 

year or more of any combination of 

HAP. An area source of HAP emissions 

is a stationary source that is not a major 

source. 

This action revises the regulations at 

40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ. Through 

this action, we are adding to 40 CFR 

part 63, subpart ZZZZ requirements for: 

existing SI stationary RICE less than or 

equal to 500 HP located at major sources 

of HAP and existing SI stationary RICE 

located at area sources of HAP. 

1. Existing Stationary SI RICE ≤ 500 HP 

at Major Sources of HAP 

This action revises 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart ZZZZ, to address HAP 

emissions from existing stationary SI 

RICE less than or equal to 500 HP 

located at major sources of HAP. For 

stationary engines less than or equal to 

500 HP at major sources, EPA must 

determine what is the appropriate 

maximum achievable control 

technology (MACT) for those engines 

under sections 112(d)(2) and (d)(3) of 

the CAA. 

EPA has divided stationary SI RICE 

less than or equal to 500 HP located at 

major sources of HAP into the following 

subcategories: 

• Non-emergency 2-stroke lean burn 

(2SLB) stationary SI RICE 100–500 HP; 

• Non-emergency 4-stroke lean burn 

(4SLB) stationary SI RICE 100–500 HP; 

• Non-emergency 4-stroke rich burn 

(4SRB) stationary SI RICE 100–500 HP; 

• Non-emergency landfill and 

digester gas stationary SI RICE 100–500 

HP; 

• Non-emergency stationary SI RICE 

< 100 HP; and 

• Emergency stationary SI RICE. 

2. Existing Stationary SI RICE at Area 

Sources of HAP 

This action revises 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart ZZZZ, in order to address HAP 

emissions from existing stationary SI 

RICE located at area sources of HAP. 

Section 112(d) of the CAA requires EPA 

to establish NESHAP for both major and 

area sources of HAP that are listed for 

regulation under CAA section 112(c). As 

noted above, an area source is a 

stationary source that is not a major 

source. 

Section 112(k)(3)(B) of the CAA calls 

for EPA to identify at least 30 HAP that, 

as a result of emissions of area sources, 

pose the greatest threat to public health 

in the largest number of urban areas. 

EPA implemented this provision in 

1999 in the Integrated Urban Air Toxics 

Strategy (64 FR 38715, July 19, 1999). 

Specifically, in the Strategy, EPA 

identified 30 HAP that pose the greatest 

potential health threat in urban areas, 

and these HAP are referred to as the ‘‘30 

urban HAP.’’ Section 112(c)(3) of the 

CAA requires EPA to list sufficient 

categories or subcategories of area 

sources to ensure that area sources 

representing 90 percent of the emissions 

of the 30 urban HAP are subject to 

regulation. EPA implemented these 

requirements through the Integrated 

Urban Air Toxics Strategy (64 FR 38715, 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51572 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

July 19, 1999). The area source 

stationary engine source category was 

one of the listed categories. A primary 

goal of the Strategy is to achieve a 75 

percent reduction in cancer incidence 

attributable to HAP emitted from 

stationary sources. 

Under CAA section 112(d)(5), EPA 

may elect to promulgate standards or 

requirements for area sources ‘‘which 

provide for the use of generally 

available control technologies or 

management practices by such sources 

to reduce emissions of hazardous air 

pollutants.’’ Additional information on 

generally available control technologies 

(GACT) and management practices is 

found in the Senate report on the 

legislation (Senate report Number 101– 

228, December 20, 1989), which 

describes GACT as: 

* * * methods, practices and techniques 

which are commercially available and 

appropriate for application by the sources in 

the category considering economic impacts 

and the technical capabilities of the firms to 

operate and maintain the emissions control 

systems. 

Consistent with the legislative history, 

EPA can consider costs and economic 

impacts in determining GACT, which is 

particularly important when developing 

regulations for source categories, like 

this one, that have many small 

businesses. 

Determining what constitutes GACT 

involves considering the control 

technologies and management practices 

that are generally available to the area 

sources in the source category. EPA also 

considers the standards applicable to 

major sources in the same industrial 

sector to determine if the control 

technologies and management practices 

are transferable and generally available 

to area sources. In appropriate 

circumstances, EPA may also consider 

technologies and practices at area and 

major sources in similar categories to 

determine whether such technologies 

and practices could be considered 

generally available for the area source 

category at issue. Finally, as EPA has 

already noted, in determining GACT for 

a particular area source category, EPA 

considers the costs and economic 

impacts of available control 

technologies and management practices 

on that category. 

The urban HAP that must be regulated 

from stationary SI RICE to achieve the 

CAA section 112(c)(3) requirement to 

regulate categories accounting for 90 

percent of the urban HAP are: 7 

polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons 

(PAH), formaldehyde, and acetaldehyde. 

Similar to existing stationary SI RICE 

at major sources, EPA has also divided 

the existing stationary SI RICE at area 

sources into subcategories in order to 

properly take into account the 

differences between these engines. The 

subcategories for existing stationary SI 

RICE at area sources are as follows: 

• Non-emergency 2SLB stationary SI 

RICE 

• Non-emergency 4SLB stationary SI 

RICE 

Æ ≤ 500 HP 

Æ > 500 HP that operate more than 24 

hours per calendar year 

Æ > 500 HP that operate 24 hours or 

less per calendar year 

• Non-emergency 4SRB stationary SI 

RICE 

Æ ≤ 500 HP that operate more than 24 

hours per calendar year 

Æ > 500 HP that operate 24 hours or 

less per calendar year 

• Non-emergency landfill and 

digester gas stationary SI RICE 

• Emergency stationary SI RICE. 

B. What are the pollutants regulated by 

this final rule? 

This final rule regulates emissions of 

HAP. Available emissions data show 

that several HAP, which are formed 

during the combustion process or which 

are contained within the fuel burned, 

are emitted from stationary engines. The 

HAP which have been measured in 

emission tests conducted on SI 

stationary RICE include: Formaldehyde, 

acetaldehyde, acrolein, methanol, 

benzene, toluene, 1,3-butadiene, 2,2,4- 

trimethylpentane, hexane, xylene, 

naphthalene, PAH, methylene chloride, 

and ethylbenzene. EPA described the 

health effects of these HAP and other 

HAP emitted from the operation of 

stationary RICE in the preamble to 40 

CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ, published 

on June 15, 2004 (69 FR 33474). More 

detail on the health effects of these HAP 

and other HAP emitted from the 

operation of stationary RICE can be 

found in the Regulatory Impact Analysis 

(RIA) for this final rule. These HAP 

emissions are known to cause, or 

contribute significantly to air pollution, 

which may reasonably be anticipated to 

endanger public health or welfare. 

For the standards being finalized in 

this action, EPA believes that previous 

determinations regarding the 

appropriateness of using formaldehyde 

and carbon monoxide (CO) both in 

concentration (parts per million (ppm)) 

levels as surrogates for HAP for 

stationary RICE are still valid. 

Consequently, EPA is promulgating CO 

or formaldehyde standards in order to 

regulate HAP emissions. 

In addition to reducing HAP, the 

emission control technologies that will 

be installed on stationary RICE to 

reduce HAP will also reduce CO and 

VOC, and for rich burn engines will also 

reduce NOX. 

C. What are the final requirements? 

1. Existing Stationary SI RICE ≤ 500 HP 

at Major Sources of HAP 

The numerical emission standards 

that are being finalized in this action for 

existing stationary non-emergency SI 

RICE less than or equal to 500 HP 

located at major sources of HAP are 

shown in Table 1 of this preamble. The 

emission standards are in units of ppm 

by volume, dry basis (ppmvd). 

TABLE 1—EMISSION STANDARDS FOR EXISTING STATIONARY SI RICE > 500 HP LOCATED AT MAJOR SOURCES OF HAP 

Subcategory Except during periods of startup 

2SLB Non-Emergency 100 ≤ HP≤ 500 ................................................................................................ 225 ppmvd CO at 15% O2. 

4SLB Non-Emergency 100 ≤ HP≤ 500 ................................................................................................ 47 ppmvd CO at 15% O2. 

4SRB Non-Emergency 100 ≤ HP≤ 500 ................................................................................................ 10.3 ppmvd formaldehyde at 15% O2. 

Landfill/Digester Gas Non-Emergency 100 ≤ HP≤ 500 ........................................................................ 177 ppmvd CO at 15% O2. 

EPA is finalizing work practice 

standards for existing emergency 

stationary SI RICE less than or equal to 

500 HP located at major sources of HAP 

and existing non-emergency stationary 

SI RICE less than 100 HP located at 

major sources of HAP. Existing 

stationary emergency SI RICE less than 

or equal to 500 HP located at major 

sources of HAP are subject to the 

following work practices: 

• Change oil and filter every 500 

hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, except that 

sources can extend the period for 

changing the oil if the oil is part of an 

oil analysis program as discussed below 

and none of the condemning limits are 

exceeded; 

• Inspect spark plugs every 1,000 

hours of operation or annually, 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51573 

whichever comes first, and replace as 

necessary; and 

• Inspect all hoses and belts every 

500 hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, and replace as 

necessary. 

Existing stationary non-emergency SI 

RICE less than 100 HP located at major 

sources of HAP that are not 2SLB 

stationary RICE are subject to the 

following work practices: 

• Change oil and filter every 1,440 

hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, except that 

sources can extend the period for 

changing the oil if the oil is part of an 

oil analysis program as discussed below 

and none of the condemning limits are 

exceeded; 

• Inspect spark plugs every 1,440 

hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, and replace as 

necessary; and 

• Inspect all hoses and belts every 

1,440 hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, and replace as 

necessary. 

Existing 2SLB stationary SI RICE less 

than 100 HP located at major sources of 

HAP are subject to the following work 

practices: 

• Change oil and filter every 4,320 

hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, except that 

sources can extend the period for 

changing the oil if the oil is part of an 

oil analysis program as discussed below 

and none of the condemning limits are 

exceeded; 

• Inspect spark plugs every 4,320 

hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, and replace as 

necessary; and 

• Inspect all hoses and belts every 

4,320 hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, and replace as 

necessary. 

Sources also have the option to use an 

oil change analysis program to extend 

the oil change frequencies specified 

above. The analysis program must at a 

minimum analyze the following three 

parameters: Total Acid Number, 

viscosity, and percent water content. 

The analysis must be conducted at the 

same frequencies specified for changing 

the engine oil. If the condemning limits 

provided below are not exceeded, the 

engine owner or operator is not required 

to change the oil. If any of the 

condemning limits are exceeded, the 

engine owner or operator must change 

the oil within two days of receiving the 

results of the analysis; if the engine is 

not in operation when the results of the 

analysis are received, the engine owner 

or operator must change the oil within 

two days or before commencing 

operation, whichever is later. The 

condemning limits are as follows: 

• Total Acid Number increases by 

more than 3.0 milligrams potassium 

hydroxide per gram from Total Acid 

Number of the oil when new; or 

• Viscosity of the oil changes by more 

than 20 percent from the viscosity of the 

oil when new; or 

• Percent water content (by volume) 

is greater than 0.5. 

Pursuant to the provisions of 40 CFR 

63.6(g), sources can also request that the 

Administrator approve alternative work 

practices. 

2. Existing Stationary SI RICE at Area 

Sources of HAP 

The numerical emission standards 

that EPA is finalizing for non-emergency 

4SLB stationary SI RICE and nonemergency 4SRB stationary SI RICE 

located at area sources of HAP are 

shown in Table 2. 

TABLE 2—NUMERICAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR EXISTING NON-EMERGENCY 4SLB STATIONARY SI RICE > 500 HP LOCATED AT AREA SOURCES OF HAP AND EXISTING NON-EMERGENCY 4SRB STATIONARY SI RICE > 500 HP LOCATED AT AREA SOURCES OF HAP 

Subcategory Except during periods of startup 

4SLB Non-Emergency > 500 HP that operate more than 24 hours per 

calendar year.

47 ppmvd CO at 15% O2 or 93% CO reduction. 

4SRB Non-Emergency > 500 HP that operate more than 24 hours per 

calendar year.

2.7 ppmvd formaldehyde at 15% O2 or 76% formaldehyde reduction. 

EPA is finalizing management 

practices for existing non-emergency 

4SLB stationary SI RICE less than or 

equal to 500 HP located at area sources 

of HAP, existing non-emergency 4SLB 

stationary SI RICE greater than 500 HP 

located at area sources of HAP that 

operate 24 hours or less per calendar 

year, existing non-emergency 4SRB 

stationary SI RICE less than or equal to 

500 HP located at area sources of HAP, 

existing non-emergency 4SRB stationary 

SI RICE greater than 500 HP located at 

area sources of HAP that operate 24 

hours or less per calendar year, existing 

2SLB non-emergency stationary SI RICE 

located at area sources of HAP, existing 

non-emergency landfill and digester gas 

stationary RICE located at area sources 

of HAP, and existing emergency 

stationary SI RICE located at area 

sources of HAP. 

Existing non-emergency 4SLB and 

4SRB stationary SI RICE less than or 

equal to 500 HP located at area sources 

of HAP and existing landfill or digester 

gas non-emergency stationary SI RICE 

located at area sources of HAP are 

subject to the following management 

practices: 

• Change oil and filter every 1,440 

hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, except that 

sources can extend the period for 

changing the oil if the oil is part of an 

oil analysis program as discussed below 

and none of the condemning limits are 

exceeded; 

• Inspect spark plugs every 1,440 

hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, and replace as 

necessary; and 

• Inspect all hoses and belts every 

1,440 hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, and replace as 

necessary. 

Existing stationary 2SLB nonemergency engines located at area 

sources of HAP are subject to the 

following management practices: 

• Change oil and filter every 4,320 

hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, except that 

sources can extend the period for 

changing the oil if the oil is part of an 

oil analysis program as discussed below 

and none of the condemning limits are 

exceeded; 

• Inspect spark plugs every 4,320 

hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, and replace as 

necessary; and 

• Inspect all hoses and belts every 

4,320 hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, and replace as 

necessary. 

Existing stationary emergency SI RICE 

located at area sources of HAP and 

existing non-emergency 4SLB and 4SRB 

stationary SI RICE greater than 500 HP 

located at area sources of HAP that 

operate 24 hours or less per calendar 

year are subject to the following 

management practices: 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51574 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

• Change oil and filter every 500 

hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, except that 

sources can extend the period for 

changing the oil if the oil is part of an 

oil analysis program as discussed below 

and none of the condemning limits are 

exceeded; 

• Inspect spark plugs every 1,000 

hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, and replace as 

necessary; and 

• Inspect all hoses and belts every 

500 hours of operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, and replace as 

necessary. 

As discussed above for major sources, 

these sources may utilize an oil analysis 

program, as described above, to extend 

the specified oil change requirement 

specified above. Also, sources have the 

option to work with State permitting 

authorities pursuant to EPA’s 

regulations at 40 CFR subpart E 

(‘‘Approval of State Programs and 

Delegation of Federal Authorities’’) for 

approval of alternative management 

practices. 40 CFR subpart E implements 

section 112(l) of the CAA, which 

authorizes EPA to approve alternative 

State/local/tribal HAP standards or 

programs when such requirements are 

demonstrated to be no less stringent 

than EPA promulgated standards. 

3. Startup Requirements 

Existing stationary SI RICE less than 

or equal to 500 HP located at major 

sources of HAP and existing stationary 

SI RICE located at area sources of HAP 

must meet specific operational 

standards during engine startup. Engine 

startup is defined as the time from 

initial start until applied load and 

engine and associated equipment 

reaches steady state or normal 

operation. For stationary engines with 

catalytic controls, engine startup means 

the time from initial start until applied 

load and engine and associated 

equipment reaches steady state, or 

normal operation, including the 

catalyst. Owners and operators must 

minimize the engine’s time spent at idle 

and minimize the engine’s startup to a 

period needed for appropriate and safe 

loading of the engine, not to exceed 30 

minutes, after which time the engine 

must meet the otherwise applicable 

emission standards. These requirements 

will limit the HAP emissions during 

periods of engine startup. Pursuant to 

the provisions of 40 CFR 63.6(g), 

engines at major sources may petition 

the Administrator for an alternative 

work practice. An owner or operator of 

an engine at an area source can work 

with its State permitting authority 

pursuant to EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR 

subpart E for approval of an alternative 

management practice. See 40 CFR 

subpart E (setting forth requirements for, 

among other things, equivalency by 

permit, rule substitution). 

D. What are the operating limitations? 

In addition to the standards discussed 

above, EPA is finalizing operating 

limitations for existing stationary nonemergency 4SLB and 4SRB RICE that 

are greater than 500 HP, located at an 

area source of HAP, and operated more 

than 24 hours per calendar year. Owners 

and operators of engines that are 

equipped with oxidation catalyst or 

non-selective catalytic reduction (NSCR) 

must maintain the catalyst so that the 

pressure drop across the catalyst does 

not change by more than 2 inches of 

water from the pressure drop across the 

catalyst that was measured during the 

initial performance test. If the engine is 

equipped with oxidation catalyst, 

owners and operators must also 

maintain the temperature of the 

stationary RICE exhaust so that the 

catalyst inlet temperature is between 

450 and 1,350 degrees Fahrenheit (°F). 

If the engine is equipped with NSCR, 

owners and operators must maintain the 

temperature of the stationary RICE 

exhaust so that the NSCR inlet 

temperature is between 750 and 1,250 

°F. Owners and operators may petition 

for a different temperature range; the 

petition must demonstrate why it is 

operationally necessary and appropriate 

to operate below the temperature range 

specified in this final rule (see 40 CFR 

63.8(f)). Owners and operators of 

engines that are not using oxidation 

catalyst or NSCR must comply with any 

operating limitations approved by the 

Administrator. 

E. What are the requirements for 

demonstrating compliance? 

The following sections describe the 

requirements for demonstrating 

compliance under this final rule. 

1. Existing Stationary SI RICE ≤ 500 at 

Major Sources of HAP 

Owners and operators of existing 

stationary non-emergency SI RICE 

located at major sources that are less 

than 100 HP and existing stationary 

emergency SI RICE located at major 

sources must operate and maintain their 

stationary RICE and aftertreatment 

control device (if any) according to the 

manufacturer’s emission-related written 

instructions or develop their own 

maintenance plan. The maintenance 

plan must specify how the work 

practices will be met and provide to the 

extent practicable for the maintenance 

and operation of the engine in a manner 

consistent with good air pollution 

control practices for minimizing 

emissions. Owners and operators of 

existing stationary non-emergency SI 

RICE located at major sources that are 

less than 100 HP and existing stationary 

emergency SI RICE located at major 

sources do not have to conduct any 

performance testing because they are 

not subject to numerical emission 

standards. 

Owners and operators of existing 

stationary non-emergency SI RICE 

located at major sources that are greater 

than or equal to 100 HP and less than 

or equal to 500 HP must conduct an 

initial performance test to demonstrate 

that they are achieving the required 

emission standards. 

2. Existing Stationary SI RICE at Area 

Sources of HAP 

Owners and operators of existing 

stationary RICE located at area sources 

of HAP that are subject to management 

practices do not have to conduct any 

performance testing; they must develop 

a maintenance plan that specifies how 

the management practices will be met 

and provides to the extent practicable 

for the maintenance and operation of 

the engine in a manner consistent with 

good air pollution control practices for 

minimizing emissions. Owners and 

operators of existing 4SLB and 4SRB 

non-emergency stationary SI RICE that 

are greater than 500 HP, located at an 

area source of HAP, and operated more 

than 24 hours per calendar year must 

conduct an initial performance test to 

demonstrate compliance with the 

applicable emission limitations and 

must conduct subsequent performance 

testing every 8,760 hours of operation or 

3 years, whichever comes first. Owners 

and operators of existing 4SLB and 

4SRB non-emergency stationary SI RICE 

that are greater than 500 HP, located at 

an area source of HAP, and operated 

more than 24 hours per calendar year 

must continuously monitor and record 

the inlet temperature of the oxidation 

catalyst or NSCR and also take monthly 

measurements of the pressure drop 

across the oxidation catalyst or NSCR. If 

an oxidation catalyst or NSCR is not 

being used on the engine, the owner or 

operator must continuously monitor and 

record the operating parameters (if any) 

approved by the Administrator. As 

discussed in the March 3, 2010, final 

NESHAP for existing stationary CI RICE 

(75 FR 9648) and in section V.E., EPA 

is finalizing performance specification 

requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

ZZZZ for the continuous parametric 

monitoring systems used for continuous 

catalyst inlet temperature monitoring. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51575 

F. What are the reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements? 

The following sections describe the 

reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements that are required under 

this final rule. 

Owners and operators of existing 

stationary emergency SI RICE that do 

not meet the requirements for nonemergency engines are required to keep 

records of their hours of operation. 

Owners and operators of existing 

stationary emergency SI RICE must 

install a non-resettable hour meter on 

their engines to record the hours of 

operation of the engine. 

Owners and operators of existing 

stationary SI RICE located at major 

sources that are subject to work 

practices and existing stationary SI RICE 

located at area sources that are subject 

to management practices are required to 

keep records that show that the work or 

management practices that are required 

are being met. These records must 

include, at a minimum: Oil and filter 

change dates and corresponding engine 

hours of operation (determined using 

hour meter, fuel consumption data, or 

other appropriate methods); inspection 

and replacement dates for spark plugs, 

hoses, and belts; and records of other 

emission-related repairs and 

maintenance performed. 

In terms of reporting requirements, 

owners and operators of existing nonemergency stationary SI RICE greater 

than or equal to 100 HP and less than 

or equal to 500 HP located at major 

sources of HAP and existing nonemergency 4SLB and 4SRB stationary 

RICE greater than 500 HP located at area 

sources of HAP that operate more than 

24 hours per calendar year must submit 

the notifications required in Table 8 of 

40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ, which 

lists the NESHAP General Provisions 

applicable to this rule. (40 CFR part 63, 

subpart A) These notifications include 

an initial notification, notification of 

performance test, and a notification of 

compliance for each stationary RICE 

which must comply with the specified 

emission limitations. Owners and 

operators of existing stationary nonemergency SI RICE greater than or equal 

to 100 HP and less than or equal to 500 

HP located at major sources of HAP and 

existing stationary 4SLB and 4SRB nonemergency SI RICE greater than 500 HP 

located at area sources of HAP that 

operate more than 24 hours per calendar 

year must submit semiannual 

compliance reports. 

IV. Summary of Significant Changes 

Since Proposal 

A. Applicability 

A change from the proposal is that 

this final rule is not applicable to 

existing stationary emergency engines at 

area sources that are located at 

residential, commercial, or institutional 

facilities. These engines are not subject 

to any requirements under this final rule 

because they are not part of the 

regulated source category. EPA has 

found that existing stationary 

emergency engines located at 

residential, commercial, and 

institutional facilities that are area 

sources were not included in the 

original Urban Air Toxics Strategy 

inventory and were not included in the 

listing of urban area sources. More 

information on this issue can be found 

in the memorandum titled, ‘‘Analysis of 

the Types of Engines Used to Estimate 

the CAA Section 112(k) Area Source 

Inventory for Stationary Reciprocating 

Internal Combustion Engines,’’ available 

from the rulemaking docket. In the 

March 3, 2010, final NESHAP for 

existing stationary CI RICE (75 FR 9648), 

EPA included a definition for 

residential/commercial/institutional 

emergency stationary RICE. After the 

final rule was promulgated, EPA 

received numerous questions regarding 

the definition and whether certain types 

of facilities would meet the definition. 

In this final rule, EPA is separating the 

definition into individual definitions for 

residential emergency stationary RICE, 

commercial emergency stationary RICE, 

and institutional emergency stationary 

RICE, and is also providing additional 

examples of the types of facilities that 

would be included under those 

categories in the definitions. EPA has 

also prepared a memorandum to 

provide further guidance regarding the 

types of facilities that would or would 

not be considered residential, 

commercial, or institutional facilities. 

The memorandum is titled, ‘‘Guidance 

Regarding Definition of Residential, 

Commercial, and Institutional 

Emergency Stationary RICE in the 

NESHAP for Stationary RICE,’’ and is 

available in the rulemaking docket. 

B. Final Emission Standards 

1. Existing Stationary SI Engines ≤ 500 

HP Located at Major Sources of HAP 

EPA is revising the emission 

standards that it proposed for the 

subcategories of stationary SI engines 

less than or equal to 500 HP located at 

major sources. As discussed in section 

V.B., numerous commenters indicated 

that EPA’s dataset used to establish the 

proposed emission limits was 

insufficient and urged EPA to gather 

more data to obtain a more complete 

representation of emissions from 

existing stationary SI engines. 

Commenters also questioned the 

emission standard setting approach that 

EPA used at proposal and claimed that 

the proposed standards did not take into 

account emissions variability. For this 

final rule, EPA has obtained additional 

test data for existing stationary SI 

engines and has included this 

additional data in the MACT floor 

analysis. EPA is also using an approach 

that better considers emissions 

variability, as discussed in V.B. below. 

EPA is also not using the Population 

Database to determine a percentage of 

engines that have emission controls 

installed, as it did at proposal. The 

Population Database has not been 

updated since 2000. It contains 

information regarding whether or not an 

engine has emission controls, but does 

not generally contain other types of 

emission-related information, like 

engine-out emissions or operational 

controls, and it does not include any 

emissions concentration data, which is 

necessary to determine the MACT floor. 

EPA determined that it would be more 

appropriate and more defensible to base 

the MACT floor analysis directly on the 

emissions data that EPA has for 

stationary SI engines, including data 

that was not used in the proposal. A 

more detailed discussion of both EPA’s 

MACT floor and beyond-the-MACTfloor analysis can be found in the 

memorandum titled ‘‘MACT Floor and 

MACT Determination for Existing 

Stationary SI RICE ≤ 500 HP Located at 

Major Sources’’. 

For 2SLB non-emergency engines, 

EPA proposed a limit of 85 ppmvd CO 

for engines from 50 to 249 HP and 8 

ppmvd CO or 90 percent CO reduction 

for engines greater than or equal to 250 

HP. EPA is finalizing an emission limit 

of 225 ppmvd CO for 2SLB nonemergency engines from 100 to 500 HP. 

For 4SLB non-emergency engines, EPA 

proposed a limit of 95 ppmvd CO for 

engines from 50 to 249 HP and 9 ppmvd 

CO or 90 percent CO reduction for 

engines greater than or equal to 250 HP. 

EPA is finalizing an emission limit of 47 

ppmvd CO for 4SLB non-emergency 

engines from 100 to 500 HP. For 4SRB 

non-emergency engines from 50 to 500 

HP, EPA proposed an emission limit of 

200 ppbvd (parts per billion by volume, 

dry basis) formaldehyde or 90 percent 

formaldehyde reduction. EPA is 

finalizing an emission limit of 10.3 

ppmvd formaldehyde for 4SRB nonemergency engines from 100 to 500 HP. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51576 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

For landfill and digester gas engines, 

EPA proposed an emission limit of 177 

ppmvd CO; EPA is finalizing an 

emission limit of 177 ppmvd CO. 

For the proposed rule, EPA required 

existing stationary engines less than 50 

HP that are located at major sources to 

meet a formaldehyde emission standard. 

As discussed in the final rule published 

on March 3, 2010, for existing stationary 

CI RICE (75 FR 9674), EPA is not 

finalizing a formaldehyde emission 

standard for stationary SI engines less 

than 50 HP, but is instead requiring 

compliance with work practices. In 

addition, in light of several comments 

asserting that the level at which EPA 

subcategorized small engines at major 

sources was inappropriate, EPA is 

finalizing a work practice standard for 

engines less than 100 HP. These work 

practices are described in section III.C. 

of this preamble. EPA believes that work 

practices are appropriate and justified 

for this group of stationary engines 

because the application of measurement 

methodology is not practicable due to 

technological and economic limitations. 

Further information on EPA’s decision 

can be found in the memorandum titled, 

‘‘MACT Floor and MACT Determination 

for Existing Stationary Non-Emergency 

SI RICE < 100 HP and Existing 

Stationary Emergency SI RICE Located 

at Major Sources and GACT for Existing 

Stationary SI RICE Located at Area 

Sources,’’ which is available from the 

rulemaking docket. 

For existing stationary emergency 

engines located at major sources, EPA 

proposed that these engines be subject 

to a 2 ppmvd formaldehyde emission 

standard. In this final rule, existing 

stationary emergency SI engines located 

at major sources of HAP must meet 

work practices. These work practices are 

described in section III.C. of this 

preamble. EPA believes that work 

practices are appropriate and justified 

for this group of stationary engines 

because the application of measurement 

methodology is not practicable due to 

technological and economic limitations. 

Further information on EPA’s decision 

can be found in the memorandum titled, 

‘‘MACT Floor and MACT Determination 

for Existing Stationary Non-Emergency 

SI RICE <100 HP and Existing 

Stationary Emergency SI RICE Located 

at Major Sources and GACT for Existing 

Stationary SI RICE Located at Area 

Sources,’’ which is available from the 

rulemaking docket. 

2. Existing Stationary SI Engines 

Located at Area Sources of HAP 

EPA proposed numerical emission 

standards for the following stationary SI 

engines located at area sources of HAP: 

non-emergency 2SLB and 4SLB greater 

than or equal to 250 HP, non-emergency 

4SRB greater than or equal to 50 HP, 

landfill and digester gas fired greater 

than 500 HP, and emergency greater 

than 500 HP. For the remaining engines 

at area sources, EPA proposed 

management practice standards. 

In this final rule, EPA is promulgating 

numerical emission standards for nonemergency 4SLB and 4SRB stationary SI 

RICE larger than 500 HP located at area 

sources of HAP emissions that operate 

more than 24 hours per calendar year. 

For non-emergency 4SLB engines 

greater than 500 HP located at area 

sources of HAP, EPA proposed an 

emission limit of 9 ppmvd CO or 90 

percent CO reduction; EPA is finalizing 

an emission limit of 47 ppmvd CO or 93 

percent CO reduction. For nonemergency 4SRB engines greater than 

500 HP located at area sources of HAP, 

EPA proposed an emission limit of 200 

ppbvd formaldehyde or 90 percent 

formaldehyde reduction and is 

finalizing an emission limit of 2.7 

ppmvd formaldehyde or 76 percent 

formaldehyde reduction. For stationary 

SI RICE located at area sources of HAP 

that are non-emergency 2SLB stationary 

SI RICE greater than or equal to 250 HP, 

non-emergency 4SLB stationary SI RICE 

between 250 and 500 HP, nonemergency 4SRB stationary SI RICE 

between 50 and 500 HP, landfill/ 

digester gas stationary SI RICE greater 

than 500 HP, or emergency stationary SI 

RICE greater than 500 HP, EPA is 

finalizing management practices rather 

than numeric emission limitations as 

proposed. EPA is also finalizing 

management practices for nonemergency 4SLB and 4SRB stationary SI 

RICE that are greater than 500 HP, 

located at area sources of HAP, and 

operated 24 hours or less per calendar 

year. 

C. Management Practices 

EPA proposed management practices 

for several subcategories of engines 

located at area sources. EPA explained 

that the proposed management practices 

would be expected to ensure that 

emission control systems are working 

properly and would help minimize HAP 

emissions from the engines. EPA 

proposed specific maintenance practices 

and asked for comments on the need 

and appropriateness for those 

procedures. Based on feedback received 

during the public comment period, 

which included information submitted 

in comment letters and additional 

information EPA received following the 

close of the comment period from 

different industry groups, EPA is 

finalizing management practices for 

existing stationary 2SLB non-emergency 

SI engines located at area sources of 

HAP, existing stationary 4SLB and 4SRB 

non-emergency SI engines less than or 

equal to 500 HP located at area sources 

of HAP; existing stationary landfill and 

digester gas non-emergency engines 

located at area sources of HAP; and 

existing emergency stationary SI engines 

located at area sources of HAP. 

Based on the comments on the 

proposal and additional information 

received from stakeholders, EPA made 

changes to the intervals for the 

management practices from the 

proposal. EPA is also adding an option 

for sources to use an oil change analysis 

program to extend the oil change 

frequencies specified above. The 

analysis program must at a minimum 

analyze the following three parameters: 

Total Acid Number, viscosity, and 

percent water content. If the 

condemning limits for these parameters 

are not exceeded, the engine owner or 

operator is not required to change the 

oil. If any of the limits are exceeded, the 

engine owner or operator must change 

the oil within two days of receiving the 

results of the analysis; if the engine is 

not in operation when the results of the 

analysis are received, the engine owner 

or operator must change the oil within 

two days or before commencing 

operation, whichever is later. Owners 

and operators of all engines subject to 

management practices also have the 

option to work with State permitting 

authorities pursuant to EPA’s 

regulations at 40 CFR subpart E for 

alternative management practices to be 

used instead of the specific management 

practices promulgated in this final rule. 

The management practices must be at 

least as stringent as those specified in 

this final rule. 

D. Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction 

EPA proposed formaldehyde and CO 

emission standards for existing 

stationary engines at major sources to 

apply during periods of startup and 

malfunction. EPA also proposed certain 

standards for existing stationary engines 

at area sources that would apply during 

startup and malfunction. EPA did not 

propose distinct standards for periods of 

shutdown. EPA proposed that engines 

would be subject to the same standards 

during shutdown as are applicable 

during other periods of operation. 

Based on various comments and 

concerns with the proposed emission 

standards for periods of startup, EPA 

has determined that it is not feasible to 

finalize numerical emission standards 

that would apply during startup because 

the application of measurement 

methodology to this operation is not 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51577 

practicable due to technological and 

economic limitations. This issue is 

discussed in detail in the final rule 

published on March 3, 2010 (75 FR 

9674), and as discussed in the Response 

to Comments for this rule, the analysis 

is the same for the engines regulated in 

this final rule. 

As a result, EPA is extending the 

operational standards during startup it 

promulgated in the March 3, 2010, final 

rule (75 FR 9674), which specify that 

owners and operators must limit the 

engine startup time to no more than 30 

minutes and must minimize the 

engine’s time spent at idle during 

startup, to the engines newly subject to 

regulation in this rule. 

With respect to malfunctions, EPA 

proposed two options for subcategories 

where the proposed emission standard 

was based on the use of catalytic 

controls. The first proposed option was 

to have the same standards apply during 

normal operation and malfunctions. The 

second proposed option was that 

standards during malfunctions be based 

on emissions expected from the best 

controlled sources prior to the full 

warm-up of the catalytic control. For 

subcategories where the proposed 

emission standard was not based on the 

use of catalytic controls, we proposed 

the same emission limitations apply 

during malfunctions and periods of 

normal operations. EPA is finalizing the 

first option described above, which is 

that the same standards apply during 

normal operation and malfunctions. In 

the proposed rule, EPA expressed the 

view that there are different modes of 

operation for any stationary source, and 

that these modes generally include 

startup, normal operations, shutdown, 

and malfunctions. However, as 

discussed in detail in the final rule 

published on March 3, 2010 (75 FR 

9674), and as discussed in the Response 

to Comments for this rule, after 

considering the issue of malfunctions 

more carefully, EPA has determined that 

malfunctions should not be viewed as a 

distinct operating mode and, therefore, 

any emissions that occur at such times 

do not need to be factored into 

development of CAA section 112(d) 

standards, which, once promulgated, 

apply at all times. In addition, as 

discussed in detail in the final rule 

published on March 3, 2010 (75 FR 

9674), and as discussed in the Response 

to Comments for this rule, EPA believes 

that malfunctions will not cause 

stationary engines to violate the 

standard that applies during normal 

operations. Therefore, the standards that 

apply during normal operation also 

apply during malfunction. 

E. Method 323 

EPA proposed to remove Method 323 

as an option for determining compliance 

with formaldehyde emission limitations 

in 40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ. EPA 

Method 323 was first proposed as part 

of the NESHAP for Stationary 

Combustion Turbines published January 

14, 2003, (68 FR 1888) for measuring 

formaldehyde emissions from natural 

gas-fired sources. However, the method 

was not included in the final Stationary 

Combustion Turbines NESHAP due to 

reliability concerns and EPA never 

promulgated EPA Method 323 as a final 

standard in 40 CFR part 63, appendix A. 

Due to unresolved technical issues with 

the method affecting engine test results, 

EPA found it appropriate to propose to 

remove the method from 40 CFR part 

63, subpart ZZZZ. As discussed in 

greater detail in section V.D., after EPA 

proposed to remove Method 323 as a 

compliance test Method, the Agency 

received test data comparing Method 

323 to EPA Method 320. The results of 

this comparison testing showed good 

agreement between the two methods 

and there was no evidence of bias in the 

results from Method 323. Therefore, 

EPA has determined that it is 

appropriate to promulgate Method 323 

and to allow it as an option for 

measuring formaldehyde in 40 CFR part 

63, subpart ZZZZ. 

F. Other 

EPA is making several minor 

clarifications to this final rule to address 

comments that the provisions were 

confusing and difficult for affected 

sources to understand. One clarification 

is to individually list out the engines 

discussed in 40 CFR 63.6590(b)(3) and 

(c) instead of having them in a single 

paragraph. The definition of emergency 

stationary RICE and the provisions for 

emergency stationary RICE in 40 CFR 

63.6640(f) have been reorganized in 

order to provide more clarity regarding 

those provisions and to more clearly 

specify that all emergency stationary 

RICE must comply with the 

requirements specified in 40 CFR 

63.6640(f) in order to be considered 

emergency stationary RICE. If the engine 

does not comply with the requirements 

specified in 40 CFR 63.6640(f), then it 

is not considered to be an emergency 

stationary RICE. Minor clarifications 

have also been made to the tables to 

provide additional clarification on the 

applicability of the requirements in the 

tables. 

V. Summary of Responses to Major 

Comments 

A. Applicability 

Comment: Numerous commenters 

expressed concern over EPA’s decision 

to not distinguish between rural and 

urban engines at area sources in the 

proposed rule. Several commenters 

requested that EPA reevaluate its 

congressional authority to regulate area 

HAP sources in rural areas. The 

commenters believed that the proposal 

is inconsistent with 42 U.S.C. 

7412(n)(4)(B) [CAA section 

112(n)(4)(B)]. Commenters requested 

clarification of EPA’s rationale to 

regulate low levels of emissions from 

engines at oil and gas production 

facilities outside metropolitan areas, 

contending that EPA has applied this 

rule more broadly than the 

Congressional intent of the CAA, and 

requested that EPA reevaluate this issue 

of whether EPA can regulate rural area 

sources in light of the 42 U.S.C. 

7412(n)(4)(B) language. 

Commenters stated that EPA has 

based this rulemaking for area sources 

on sections of the CAA and its Urban 

Air Toxics Strategy that are intended to 

remove threats to public health in urban 

areas. The commenters do not believe 

that the remote RICE at area sources in 

the oil and gas industry threaten public 

health in urban areas. Several 

commenters noted that the NESHAP for 

glycol gas dehydrators (40 CFR part 63, 

subpart HH) takes into account the 

location of area sources and does not 

apply the specific requirements of the 

rule to rural area sources. The 

commenters believe that the same 

approach should be used for the RICE 

rule, i.e., engines that are not located in 

or near populated areas should be 

subject to an alternative set of 

requirements so as not to force 

expensive requirements on remote 

engines that have no impact on public 

health. 

Response: EPA is finalizing its 

proposal to regulate existing stationary 

SI engines located at area sources on a 

nationwide basis. EPA believes that the 

CAA provides the Agency with the 

authority to regulate area sources 

nationwide. Section 112(k)(1) of the 

CAA states that ‘‘It is the purpose of this 

subsection to achieve a substantial 

reduction in emissions of hazardous air 

pollutants from area sources and an 

equivalent reduction in the public 

health risks associated with such 

sources including a reduction of not less 

than 75 per centum in the incidence of 

cancer attributable to emissions from 

such sources.’’ Consistent with this 

expressed purpose of section 112(k) of 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51578 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

the CAA to reduce both emissions and 

risks, CAA section 112(k)(3)(i) requires 

that EPA list not less than 30 HAP that, 

as a result of emissions from area 

sources, present the greatest threat to 

public health in the largest number of 

urban areas. Sections 112(c)(3) and 

(k)(3)(ii) of the CAA require that EPA 

list area source categories that represent 

not less than 90 percent of the area 

source emissions of each of the listed 

HAP. Section 112(c) of the CAA requires 

that EPA issue standards for listed 

categories under CAA section 112(d). 

These relevant statutory provisions 

authorize EPA to regulate listed area 

source engines and not just engines 

located in urban areas. EPA believes 

that sections 112(c) and 112(k) of the 

CAA do not prohibit issuing area source 

rules of national applicability. EPA also 

disagrees with the statement that the 

proposal was inconsistent with section 

112(n)(4)(B) of the CAA. The term 

‘‘associated equipment’’ was defined for 

the purposes of 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

ZZZZ in the first RICE MACT rule not 

to include stationary RICE. EPA has not 

revisited that issue in this final rule and 

the commenters have not provided 

sufficient reason to revisit that issue. 

EPA has taken steps in the final rule 

that reduce the burden on owners and 

operators of engines regulated in this 

final rule. EPA has established 

management practice standards for most 

of the engines located at area sources of 

HAP. The only existing stationary SI 

RICE at area sources that are required to 

meet numeric emission limitations are 

4SLB and 4SRB non-emergency 

stationary SI RICE that are greater than 

500 HP and operate more than 24 hours 

per calendar year; these engines are 

estimated to be only 7 percent of the 

population of existing SI RICE at area 

sources. EPA believes that requiring 

management practices instead of 

specific emission limitations and/or 

control efficiency requirements on the 

vast majority of existing stationary SI 

engines at area sources alleviates 

concerns regarding costly and 

burdensome requirements for rural 

sources. 

EPA has also determined that existing 

emergency engines located at 

residential, institutional, and 

commercial facilities that are area 

sources of HAP emissions were not 

included in the original Urban Air 

Toxics Strategy inventory and therefore 

are not included in the source category 

listing. In this final rule, EPA has 

specified that those engines are not 

subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

ZZZZ. EPA has clarified the definitions 

of these existing emergency engines in 

this final rule. As further clarification, 

EPA notes that existing emergency 

engines located at, among other things, 

industrial facilities, would not be 

affected by this determination and are 

subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

ZZZZ. 

For existing stationary 4SLB and 

4SRB non-emergency SI engines greater 

than 500 HP located at area sources that 

operate more than 24 hours per calendar 

year, EPA determined that the 

appropriate standards are numerical 

standards that provide for the use of 

oxidation catalyst or NSCR control, 

respectively, which are generally 

available control technologies for those 

subcategories. The commenters did not 

provide a reason that GACT would be 

different for non-emergency stationary 

SI engines located in rural areas. In 

determining GACT, EPA can consider 

factors such as availability and 

feasibility of control technologies and 

management practices, as well as costs 

and economic impacts. These factors are 

not expected to be significantly different 

for existing stationary non-emergency SI 

engines in urban versus rural areas. For 

example, the availability of oxidation 

catalysts would be the same for urban 

and rural engines, and if an engine was 

in a rural location, that would not 

preclude an owner from being able to 

install aftertreatment controls. For this 

final rule, EPA estimated the capital 

cost of retrofitting an existing stationary 

4SLB non-emergency SI engine with an 

oxidation catalyst to be around $9,500 

for a 500 HP engine. Annual costs of 

operating and maintaining the control 

device are estimated to be 

approximately $4,300 per year for the 

same engine. For a 500 HP 4SRB engine, 

EPA estimated the costs for NSCR are a 

capital cost of $26,000 and an annual 

cost of $8,000. These costs would not be 

prohibitive for any engines in either 

rural or urban areas and are expected to 

be the same no matter the location. 

Furthermore, the controls that are 

expected to be used on these engines 

will have the co-benefit of reducing 

VOC and CO emissions and, for nonemergency 4SRB engines above 500 HP 

will have the co-benefit of reducing 

NOX emissions. This final rule is 

expected to reduce emissions of NOX

from stationary SI RICE located at area 

sources by 96,000 tons per year (tpy) in 

the year 2013. Reductions of CO and 

VOC from stationary SI RICE located at 

area sources are estimated to be 97,000 

and 24,000 tpy, respectively, in the year 

2013. There is also no reason to 

distinguish between the rural and urban 

area source engines that are subject to 

management practices. There is nothing 

limiting owners and operators of 

existing stationary SI engines located in 

rural areas from following the 

management practices specified in this 

final rule, and the management 

practices required by this final rule are 

appropriate for all engines, whether 

they are in rural or urban locations. 

Consistent with the proposal and for 

the reasons discussed, EPA is finalizing 

national requirements for existing 

stationary SI engines at area sources 

without a distinction between urban 

and non-urban areas. 

B. Emission Standards 

Comment: Multiple commenters were 

concerned with how EPA set the MACT 

floor for the proposed rule. The 

commenters believed that the emissions 

data was not adequate to conduct a 

MACT floor analysis. Several 

commenters said that EPA has not 

considered variability in setting the 

MACT floor for the proposed rule. A 

commenter cited the recent Brick MACT 

ruling which indicated that ‘‘floors may 

legitimately account for variability [in 

the best performing sources that are the 

MACT floor basis] because ‘‘each 

[source] must meet the [specified] 

standard every day and under all 

operating conditions.’’ The commenters 

stated EPA’s data set is not sufficient in 

covering variability. One commenter 

noted that the Courts have been critical 

of EPA’s process for setting minimum 

allowable emission limits. The 

commenter stated that EPA set the 

emission limits by averaging the best 

12 percent of all performance tests for 

each subcategory, but did not consider 

operational variations of the units. The 

commenter recommended that EPA set 

emission limits at the emissions level 

that is actually achieved under the 

worst reasonably foreseeable 

circumstances for the best performing 

12 percent of existing sources. 

Response: The CAA requires EPA to 

set MACT standards based on the test 

data that is available to the Agency and 

this is what EPA did at proposal. EPA 

recognized that it had limited emissions 

test data at the time it was developing 

the proposed rule. However, EPA had 

requested additional test data to 

supplement the emissions database from 

commenters during the development of 

previous rules for stationary engines. In 

addition, EPA requested additional test 

data during the comment period for the 

current engine rulemaking. EPA made 

an additional effort post-proposal to 

reach out to industry and other sources 

in order to supplement the existing 

emission data set. EPA received data for 

an additional 619 engines during the 

post-proposal period; this data was 

incorporated into the MACT floor 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51579 

analysis for this final rule. EPA also 

identified additional emissions data for 

stationary 4SLB SI RICE that was in the 

docket for the original RICE NESHAP 

rulemaking, docket EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2002–0059. These data were 

inadvertently omitted from the MACT 

floor analysis for the proposed rule, but 

have been incorporated into the analysis 

for the final rule, along with the 

additional emissions data received postproposal. EPA placed all additional data 

into the docket for this rule. 

Stakeholders who believe that further 

review of this information is in order or 

necessary can petition for 

reconsideration of this final rule. 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. 

Circuit has recognized that EPA may 

consider variability in estimating the 

degree of emission reduction achieved 

by best-performing sources and in 

setting MACT floors. See Mossville 

Envt’l Action Now v. EPA, 370 F.3d 

1232, 1241–42 (D.C. Cir 2004). EPA has 

included a revised approach to 

variability in the MACT floor analysis 

for this final rule. The final emission 

standards are based on test data 

collected from stationary engines 

produced by different engine 

manufacturers, operating at various 

loads and other conditions, and located 

in various types of service and 

locations. The engines range in size 

from 39 HP to 12,000 HP. The data 

includes engines operating at loads from 

11 to 100 percent. To the extent 

commenters believed further data would 

have been beneficial to EPA, EPA must 

make its determinations based on the 

information available to us. EPA asked 

for further data, and EPA did receive 

further data following the proposal, 

which led to changes in the final 

regulations. For engines operating at 

reduced speed or loads resulting in a 

reduced exhaust temperature, EPA 

believes that numerical emission 

requirements are still appropriate and 

there is no justification to only require 

work practice standards during these 

situations. EPA does not believe that the 

provisions of section 112(h) of the CAA 

are met (except as discussed elsewhere 

with regard to periods of start-up, 

emergency engines, and engines below 

100 HP) because testing is not 

economically and technologically 

impractical and the emissions can be 

readily routed through a conveyance for 

purposes of emission testing. EPA 

believes that the final emission 

standards will reflect the numerous 

engine models and operating scenarios 

that can be expected from stationary 

engines. 

In order to determine the MACT floor 

for each subcategory, EPA ranked all of 

the sources for which it had data based 

on their emissions and identified the 

lowest emitting 12 percent of the 

sources based on the lowest test for each 

engine. EPA used all of the emissions 

data for those best performing engines to 

determine the emission limits for this 

final rule, accounting for variability. 

EPA notes that as a result of using 

emissions testing data directly to 

determine the MACT, rather than using 

the Population Database, the final 

MACT floor for 4SLB engines was 

calculated using data from engines with 

emissions aftertreatment, which were 

the best performing 12% of engines in 

the emissions database. 

EPA assessed the variability of the 

best performers by using a statistical 

formula designed to estimate a MACT 

floor level that is achieved by the 

average of the best performing sources if 

the best performing sources were able to 

replicate the compliance tests in our 

data set. Specifically, the MACT floor 

limit is an upper prediction limit (UPL) 

calculated with the Student’s t-test 

using the TINV function in Microsoft 

Excel. The Student’s t-test has also been 

used in other EPA rulemakings (e.g., 

New Source Performance Standards for 

Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste 

Incinerators, Proposed NESHAP for 

Industrial, Commercial, and 

Institutional Boilers and Process 

Heaters) in accounting for variability. A 

prediction interval for a future 

observation is an interval that will, with 

a specified degree of confidence, 

contain the next (or some other prespecified) randomly selected 

observation from a population. In other 

words, the prediction interval estimates 

what future values will be, based upon 

present or past background samples 

taken. Given this definition, the UPL 

represents the value which EPA can 

expect the mean of 3 future observations 

(3-run average) to fall below, based 

upon the results of an independent 

sample from the same population. In 

other words, if EPA were to randomly 

select a future test condition from any 

of these sources (i.e., average of 3 runs), 

EPA can be 99 percent confident that 

the reported level will fall at or below 

the UPL value. To calculate the UPL, 

EPA used the average (or sample mean) 

and sample standard deviation, which 

are two statistical measures calculated 

from the sample data. The average is the 

central value of a data set, and the 

standard deviation is the common 

measure of the dispersion of the data set 

around the average. This approach 

reasonably ensures that the emission 

limit selected as the MACT floor 

adequately represents the level of 

emissions actually achieved by the 

average of the units in the top 12 

percent, considering ordinary 

operational variability of those units. 

Both the analysis of the measured 

emissions from units representative of 

the top 12 percent, and the variability 

analysis, are reasonably designed to 

provide a meaningful estimate of the 

average performance, or central 

tendency, of the best controlled 12 

percent of units in a given subcategory. 

Comment: Commenters stated that 

EPA should reevaluate its GACT 

determinations for engines located at 

area sources. Commenters stated that 

EPA is not required to consider the 

MACT floor as a minimum standard for 

area sources, but may instead elect to 

promulgate standards or requirements 

for area sources which provide for the 

use of GACT or management practices 

by such sources to reduce emissions of 

HAP. The commenters stated that EPA 

must consider not only the economic 

impacts and whether the methods, 

practices, and techniques are 

commercially available and appropriate 

for application by the sources in the 

category, but also the technical 

capabilities of the firms to operate and 

maintain the emissions controls 

systems. The commenters pointed out 

that unlike engines located at major 

sources, which are often large industrial 

facilities, many engines at area sources 

are owned and operated by small 

businesses with little or no experience 

dealing with complex regulatory issues 

and with minimal technical and 

financial resources. Commenters said 

that EPA’s GACT determination for 

engines located at area sources does not 

adequately account for the variation in 

engines that would be covered under 

the proposed control requirements 

when applied to area sources. The 

commenters listed several factors 

(engine size, cost effectiveness of 

control devices, engine usage and duty 

cycles, engine location) that must be 

considered in assessing whether and to 

what degree existing engines at area 

sources should be regulated. 

Commenters recommended defining a 

size based subcategory for area sources 

for natural gas-fired 4SRB engines 

similar to the size threshold used for CI 

engines. The commenters recommended 

that the subcategory or subcategories 

would require GACT management 

practices rather than emission standards 

based on catalytic control. At a 

minimum, the commenters 

recommended that subcategories be 

included in the proposed rule for rural 

area source natural gas-fired 4SRB 

engines from 50 HP to 500 HP. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51580 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

Response: EPA has reviewed its 

proposed requirements for existing SI 

engines at area sources based on 

comments received on the proposed 

rule. For existing non-emergency 4SRB 

and 4SLB stationary SI RICE greater 

than 500 HP at area sources that operate 

more than 24 hours per calendar year, 

EPA determined for the final rule that 

it is appropriate to set numerical 

emission limits that EPA expects would 

be met using emission control 

technologies. The costs and economic 

impacts are reasonable and the control 

technologies that would be expected to 

be used are generally available for these 

area source engines. 

For the remaining existing stationary 

SI RICE at area sources, the final rule 

requires management practices. EPA 

received comments and supporting 

information indicating that EPA had 

underestimated the cost of emission 

controls and overestimated how many 

engines were already using these 

controls. EPA reevaluated the cost 

impacts associated with establishing 

numeric emission limitations for these 

engines and determined that the cost 

impacts would be unreasonable given 

the expected emission impacts both 

with and without the expectation of use 

of emission control technologies. For 

example, for 4SRB engines, the annual 

cost per ton of HAP reduced, assuming 

the engine will have to install emission 

controls to meet the emission limit, is 

estimated to be $762,000 for a 50 HP 

engine and $167,000 for a 250 HP 

engine. For 2SLB and 4SLB engines at 

250 HP, the annual cost per ton of HAP 

reduced is estimated to be $224,000 and 

$55,000, respectively, assuming the 

engines will have to install emission 

controls to meet the emission limit. 

Engine owners/operators have indicated 

that most of these smaller area source 

engines are not equipped with the 

control technologies required to meet 

these limits. Based on this information, 

EPA determined that management 

practices for these stationary SI RICE 

located at area sources of HAP are 

generally available and cost effective 

and is promulgating management 

practices for these engines in the final 

rule. Additional information regarding 

this determination can be found in the 

memorandum titled, ‘‘MACT Floor and 

MACT Determination for Existing 

Stationary Non-Emergency SI RICE <100 

HP and Existing Stationary Emergency 

SI RICE Located at Major Sources and 

GACT for Existing Stationary SI RICE 

Located at Area Sources,’’ which is 

available from the rulemaking docket. 

C. Management Practices 

Comment: Several commenters did 

not agree with the specific management 

practices that EPA proposed in the rule 

for area sources and recommended 

different maintenance practices. 

According to the commenters, the 

maintenance frequency in the proposed 

rule exceeds current practices or is not 

supported in the proposed rule. Several 

commenters agreed that management 

practices are appropriate for the proper 

operation of the engines and are a 

reasonable means to reduce HAP 

emissions, however, the commenters 

did not agree with the specific 

maintenance practices proposed by 

EPA. Numerous commenters 

recommended that EPA allow owners/ 

operators to follow engine 

manufacturers’ recommended practices 

or the owners/operators own sitespecific maintenance plan. 

One commenter pointed out that 

operators have a direct interest in 

maintaining engine oil, hoses, and belts, 

so the engine runs reliably, but the 

appropriate frequency for these 

maintenance practices are specific to 

engine design and are not ‘‘one size fits 

all.’’ Commenters recommended that 

EPA revise fixed maintenance (one-sizefits-all) requirements to maintenance 

plans. The commenters stated that, 

while fixed maintenance intervals work 

well for new mass produced engines 

similar to those in automobiles, they are 

inappropriate for the wide variety of 

existing engines used in the oil and gas, 

agriculture, and power generation 

industries across the nation. The 

commenters pointed out that EPA 

allows the use of operator-defined 

maintenance plans that are ‘‘consistent 

with good air pollution control practice 

for minimizing emissions’’ to be used in 

other portions of this same rule, and 

asserted that EPA should allow the use 

of operator-defined maintenance plans 

to greatly reduce cost and allow 

operators to optimize maintenance for 

each type of engine. 

Commenters said that if EPA keeps 

the management practices as proposed, 

the frequencies associated with 

conducting engine maintenance should 

be revised to be commensurate with 

today’s practices. The commenters 

believed the maintenance practices, as 

proposed, are significantly burdensome 

and lack basis. According to the 

commenters, EPA should replace the 

maintenance hour intervals with 

company recommended performancebased maintenance practices to be 

documented in an operator-defined 

maintenance plan consistent with 

requirements in 40 CFR part 60, subpart 

JJJJ. 

One commenter stated that most of 

the engine manufacturers for the 

engines in the oil and gas industry 

recommend oil changes on a monthly 

schedule. The commenter also indicated 

that it is common practice to 

periodically sample and test the engine 

oil to see if the oil properties are 

sufficient to extend this time period 

between oil changes. According to the 

commenter, this testing has shown in 

many cases that the oil change interval 

can be extended without any 

detrimental effects on the engine, which 

allows industry to maximize 

efficiencies, minimize oil usage, reduce 

waste, and streamline operations with 

no negative impacts to the engine or 

emissions. 

One commenter expressed that 

inspection of hoses and belts has no 

impact on HAP emissions. The 

commenter expressed that, generally, it 

agreed that performing maintenance on 

engines will help to reduce HAP 

emissions, but that while inspecting 

belts and hoses is an important part of 

general engine maintenance (and most 

sources likely conduct regular 

inspections of their engines), such 

inspections have no effect on emissions 

and should not be included in the final 

rule. 

Response: EPA proposed to require 

specific management practices for 

certain engines, primarily for smaller 

existing stationary engines at area 

sources where EPA determined that 

add-on controls were not GACT. EPA 

indicated at proposal that the 

management practices specified in the 

proposal reflected GACT and that such 

practices would provide a reasonable 

level of control, while at the same time 

ensuring that the burden on particularly 

small businesses and individual owners 

and operators would be minimized. EPA 

asked for comment on the proposed 

management practices and received 

comments on the proposal from 

industry. 

EPA agrees with the commenters that 

it is difficult to adopt a set of 

management practices that are 

appropriate for all types of stationary 

engines. Regardless, EPA must 

promulgate emission standards 

pursuant to section 112(d)(5) of the CAA 

for all engines at area sources covered 

by this final rule. EPA still believes that 

management practices reflect GACT for 

emergency engines, engines less than or 

equal to 500 HP, 2SLB engines, and 

landfill/digester gas engines at area 

sources. These management practices 

represent what is generally available 

among such engines to reduce HAP, and 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51581 

the practices will ensure that emissions 

are minimized and engines are properly 

operated. EPA does not agree with the 

commenters that it would be 

appropriate to simply specify that 

owners and operators follow the 

manufacturer’s recommended 

maintenance practices for the engine. 

EPA cannot delegate to manufacturers 

the final decision regarding the proper 

management practices required by 

section 112(d) of the CAA. To address 

the comments that there may be special 

and unique operating situations where 

the management practices in this final 

rule may not be appropriate, for 

example engines using a synthetic 

lubricant, EPA notes that owners/ 

operators may work with State 

permitting authorities pursuant to 40 

CFR subpart E (‘‘Approval of State 

Programs and Delegation of Federal 

Authorities’’) for approval of alternative 

management practices for their engines. 

40 CFR subpart E implements section 

112(l) of the CAA, which authorizes 

EPA to approve alternative State/local/ 

tribal HAP standards or programs when 

such requirements are demonstrated to 

be no less stringent than EPA 

promulgated standards. 

The management practices EPA 

proposed for stationary SI engines 

greater than 50 HP included changing 

the oil and filter every 500 hours, 

replacing the spark plugs every 1,000 

hours, and inspecting all hoses and belts 

every 500 hours and replacing as 

necessary. For engines less than 50 HP, 

EPA proposed to require that these 

engines change the oil and filter every 

200 hours, replace spark plugs every 

500 hours, and inspect all hoses and 

belts every 500 hours and replace as 

necessary. 

EPA agrees that there is a wide range 

of recommended maintenance 

procedures, but EPA must promulgate 

specific requirements pursuant to 

section 112(d) of the CAA for this 

source category. Based on the different 

suggested maintenance 

recommendations EPA has reviewed, 

maintenance requirements appear to 

vary depending on whether the engine 

is used for standby, intermittent, or 

continuous operation. Maintenance is 

also dependent on the engine 

application, design, and model. 

Taking into consideration the 

information received from commenters 

on the proposed maintenance practices 

for oil and filter changes and carefully 

reviewing engine manufacturer 

recommended maintenance procedures, 

EPA has determined that for stationary 

non-emergency 4SLB and 4SRB SI RICE 

at or below 500 HP and stationary nonemergency landfill/digester gas SI RICE, 

GACT will require the management 

practices to be performed every 1,440 

hours of engine operation or annually, 

whichever comes first, which, as 

indicated in the comments, reflects the 

management practices that are generally 

available. For stationary non-emergency 

2SLB SI RICE, GACT will require the 

management practices to be performed 

every 4,320 hours of engine operation or 

annually, whichever comes first. Two 

stroke lean burn engines have a longer 

maintenance interval than 4-stroke 

engines because they do not have 

combustion blow-by gases entering the 

crankcase due to the engine 

configuration and therefore do not have 

as much oil contamination from the 

combustion blow-by gases. The 2SLB 

engines also operate at lower speeds and 

temperatures than 4-stroke engines; 

consequently the spark plug does not 

fire as frequently and fires at lower 

temperatures than 4-stroke engines. For 

these reasons, EPA agrees that 2SLB 

engines should have longer 

maintenance practice intervals than 4- 

stroke engines. EPA also determined 

that it would be appropriate to include 

the option to use an oil analysis 

program in this final rule. 

EPA does not agree with the 

comments that EPA’s proposed 

requirement to inspect belts and hoses 

has no impact on emissions. Ensuring 

that the engine is properly operated and 

maintained will help minimize the HAP 

emissions from the engine. Properly 

maintained belts and hoses allow the 

engine to operate at maximum 

efficiency. Hoses are generally used to 

move coolant through the engine to 

prevent the engine from overheating. 

Overheating of the engine can cause a 

malfunction in the combustion process, 

and may also burn the engine oil in the 

combustion chamber. Both of these 

conditions may increase pollutant 

emissions from the engine. Belts are 

commonly used for electrical generation 

and engine timing, and if worn or 

broken can cause damage to the engine 

and increase emissions. Therefore, EPA 

has required management practices that 

reflect GACT and that, in EPA’s view, 

will ensure the proper operation and 

maintenance of the engine. 

D. Method 323 

Comment: Many commenters thought 

that EPA should reconsider whether 

EPA Method 323 could be included in 

this final rule or if there is another 

viable alternative to EPA Method 320. 

EPA Method 323 was published in the 

Federal Register on January 14, 2003, as 

a proposed test method to measuring 

formaldehyde from natural gas 

stationary combustion sources, but the 

method was never finalized. However, 

the commenters said that the method 

has been used on a consistent basis to 

measure formaldehyde from gas engines 

for compliance and other purposes. EPA 

Region 8 has test results that indicate 

potential issues related to the reliability 

of EPA Method 323 and the method was 

therefore not included in the proposed 

rule. The commenters said that they 

believe that testing errors may have 

been a factor in the anomalous results 

from EPA Region 8. The commenters 

have reviewed some of the test reports 

in question and noted potential 

calculation or testing errors. The Fourier 

Transform Infrared method, which is 

the single formaldehyde test method in 

the proposal, compared to Method 323 

is more complex and often more 

expensive, according to the 

commenters. In addition, several 

commenters have concerns about 

whether there will be a sufficient 

amount of available testing companies 

to meet the performance testing 

demands of this final rule. For these 

reasons, several of the commenters said 

that EPA should look back at Method 

323 as a viable method and at the same 

time consider other alternatives for 

measuring formaldehyde. 

Response: EPA Method 323 was first 

proposed as part of the NESHAP for 

Stationary Combustion Turbines 

published January 14, 2003, (68 FR 

1888) for measuring formaldehyde 

emissions from natural gas-fired 

sources. However, the method was not 

included in the final Stationary 

Combustion Turbine NESHAP due to 

reliability concerns and EPA never 

promulgated EPA Method 323 as a final 

standard in 40 CFR part 63, appendix A. 

Despite this, many sources chose to use 

the method for compliance testing and 

as EPA reviewed the results from the 

method two issues emerged. A few 

testers seemed to produce results with 

the method that were consistently 

biased low, and occasionally testers 

were unable to meet the performance 

requirement for collecting duplicate 

samples whose results agreed within ± 

20 percent. Because EPA was unable to 

resolve these technical issues with the 

method, EPA found it appropriate to 

propose to remove the method from 40 

CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ. 

After EPA proposed to remove 

Method 323 as a compliance test 

method, the Agency received test data 

comparing Method 323 to EPA Method 

320. These comparison tests were run 

on five different engines with samples 

collected concurrently from co-located 

sampling systems. The results from the 

two methods showed good agreement 

and there was no evidence of bias in the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51582 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

1Roman et al., 2008. Expert Judgment Assessment 

of the Mortality Impact of Changes in Ambient Fine 

Particulate Matter in the U.S. Environ. Sci. 

Technol., 42, 7, 2268–2274. 

results from Method 323. Also, during 

the comparison testing, there were no 

problems meeting the quality assurance 

requirement in Method 323 for 

agreement between duplicate samples. 

A careful review of the earlier data 

where some testers using Method 323 

were consistently producing biased 

results showed that these testers did not 

always perform the method correctly. 

Based on the results of the comparison 

testing, EPA believes that when 

competent testers perform Method 323 

according to all of its requirements, the 

method will produce accurate and 

consistent results and it is appropriate 

to allow sources the option to use 

Method 323 to demonstrate compliance 

with the formaldehyde emission limits 

in 40 CFR part 63 subpart ZZZZ. 

Therefore, we are adding Method 323 to 

Appendix A of Part 63 as part of this 

action. 

E. Other 

Comment: One commenter indicated 

that they had provided significant 

comments in February 2009 on EPA’s 

Continuous Parameter Monitoring 

Systems proposal (73 FR 59956, October 

9, 2008) and believes that extensive 

revisions are needed of Performance 

Specifications 17 and 4. The commenter 

asked that EPA review these procedures 

to determine their appropriateness for 

even larger engines and suggested that 

EPA remove the reference to 40 CFR 

63.8(a)(2) from Table 8 of the proposed 

rule, i.e., change ‘‘Yes’’ to ‘‘No’’ for this 

paragraph. 

Response: EPA does not agree with 

the commenter that the reference to 40 

CFR 63.8(a)(2) in Table 8 of the rule 

should be ‘‘no’’. The commenter did not 

provide any information to support the 

claim that the Performance 

Specifications and 40 CFR 63.8(a)(2) are 

not appropriate for stationary engines. 

In response to this comment, EPA 

reviewed the proposed Performance 

Specifications and determined that they 

are appropriate for stationary engines, 

including stationary SI engines. In order 

to clearly indicate the requirements 

from the Performance Specifications 

that should be followed for the 

stationary engines subject to this 

rulemaking, EPA has included the 

Performance Specification requirements 

in 40 CFR part 63 subpart ZZZZ. 

VI. Summary of Environmental, Energy 

and Economic Impacts 

A. What are the air quality impacts? 

This final rule is expected to reduce 

total HAP emissions from stationary 

RICE by 6,000 tpy beginning in the year 

2013, which is the first year this final 

rule will be implemented. EPA 

estimates that approximately 330,000 

stationary SI engines will be subject to 

this final rule. These estimates include 

stationary engines located at major and 

area sources; however, not all stationary 

engines are subject to numerical 

emission standards. Further information 

regarding the estimated reductions of 

this final rule can be found in the 

memorandum titled, ‘‘Impacts 

Associated with NESHAP for Existing 

Stationary SI RICE,’’ which is available 

in the docket. 

In addition to HAP emissions 

reductions, this final rule will reduce 

other pollutants such as CO, NOX, and 

VOC. This final rule is expected to 

reduce emissions of CO by 109,000 tpy 

in the year 2013. Reductions of NOX are 

estimated at 96,000 tpy in the year 2013. 

Emissions of VOC are estimated to be 

reduced by 31,000 tpy in the year 2013. 

B. What are the cost impacts? 

The total national capital cost for this 

final rule for existing stationary RICE is 

estimated to be $383 million, with a 

total national annual cost of $253 

million in year 2013 (the first year this 

final rule is implemented). Further 

information regarding the estimated cost 

impacts of this final rule can be found 

in the memorandum titled, ‘‘Impacts 

Associated with NESHAP for Existing 

Stationary SI RICE,’’ which is available 

in the docket. 

C. What are the benefits? 

We estimate the monetized 

co-benefits of the final SI RICE NESHAP 

for major and area sources to be $510 

million to $1.2 billion (2009$, 3 percent 

discount rate) in the implementation 

year (2013). The monetized co-benefits 

of the regulatory action at a 7 percent 

discount rate are $460 million to $1.1 

billion (2009$). Using alternate 

relationships between PM2.5 and 

premature mortality supplied by 

experts, higher and lower co-benefits 

estimates are plausible, but most of the 

expert-based estimates fall between 

these two estimates.1 A summary of the 

monetized co-benefits estimates at 

discount rates of 3 percent and 7 

percent is presented in Table 3 of this 

preamble. 

TABLE 3—SUMMARY OF THE MONETIZED CO-BENEFITS ESTIMATES FOR THE FINAL RICE SI NESHAP IN 2013 

[Millions of 2009$] 1

PM2.5 precursors 

Estimated 

emission 

reductions 

(tons per year) 

Total monetized 

co-benefits 

(3% discount rate) 

Total monetized 

co-benefits 

(7% discount rate) 

Major Sources: 

VOC ............................................................................................................... 6,730 $8.2 to $20 ............ $7.4 to $18. 

Area Sources: 

VOC ............................................................................................................... 24,177 $29 to $72 ............. $27 to $65. 

NOX ................................................................................................................ 96,479 $470 to $1,100 ...... $420 to $1,000. 

Total for Area Sources ........................................................................... .............................. $500 to $1,200 ...... $450 to $1,100. 

Combined Total for Major and Area Sources ........................................ .............................. $510 to $1,200 ...... $460 to $1,100. 

1All estimates are for the implementation year (2013), and are rounded to two significant figures so numbers may not sum across rows. All 

fine particles are assumed to have equivalent health effects, but the benefit-per-ton estimates vary between precursors because each ton of precursor reduced has a different propensity to form PM2.5. Benefits from reducing CO and HAP are not included. All of the benefits for area 

sources are attributable to reductions expected from 4SLB and 4SRB non-emergency engines above 500 HP. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51583 

2Fann, N., C.M. Fulcher, B.J. Hubbell. 2009. ‘‘The 

influence of location, source, and emissions type in 

estimates of the human health benefits of reducing 

a ton of air pollution.’’ Air Qual Atmos Health 

(2009) 2:169–176. 

3Pope et al., 2002. ‘‘Lung Cancer, 

Cardiopulmonary Mortality, and Long-term 

Exposure to Fine Particulate Air Pollution.’’ Journal 

of the American Medical Association 287:1132– 

1141. 

4Laden et al., 2006. ‘‘Reduction in Fine 

Particulate Air Pollution and Mortality.’’ American 

Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 

173: 667–672. 

5U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006. 

Final Regulatory Impact Analysis: PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Prepared by Office of Air and Radiation. October. 

Available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ 

ecas/ria.html. 

These co-benefits estimates represent 

the total monetized human health 

benefits for populations exposed to less 

PM2.5 in 2013 from controls installed to 

reduce air pollutants in order to meet 

these multiple standards. These coestimates are calculated as the sum of 

the monetized value of avoided 

premature mortality and morbidity 

associated with reducing a ton of PM2.5

precursor emissions. To estimate the 

human health benefits derived from 

reducing PM2.5 precursor emissions, we 

utilized the general approach and 

methodology laid out in Fann, Fulcher, 

and Hubbell (2009).2

To generate the benefit-per-ton 

estimates, we used a model to convert 

emissions of direct PM2.5 and PM2.5

precursors into changes in ambient 

PM2.5 levels and another model to 

estimate the changes in human health 

associated with that change in air 

quality. Finally, the monetized health 

co-benefits were divided by the 

emissions reductions to create the 

benefit-per-ton estimates. These models 

assume that all fine particles, regardless 

of their chemical composition, are 

equally potent in causing premature 

mortality because there is no clear 

scientific evidence that would support 

the development of differential effects 

estimates by particle type. NOX and 

VOCs are the primary PM2.5 precursors 

affected by this rule. Even though we 

assume that all fine particles have 

equivalent health effects, the benefitper-ton estimates vary between 

precursors because each ton of 

precursor reduced has a different 

propensity to form PM2.5. For example, 

NOX has a lower benefit-per-ton 

estimate than direct PM2.5 because it 

does not form as much PM2.5, thus the 

exposure would be lower, and the 

monetized health co-benefits would be 

lower. 

For context, it is important to note 

that the magnitude of the PM co-benefits 

is largely driven by the concentration 

response function for premature 

mortality. Experts have advised EPA to 

consider a variety of assumptions, 

including estimates based both on 

empirical (epidemiological) studies and 

judgments elicited from scientific 

experts, to characterize the uncertainty 

in the relationship between PM2.5

concentrations and premature mortality. 

For this rulemaking we cite two key 

empirical studies, one based on the 

American Cancer Society cohort study 3

and the extended Six Cities cohort 

study.4 In the RIA for this rulemaking, 

which is available in the docket, we also 

include co-benefits estimates derived 

from expert judgments and other 

assumptions. 

EPA strives to use the best available 

science to support our benefits analyses. 

We recognize that interpretation of the 

science regarding air pollution and 

health is dynamic and evolving. After 

reviewing the scientific literature and 

recent scientific advice, we have 

determined that the no-threshold model 

is the most appropriate model for 

assessing the mortality benefits 

associated with reducing PM2.5

exposure. Consistent with this recent 

advice, we are replacing the previous 

threshold sensitivity analysis with a 

new ‘‘Lowest Measured Level’’ (LML) 

assessment. While an LML assessment 

provides some insight into the level of 

uncertainty in the estimated PM 

mortality benefits, EPA does not view 

the LML as a threshold and continues to 

quantify PM-related mortality impacts 

using a full range of modeled air quality 

concentrations. 

Most of the estimated PM-related 

benefits in this rulemaking would 

accrue to populations exposed to higher 

levels of PM2.5. Using the Pope et al. 

(2002) study, the 85 percent of the 

population is exposed at or above the 

LML of 7.5 μg/m3. Using the Laden et 

al. (2006) study, 40 percent of the 

population is exposed above the LML of 

10 μg/m3. It is important to emphasize 

that we have high confidence in PM2.5- 

related effects down to the lowest LML 

of the major cohort studies. This fact is 

important, because as we estimate PMrelated mortality among populations 

exposed to levels of PM2.5 that are 

successively lower, our confidence in 

the results diminishes. However, our 

analysis shows that the great majority of 

the impacts occur at higher exposures. 

This analysis does not include the 

type of detailed uncertainty assessment 

found in the 2006 PM2.5 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) 

RIA because we lack the necessary air 

quality input and monitoring data to run 

the benefits model. However, the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS benefits analysis 5

provides an indication of the sensitivity 

of our results to various assumptions. 

It should be emphasized that the 

monetized co-benefits estimates 

provided above do not include benefits 

from several important benefit 

categories, including reducing other air 

pollutants, ecosystem effects, and 

visibility impairment. The benefits from 

reducing CO and HAP have not been 

monetized in this analysis, including 

reducing 109,000 tons of CO and 6,000 

tons of HAP each year. Although we do 

not have sufficient information or 

modeling available to provide 

monetized estimates for this 

rulemaking, we include a qualitative 

assessment of these other effects in the 

RIA for this rulemaking, which is 

available in the docket. 

The combined social costs of this 

rulemaking are estimated to be $253 

million (2009$) in the implementation 

year. The combined monetized cobenefits are $510 million to $1.2 billion 

(2009$, 3 percent discount rate) and 

$460 million to $1.1 billion (2009$, 7 

percent discount rate) for 2013. Thus, 

net benefits of this rulemaking are 

estimated at $250 million to $980 

million (2009$, 3 percent discount rate) 

and $210 million to $860 million 

(2009$, 7 percent discount rate). EPA 

believes that the benefits of the 

rulemaking are likely to exceed the costs 

even when taking into account the 

uncertainties in the cost and benefit 

estimates. 

D. What are the economic impacts? 

The economic impact analysis (EIA) 

that is included in the RIA indicates 

that prices of affected output from the 

affected industries will increase as a 

result of the rule, but the changes will 

be small. The largest impacts are on the 

electric power generating industry 

because it bears more costs from the rule 

than any other affected industry 

(slightly more than 50 percent of the 

total annualized costs). For all affected 

industries, annualized compliance costs 

are 0.5 percent or less, on average, of 

sales for firms. 

Based on the estimated compliance 

costs associated with this rule and the 

predicted changes in prices and output 

in affected markets, the estimated social 

costs are $253 million (2009$), which is 

the same as the estimated compliance 

costs. 

For more information on the 

economic impacts, please refer to the 

RIA for this rulemaking, which is 

available in the docket. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51584 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

E. What are the non-air health, 

environmental and energy impacts? 

EPA does not anticipate any 

significant non-air health, 

environmental or energy impacts as a 

result of this final rule. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Under section 3(f)(1) of Executive 

Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 

1993), this action is an ‘‘economically 

significant regulatory action’’ because it 

is likely to have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more. 

Accordingly, EPA submitted this action 

to the Office of Management and Budget 

(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. In addition, EPA prepared a 

RIA of the potential costs and benefits 

associated with this action. 

When estimating the PM2.5-related 

human health benefits and compliance 

costs in Table 4 below, EPA applied 

methods and assumptions consistent 

with the state-of-the-science for human 

health impact assessment, economics 

and air quality analysis. EPA applied its 

best professional judgment in 

performing this analysis and believes 

that these estimates provide a 

reasonable indication of the expected 

benefits and costs to the nation of this 

rulemaking. The RIA available in the 

docket describes in detail the empirical 

basis for EPA’s assumptions and 

characterizes the various sources of 

uncertainties affecting the estimates 

below. 

When characterizing uncertainty in 

the PM-mortality relationship, EPA has 

historically presented a sensitivity 

analysis applying alternate assumed 

thresholds in the PM concentrationresponse relationship. In its synthesis of 

the current state of the PM science, 

EPA’s 2009 Integrated Science 

Assessment for Particulate Matter 

concluded that a no-threshold log-linear 

model most adequately portrays the PMmortality concentration-response 

relationship. In the RIA accompanying 

this rulemaking, rather than segmenting 

out impacts predicted to be associated 

levels above and below a ‘‘bright line’’ 

threshold, EPA includes a ‘‘LML’’ that 

illustrates the increasing uncertainty 

that characterizes exposure attributed to 

levels of PM2.5 below the LML for each 

study. Figures provided in the RIA show 

the distribution of baseline exposure to 

PM2.5, as well as the lowest air quality 

levels measured in each of the 

epidemiology cohort studies. This 

information provides a context for 

considering the likely portion of PMrelated mortality benefits occurring 

above or below the LML of each study; 

in general, our confidence in the size of 

the estimated reduction PM2.5-related 

premature mortality diminishes as 

baseline concentrations of PM2.5 are 

lowered. Using the Pope et al. (2002) 

study, the 85 percent of the population 

is exposed to annual mean PM2.5 levels 

at or above the LML of 7.5 μg/m3. Using 

the Laden et al. (2006) study, 40 percent 

of the population is exposed above the 

LML of 10 μg/m3. While the LML 

analysis provides some insight into the 

level of uncertainty in the estimated PM 

mortality benefits, EPA does not view 

the LML as a threshold and continues to 

quantify PM-related mortality impacts 

using a full range of modeled air quality 

concentrations. 

A summary of the monetized benefits, 

social costs, and net benefits for the 

option, as well as a less stringent option, 

at discount rates of 3 percent and 7 

percent is in Table 4 of this preamble. 

TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF THE MONETIZED BENEFITS, SOCIAL COSTS, AND NET BENEFITS FOR THE FINAL SI RICE 

NESHAP IN 2013 

[Millions of 2009$] 1

3% Discount rate 7% Discount rate 

Final NESHAP: Major 

Total Monetized Benefits 2 ....................................................................... $8.2 to $20 $7.4 to $18 

Total Social Costs 3 .................................................................................. $88 $88 

Net Benefits ............................................................................................. ¥$80 to ¥$68 ¥$81 to ¥$70 

12,500 tons of CO 

1,300 tons of HAP 

Non-monetized Benefits ........................................................................... Ecosystem effects 

Visibility impairment 

Alternative 2: Major 

Total Monetized Benefits 2 ....................................................................... $48 to $120 $43 to $110 

Total Social Costs 3 .................................................................................. $95 $95 

Net Benefits ............................................................................................. ¥$47 to $22 ¥$52 to $11 

17,800 tons of CO 

1,400 tons of HAP 

Non-monetized Benefits ........................................................................... Health effects from NO2 and ozone exposure 

Ecosystem effects 

Visibility impairment 

Final NESHAP: Area 4

Total Monetized Benefits 2 ....................................................................... $500 to $1,200 $450 to $1,100 

Total Social Costs 3 .................................................................................. $166 $166 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51585 

TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF THE MONETIZED BENEFITS, SOCIAL COSTS, AND NET BENEFITS FOR THE FINAL SI RICE 

NESHAP IN 2013—Continued 

[Millions of 2009$] 1

3% Discount rate 7% Discount rate 

Net Benefits ............................................................................................. $330 to $1,100 $290 to $930 

97,000 tons of CO 

4,700 tons of HAP 

Non-monetized Benefits ........................................................................... Health effects from NO2 and ozone exposure 

Ecosystem effects 

Visibility impairment 

Final Major and Area Source NESHAP 

Total Monetized Benefits 2 ....................................................................... $510 to $1,200 $460 to $1,100 

Total Social Costs 3 .................................................................................. $253 $253 

Net Benefits ............................................................................................. $250 to $980 $210 to $860 

109,000 tons of CO 

6,000 tons of HAP 

Non-monetized Benefits ........................................................................... Health effects from NO2 and ozone exposure 

Ecosystem effects 

Visibility impairment 

1All estimates are for the implementation year (2013), and are rounded to two significant figures. 

2The total monetized benefits reflect the human health benefits associated with reducing exposure to PM2.5 through reductions of PM2.5 precursors such as NOX and VOC. It is important to note that the monetized benefits include many but not all health effects associated with PM2.5

exposure. Benefits are shown as a range from Pope et al. (2002) to Laden et al. (2006). These models assume that all fine particles, regardless 

of their chemical composition, are equally potent in causing premature mortality because there is no clear scientific evidence that would support 

the development of differential effects estimates by particle type. 3The annual compliance costs serve as a proxy for the annual social costs of this rulemaking given the lack of difference between the two. 

4All of the benefits for area sources are attributable to reductions expected from 4SLB and 4SRB non-emergency engines above 500 HP. 

For more information on the benefits 

analysis, please refer to the RIA for this 

rulemaking, which is available in the 

docket. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The information collection 

requirements in this final rule have been 

submitted for approval to OMB under 

the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 

3501 et seq. The information collection 

requirements are not enforceable until 

OMB approves them. 

The information collection activities 

in this final rule include performance 

testing for non-emergency stationary SI 

RICE from 100 to 500 HP located at 

major sources of HAP and for nonemergency 4SLB and 4SRB stationary SI 

RICE larger than 500 HP located at area 

sources of HAP. The information 

collection activities also include onetime notifications and periodic reports, 

recording information, monitoring and 

the maintenance of records. The 

information generated by these activities 

will be used by EPA to ensure that 

affected facilities comply with the 

emission limits and other requirements. 

Records and reports are necessary to 

enable EPA or States to identify affected 

facilities that may not be in compliance 

with the requirements. Based on 

reported information, EPA will decide 

which units and what records or 

processes should be inspected. These 

amendments do not require any 

notifications or reports beyond those 

required by the General Provisions. The 

recordkeeping requirements require 

only the specific information needed to 

determine compliance. These 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements are specifically authorized 

by CAA section 114 (42 U.S.C. 7414). 

All information submitted to EPA for 

which a claim of confidentiality is made 

will be safeguarded according to EPA 

policies in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B, 

Confidentiality of Business Information. 

The annual monitoring, reporting, and 

recordkeeping burden for this collection 

(averaged over the first 3 years after 

sources must comply) is estimated to be 

967,246 labor hours per year at a total 

annual cost of $86 million. This 

estimate includes notifications of 

compliance and performance tests, 

engine performance testing, semiannual 

compliance reports, continuous 

monitoring, and recordkeeping. The 

total capital costs associated with the 

requirements over the 3-year period of 

the information collection request (ICR) 

is estimated to be $13.8 million per 

year. There are no additional operation 

and maintenance costs for the 

requirements over the 3-year period of 

the ICR. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 

1320.3(b). 

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 are listed in 40 CFR part 9. When 

this ICR is approved by OMB, the 

Agency will publish a technical 

amendment to 40 CFR part 9 in the 

Federal Register to display the OMB 

control number for the approved 

information collection requirements 

contained in this final rule. 

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 final rule on small entities, small 

entity is defined as: (1) A small business 

as defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s (SBA) regulations at 13 

CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51586 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

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. The companies 

owning facilities with affected RICE can 

be grouped into small and large 

categories using SBA general size 

standard definitions. Size standards are 

based on industry classification codes 

(i.e., North American Industrial 

Classification System, or NAICS) that 

each company uses to identify the 

industry or industries in which they 

operate in. The SBA defines a small 

business in terms of the maximum 

employment, annual sales, or annual 

energy-generating capacity (for 

electricity generating units) of the 

owning entity. These thresholds vary by 

industry and are evaluated based on the 

primary industry classification of the 

affected companies. In cases where 

companies are classified by multiple 

NAICS codes, the most conservative 

SBA definition (i.e., the NAICS code 

with the highest employee or revenue 

size standard) was used. 

As mentioned earlier in this 

preamble, facilities across several 

industries use affected SI RICE; 

therefore, a number of size standards are 

utilized in this analysis. For the 15 

industries identified at the 6-digit 

NAICS codes represented in this 

analysis, the employment size standard 

(where it applies) varies from 500 to 

1,000 employees. The annual sales 

standard (where it applies) is as low as 

$0.75 million and as high as $33.5 

million. In addition, for the electric 

power generation industry, the small 

business size standard is an ultimate 

parent entity defined as having a total 

electric output of 4 million megawatthours in the previous fiscal year. The 

specific SBA size standard is identified 

for each affected industry within the 

industry profile to support this 

economic analysis. 

After considering the economic 

impacts of this final rule on small 

entities, I certify that this action will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities 

(SISNOSE). This certification is based 

on the economic impact of this final 

action to all affected small entities 

across all industries affected. We 

estimate that all small entities will have 

annualized costs of less than 1 percent 

of their sales in all industries except 

NAICS 2211 (electric power generation, 

transmission, and distribution) and 

NAICS 111 (Crop and Animal 

Production). The number of small 

entities in NAICS 2211 having 

annualized costs of greater than 1 

percent of their sales is less than 5 

percent, and the number of small 

entities in NAICS 111 and 112 having 

annualized costs of greater than 1 

percent of their sales (but less than 2 

percent of sales) is 30 percent. We 

conclude that there is no SISNOSE for 

this final rule. 

For more information on the small 

entity impacts associated with this final 

rule, please refer to the Economic 

Impact and Small Business Analyses in 

the public docket. These analyses can be 

found in the RIA for this final rule. 

Although this final rule would not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities, 

EPA nonetheless tried to reduce the 

impact of this final rule on small 

entities. When developing the 

standards, EPA took special steps to 

ensure that the burdens imposed on 

small entities were minimal. EPA 

conducted several meetings with 

industry trade associations to discuss 

regulatory options and the 

corresponding burden on industry, such 

as recordkeeping and reporting. In this 

final rule, we are applying the minimum 

level of control (i.e., the MACT floor) to 

engines located at major HAP sources 

and the minimum level of testing, 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting to affected RICE sources, both 

major and area, allowed by the CAA. 

Other alternatives considered that 

provided more than the minimum level 

of control were deemed as not 

technically feasible or cost-effective for 

EPA to implement as explained earlier 

in the preamble. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 

1531–1538, requires Federal agencies, 

unless otherwise prohibited by law, to 

assess the effects of their regulatory 

actions on State, local, and tribal 

governments and the private sector. 

This final rule contains a Federal 

mandate that may result in expenditures 

of $100 million or more for State, local, 

and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 

or the private sector in any 1 year. 

Accordingly, EPA has prepared under 

section 202 of the UMRA a written 

statement which is summarized below. 

As discussed previously in this 

preamble, the statutory authority for this 

final rule is section 112 of the CAA. 

Section 112(b) lists the 189 chemicals, 

compounds, or groups of chemicals 

deemed by Congress to be HAP. These 

toxic air pollutants are to be regulated 

by NESHAP. Section 112(d) of the CAA 

directs us to develop NESHAP based on 

MACT, which require existing and new 

major sources to control emissions of 

HAP. EPA is required to address HAP 

emissions from stationary RICE located 

at area sources under section 112(k) of 

the CAA, based on criteria set forth by 

EPA in the Urban Air Toxics Strategy 

previously discussed in this preamble. 

In compliance with section 205(a), we 

identified and considered a reasonable 

number of regulatory alternatives. EPA 

carefully examined the regulatory 

alternatives, and selected the lowest 

cost/least burdensome alternative that 

EPA deems adequate to achieve the 

statutory requirements of CAA section 

112 and effectively reduce emissions of 

HAP. 

1. Social Costs and Benefits 

The RIA prepared for this final rule, 

including the Agency’s assessment of 

costs and benefits, is detailed in the 

‘‘Regulatory Impact Analysis for the 

Final SI RICE NESHAP’’ in the docket. 

Based on estimated compliance costs on 

all sources associated with this final 

rule and the predicted change in prices 

and production in the affected 

industries assuming passthrough of 

costs to affected consumers, the 

estimated social costs of this final rule 

are $253 million (2009$). It is estimated 

that by 2013, HAP will be reduced by 

6,000 tpy due to reductions in 

formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, 

methanol and benzene from existing 

stationary SI RICE. Formaldehyde and 

acetaldehyde have been classified as 

‘‘probable human carcinogens.’’ Acrolein 

and methanol are not considered 

carcinogenic, but produce several other 

toxic effects. Benzene is classified as a 

known carcinogen (Group A). This final 

rule is expected to reduce emissions of 

CO by about 109,000 tpy in the year 

2013. Reductions of NOX are estimated 

at 96,000 tpy in the year 2013. 

Emissions of VOC are estimated to be 

reduced by 31,000 tpy in the year 2013. 

Exposure to CO can affect the 

cardiovascular system and the central 

nervous system. 

The total monetized benefits of this 

final rule in 2013 range from $510 

million to $1.2 billion (2009$, 3% 

discount rate). 

2. Future and Disproportionate Costs 

The UMRA requires that we estimate, 

where accurate estimation is reasonably 

feasible, future compliance costs 

imposed by this final rule and any 

disproportionate budgetary effects. Our 

estimates of the future compliance costs 

of this final rule are discussed 

previously in this preamble. We do not 

believe that there will be any 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51587 

disproportionate budgetary effects of 

this final rule on any particular areas of 

the country, State or local governments, 

types of communities (e.g., urban, rural), 

or particular industry segments. 

3. Effects on the National Economy 

The UMRA requires that we estimate 

the effect of this final rule on the 

national economy. To the extent 

feasible, we must estimate the effect on 

productivity, economic growth, full 

employment, creation of productive 

jobs, and international competitiveness 

of the U.S. goods and services if we 

determine that accurate estimates are 

reasonably feasible and that such effect 

is relevant and material. The nationwide 

economic impact of this final rule is 

presented in the ‘‘Regulatory Impact 

Analysis for the SI RICE NESHAP’’ in 

the docket. This analysis provides 

estimates of the effect of this final rule 

on most of the categories mentioned 

above. The results of the economic 

impact analysis were summarized 

previously in this preamble. In addition, 

we have determined that this final rule 

contains no regulatory requirements that 

might significantly or uniquely affect 

small governments. Therefore, this rule 

is not subject to the requirements of 

section 203 of the UMRA. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This final rule does not have 

federalism implications. It will not have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132. This final rule 

primarily affects private industry, and 

does not impose significant economic 

costs on State or local governments. 

Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not 

apply to this final rule. 

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). It will not have substantial direct 

effects on tribal governments, on the 

relationship between the Federal 

government and Indian tribes, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

government and Indian tribes, as 

specified in Executive Order 13175. 

Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 

apply to this final rule. 

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 final rule 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 impact on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy. 

EPA has prepared an analysis of energy 

impacts that explains this conclusion as 

follows below. 

With respect to energy supply and 

prices, our analysis suggests that at the 

industry level, the annualized costs 

represent a very small fraction of 

revenue (generally less than 0.5 

percent). As a result, we can conclude 

supply and price impacts on affected 

energy producers and consumers should 

be small. 

To enhance understanding regarding 

the regulation’s influence on energy 

consumption, we examined publicly 

available data describing energy 

consumption for the electric power 

sector. The electric power sector is 

expected to incur about half of the $253 

million in compliance costs associated 

with this final rule, and is the industry 

expected to incur the greatest share of 

the costs relative to other affected 

industries. The Annual Energy Outlook 

2010 (EIA, 2009) provides energy 

consumption data. Since this final rule 

primarily affects natural gas and 

gasoline-fired RICE, our analysis focuses 

on impacts of consumption of these 

fuels. As shown in Table 5 of this 

preamble, the electric power sector 

accounts for less than 5.1 percent of 

U.S. natural gas consumption. As a 

result, any energy consumption changes 

attributable to this final rule should not 

significantly influence the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy 

nationwide. 

TABLE 5—U.S. ELECTRIC POWER a SECTOR ENERGY CONSUMPTION

[(Quadrillion BTUs): 2013] 

Quantity 

Share of 

total energy 

use 

(percent) 

Distillate fuel oil ................................................................................................................................................................ 0.12 0.1 

Residual fuel oil ............................................................................................................................................................... 0.34 0.3 

Liquid fuels subtotal ......................................................................................................................................................... 0.45 0.5 

Natural gas ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5.17 5.1 

Steam coal ....................................................................................................................................................................... 20.69 20.6 

Nuclear power .................................................................................................................................................................. 8.59 8.5 

Renewable energy b ......................................................................................................................................................... 6.06 6.0 

Electricity Imports ............................................................................................................................................................ 0.09 0.1 

Total Electric Power Energy Consumption c ............................................................................................................ 41.18 40.9 

Delivered Energy Use .............................................................................................................................................. 72.41 72.0 

Total Energy Use ...................................................................................................................................................... 100.59 100.0 

a Includes consumption of energy by electricity-only and combined heat and power plants whose primary business is to sell electricity, or electricity and heat, to the public. Includes small power producers and exempt wholesale generators. b Includes conventional hydroelectric, geothermal, wood and wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, other biomass, petroleum coke, wind, 

photovoltaic and solar thermal sources. Excludes net electricity imports. c Includes non-biogenic municipal waste not included above. 

Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2009. Supplemental Tables to the Annual Energy Outlook 2010. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51588 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

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 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 EPA to 

provide Congress, through OMB, 

explanations when the Agency does not 

use available and applicable VCS. 

EPA cites technical standard EPA 

Method 323 of 40 CFR part 63, appendix 

A, in this final rule. Consistent with the 

NTTAA, EPA conducted searches to 

identify VCS in addition to this EPA 

method. No applicable VCS were 

identified for EPA Method 323. The 

search and review results have been 

documented and are placed in the 

docket for this final rule. 

Under § 63.7(f) and § 63.8(f) of subpart 

A of the General Provisions, a source 

may apply to EPA for permission to use 

alternative test methods or alternative 

monitoring requirements in place of any 

required or referenced testing methods, 

performance specifications, or 

procedures. 

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. 

EPA has determined that this final 

rule 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. This rule is a 

nationwide standard that reduces air 

toxics emissions from existing 

stationary SI engines, thus decreasing 

the amount of such emissions to which 

all affected populations are exposed. 

K. Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this final rule and 

other required information to the 

U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 

Representatives, and the Comptroller 

General of the United States prior to 

publication of this final rule in the 

Federal Register. A major rule cannot 

take effect until 60 days after it is 

published in the Federal Register. This 

action is a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 

5 U.S.C. 804(2). This final rule will be 

effective on October 19, 2010. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Air pollution control, 

Hazardous substances, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: August 10, 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 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 ZZZZ—[Amended] 

■ 2. Section 63.6590 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(3), and (c) 

to read as follows: 

§ 63.6590 What parts of my plant does this 

subpart cover? 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(2) A new or reconstructed stationary 

RICE with a site rating of more than 500 

brake HP located at a major source of 

HAP emissions which combusts landfill 

or digester gas equivalent to 10 percent 

or more of the gross heat input on an 

annual basis must meet the initial 

notification requirements of § 63.6645(f) 

and the requirements of §§ 63.6625(c), 

63.6650(g), and 63.6655(c). These 

stationary RICE do not have to meet the 

emission limitations and operating 

limitations of this subpart. 

(3) The following stationary RICE do 

not have to meet the requirements of 

this subpart and of subpart A of this 

part, including initial notification 

requirements: 

(i) Existing spark ignition 2 stroke 

lean burn (2SLB) stationary RICE with a 

site rating of more than 500 brake HP 

located at a major source of HAP 

emissions; 

(ii) Existing spark ignition 4 stroke 

lean burn (4SLB) stationary RICE with a 

site rating of more than 500 brake HP 

located at a major source of HAP 

emissions; 

(iii) Existing emergency stationary 

RICE with a site rating of more than 500 

brake HP located at a major source of 

HAP emissions; 

(iv) Existing limited use stationary 

RICE with a site rating of more than 500 

brake HP located at a major source of 

HAP emissions; 

(v) Existing stationary RICE with a site 

rating of more than 500 brake HP 

located at a major source of HAP 

emissions that combusts landfill gas or 

digester gas equivalent to 10 percent or 

more of the gross heat input on an 

annual basis; 

(vi) Existing residential emergency 

stationary RICE located at an area source 

of HAP emissions; 

(vii) Existing commercial emergency 

stationary RICE located at an area source 

of HAP emissions; or 

(viii) Existing institutional emergency 

stationary RICE located at an area source 

of HAP emissions. 

(c) Stationary RICE subject to 

Regulations under 40 CFR Part 60. An 

affected source that meets any of the 

criteria in paragraphs (c)(1) through (7) 

of this section must meet the 

requirements of this part by meeting the 

requirements of 40 CFR part 60 subpart 

IIII, for compression ignition engines or 

40 CFR part 60 subpart JJJJ, for spark 

ignition engines. No further 

requirements apply for such engines 

under this part. 

(1) A new or reconstructed stationary 

RICE located at an area source; 

(2) A new or reconstructed 2SLB 

stationary RICE with a site rating of less 

than or equal to 500 brake HP located 

at a major source of HAP emissions; 

(3) A new or reconstructed 4SLB 

stationary RICE with a site rating of less 

than 250 brake HP located at a major 

source of HAP emissions; 

(4) A new or reconstructed spark 

ignition 4 stroke rich burn (4SRB) 

stationary RICE with a site rating of less 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51589 

than or equal to 500 brake HP located 

at a major source of HAP emissions; 

(5) A new or reconstructed stationary 

RICE with a site rating of less than or 

equal to 500 brake HP located at a major 

source of HAP emissions which 

combusts landfill or digester gas 

equivalent to 10 percent or more of the 

gross heat input on an annual basis; 

(6) A new or reconstructed emergency 

or limited use stationary RICE with a 

site rating of less than or equal to 500 

brake HP located at a major source of 

HAP emissions; 

(7) A new or reconstructed 

compression ignition (CI) stationary 

RICE with a site rating of less than or 

equal to 500 brake HP located at a major 

source of HAP emissions. 

■ 3. Section 63.6595 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as 

follows: 

§ 63.6595 When do I have to comply with 

this subpart? 

(a) * * * 

(1) If you have an existing stationary 

RICE, excluding existing non-emergency 

CI stationary RICE, with a site rating of 

more than 500 brake HP located at a 

major source of HAP emissions, you 

must comply with the applicable 

emission limitations and operating 

limitations no later than June 15, 2007. 

If you have an existing non-emergency 

CI stationary RICE with a site rating of 

more than 500 brake HP located at a 

major source of HAP emissions, an 

existing stationary CI RICE with a site 

rating of less than or equal to 500 brake 

HP located at a major source of HAP 

emissions, or an existing stationary CI 

RICE located at an area source of HAP 

emissions, you must comply with the 

applicable emission limitations and 

operating limitations no later than May 

3, 2013. If you have an existing 

stationary SI RICE with a site rating of 

less than or equal to 500 brake HP 

located at a major source of HAP 

emissions, or an existing stationary SI 

RICE located at an area source of HAP 

emissions, you must comply with the 

applicable emission limitations and 

operating limitations no later than 

October 19, 2013. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Section 63.6601 is amended by 

revising the section heading to read as 

follows: 

§ 63.6601 What emission limitations must I 

meet if I own or operate a new or 

reconstructed 4SLB stationary RICE with a 

site rating of greater than or equal to 250 

brake HP and less than or equal to 500 

brake HP located at a major source of HAP 

emissions? 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Section 63.6602 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 63.6602 What emission limitations must I 

meet if I own or operate an existing 

stationary RICE with a site rating of equal 

to or less than 500 brake HP located at a 

major source of HAP emissions? 

If you own or operate an existing 

stationary RICE with a site rating of 

equal to or less than 500 brake HP 

located at a major source of HAP 

emissions, you must comply with the 

emission limitations in Table 2c to this 

subpart which apply to you. 

Compliance with the numerical 

emission limitations established in this 

subpart is based on the results of testing 

the average of three 1-hour runs using 

the testing requirements and procedures 

in § 63.6620 and Table 4 to this subpart. 

■ 6. Section 63.6603 is amended by 

revising the section heading and 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 63.6603 What emission limitations and 

operating limitations must I meet if I own or 

operate an existing stationary RICE located 

at an area source of HAP emissions? 

* * * * * 

(a) If you own or operate an existing 

stationary RICE located at an area source 

of HAP emissions, you must comply 

with the requirements in Table 2d to 

this subpart and the operating 

limitations in Table 2b to this subpart 

which apply to you. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Section 63.6604 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 63.6604 What fuel requirements must I 

meet if I own or operate an existing 

stationary CI RICE? 

If you own or operate an existing nonemergency, non-black start CI stationary 

RICE with a site rating of more than 300 

brake HP with a displacement of less 

than 30 liters per cylinder that uses 

diesel fuel, you must use diesel fuel that 

meets the requirements in 40 CFR 

80.510(b) for nonroad diesel fuel. 

Existing non-emergency CI stationary 

RICE located in Guam, American 

Samoa, the Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands, or at area 

sources in areas of Alaska not accessible 

by the FAHS are exempt from the 

requirements of this section. 

■ 8. Section 63.6611 is amended by 

revising the section heading to read as 

follows: 

§ 63.6611 By what date must I conduct the 

initial performance tests or other initial 

compliance demonstrations if I own or 

operate a new or reconstructed 4SLB SI 

stationary RICE with a site rating of greater 

than or equal to 250 and less than or equal 

to 500 brake HP located at a major source 

of HAP emissions? 

* * * * * 

■ 9. Section 63.6612 is amended by 

revising the introductory text to read as 

follows: 

§ 63.6612 By what date must I conduct the 

initial performance tests or other initial 

compliance demonstrations if I own or 

operate an existing stationary RICE with a 

site rating of less than or equal to 500 brake 

HP located at a major source of HAP 

emissions or an existing stationary RICE 

located at an area source of HAP 

emissions? 

If you own or operate an existing 

stationary RICE with a site rating of less 

than or equal to 500 brake HP located 

at a major source of HAP emissions or 

an existing stationary RICE located at an 

area source of HAP emissions you are 

subject to the requirements of this 

section. 

* * * * * 

■ 10. Section 63.6625 is amended by: 

■ a. Revising paragraph (b); 

■ b. Revising paragraph (e); 

■ c. Revising paragraph (g) introductory 

text; 

■ d. Revising paragraph (h); 

■ e. Revising paragraph (i); and 

■ f. Adding paragraphs (j) and (k) to 

read as follows: 

§ 63.6625 What are my monitoring, 

installation, collection, operation, and 

maintenance requirements? 

* * * * * 

(b) If you are required to install a 

continuous parameter monitoring 

system (CPMS) as specified in Table 5 

of this subpart, you must install, 

operate, and maintain each CPMS 

according to the requirements in 

paragraphs (b)(1) through (8) of this 

section. 

(1) The CPMS must complete a 

minimum of one cycle of operation for 

each successive 15-minute period. You 

must have a minimum of four 

successive cycles of operation to have a 

valid hour of data. 

(2) Except for monitoring 

malfunctions, associated repairs, and 

required quality assurance or control 

activities (including, as applicable, 

calibration checks and required zero 

and span adjustments), you must 

conduct all monitoring in continuous 

operation at all times that the unit is 

operating. A monitoring malfunction is 

any sudden, infrequent, not reasonably 

preventable failure of the monitoring to 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51590 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

provide valid data. Monitoring failures 

that are caused in part by poor 

maintenance or careless operation are 

not malfunctions. 

(3) For purposes of calculating data 

averages, you must not use data 

recorded during monitoring 

malfunctions, associated repairs, out of 

control periods, or required quality 

assurance or control activities. You 

must use all the data collected during 

all other periods in assessing 

compliance. Any 15-minute period for 

which the monitoring system is out-ofcontrol and data are not available for 

required calculations constitutes a 

deviation from the monitoring 

requirements. 

(4) Determine the 3-hour block 

average of all recorded readings, except 

as provided in paragraph (b)(3) of this 

section. 

(5) Record the results of each 

inspection, calibration, and validation 

check. 

(6) You must develop a site-specific 

monitoring plan that addresses 

paragraphs (b)(6)(i) through (vi) of this 

section. 

(i) Installation of the CPMS sampling 

probe or other interface at the 

appropriate location to obtain 

representative measurements; 

(ii) Performance and equipment 

specifications for the sample interface, 

parametric signal analyzer, and the data 

collection and reduction systems; 

(iii) Performance evaluation 

procedures and acceptance criteria (e.g., 

calibrations); 

(iv) Ongoing operation and 

maintenance procedures in accordance 

with the general requirements of 

§ 63.8(c)(1), (c)(3), and (c)(4)(ii); 

(v) Ongoing data quality assurance 

procedures in accordance with the 

general requirements of § 63.8(d); and 

(vi) Ongoing recordkeeping and 

reporting procedures in accordance with 

the general requirements of § 63.10(c), 

(e)(1), and (e)(2)(i). 

(7) You must conduct a performance 

evaluation of each CPMS in accordance 

with your site-specific monitoring plan. 

(8) You must operate and maintain 

the CPMS in continuous operation 

according to the site-specific monitoring 

plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) If you own or operate any of the 

following stationary RICE, you must 

operate and maintain the stationary 

RICE and after-treatment control device 

(if any) according to the manufacturer’s 

emission-related written instructions or 

develop your own maintenance plan 

which must provide to the extent 

practicable for the maintenance and 

operation of the engine in a manner 

consistent with good air pollution 

control practice for minimizing 

emissions: 

(1) An existing stationary RICE with a 

site rating of less than 100 HP located 

at a major source of HAP emissions; 

(2) An existing emergency or black 

start stationary RICE with a site rating 

of less than or equal to 500 HP located 

at a major source of HAP emissions; 

(3) An existing emergency or black 

start stationary RICE located at an area 

source of HAP emissions; 

(4) An existing non-emergency, nonblack start stationary CI RICE with a site 

rating less than or equal to 300 HP 

located at an area source of HAP 

emissions; 

(5) An existing non-emergency, nonblack start 2SLB stationary RICE located 

at an area source of HAP emissions; 

(6) An existing non-emergency, nonblack start landfill or digester gas 

stationary RICE located at an area source 

of HAP emissions; 

(7) An existing non-emergency, nonblack start 4SLB stationary RICE with a 

site rating less than or equal to 500 HP 

located at an area source of HAP 

emissions; 

(8) An existing non-emergency, nonblack start 4SRB stationary RICE with a 

site rating less than or equal to 500 HP 

located at an area source of HAP 

emissions; 

(9) An existing, non-emergency, nonblack start 4SLB stationary RICE with a 

site rating greater than 500 HP located 

at an area source of HAP emissions that 

is operated 24 hours or less per calendar 

year; and 

(10) An existing, non-emergency, nonblack start 4SRB stationary RICE with a 

site rating greater than 500 HP located 

at an area source of HAP emissions that 

is operated 24 hours or less per calendar 

year. 

* * * * * 

(g) If you own or operate an existing 

non-emergency, non-black start CI 

engine greater than or equal to 300 HP 

that is not equipped with a closed 

crankcase ventilation system, you must 

comply with either paragraph (g)(1) or 

paragraph (g)(2) of this section. Owners 

and operators must follow the 

manufacturer’s specified maintenance 

requirements for operating and 

maintaining the open or closed 

crankcase ventilation systems and 

replacing the crankcase filters, or can 

request the Administrator to approve 

different maintenance requirements that 

are as protective as manufacturer 

requirements. Existing CI engines 

located at area sources in areas of 

Alaska not accessible by the FAHS do 

not have to meet the requirements of 

paragraph (g) of this section. 

* * * * * 

(h) If you operate a new, 

reconstructed, or existing stationary 

engine, you must minimize the engine’s 

time spent at idle during startup and 

minimize the engine’s startup time to a 

period needed for appropriate and safe 

loading of the engine, not to exceed 30 

minutes, after which time the emission 

standards applicable to all times other 

than startup in Tables 1a, 2a, 2c, and 2d 

to this subpart apply. 

(i) If you own or operate a stationary 

CI engine that is subject to the work, 

operation or management practices in 

items 1 or 2 of Table 2c to this subpart 

or in items 1 or 4 of Table 2d to this 

subpart, you have the option of utilizing 

an oil analysis program in order to 

extend the specified oil change 

requirement in Tables 2c and 2d to this 

subpart. The oil analysis must be 

performed at the same frequency 

specified for changing the oil in Table 

2c or 2d to this subpart. The analysis 

program must at a minimum analyze the 

following three parameters: Total Base 

Number, viscosity, and percent water 

content. The condemning limits for 

these parameters are as follows: Total 

Base Number is less than 30 percent of 

the Total Base Number of the oil when 

new; viscosity of the oil has changed by 

more than 20 percent from the viscosity 

of the oil when new; or percent water 

content (by volume) is greater than 0.5. 

If all of these condemning limits are not 

exceeded, the engine owner or operator 

is not required to change the oil. If any 

of the limits are exceeded, the engine 

owner or operator must change the oil 

within 2 days of receiving the results of 

the analysis; if the engine is not in 

operation when the results of the 

analysis are received, the engine owner 

or operator must change the oil within 

2 days or before commencing operation, 

whichever is later. The owner or 

operator must keep records of the 

parameters that are analyzed as part of 

the program, the results of the analysis, 

and the oil changes for the engine. The 

analysis program must be part of the 

maintenance plan for the engine. 

(j) If you own or operate a stationary 

SI engine that is subject to the work, 

operation or management practices in 

items 6, 7, or 8 of Table 2c to this 

subpart or in items 5, 6, 7, 9, or 11 of 

Table 2d to this subpart, you have the 

option of utilizing an oil analysis 

program in order to extend the specified 

oil change requirement in Tables 2c and 

2d to this subpart. The oil analysis must 

be performed at the same frequency 

specified for changing the oil in Table 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51591 

2c or 2d to this subpart. The analysis 

program must at a minimum analyze the 

following three parameters: Total Acid 

Number, viscosity, and percent water 

content. The condemning limits for 

these parameters are as follows: Total 

Acid Number increases by more than 

3.0 milligrams of potassium hydroxide 

(KOH) per gram from Total Acid 

Number of the oil when new; viscosity 

of the oil has changed by more than 20 

percent from the viscosity of the oil 

when new; or percent water content (by 

volume) is greater than 0.5. If all of 

these condemning limits are not 

exceeded, the engine owner or operator 

is not required to change the oil. If any 

of the limits are exceeded, the engine 

owner or operator must change the oil 

within 2 days of receiving the results of 

the analysis; if the engine is not in 

operation when the results of the 

analysis are received, the engine owner 

or operator must change the oil within 

2 days or before commencing operation, 

whichever is later. The owner or 

operator must keep records of the 

parameters that are analyzed as part of 

the program, the results of the analysis, 

and the oil changes for the engine. The 

analysis program must be part of the 

maintenance plan for the engine. 

(k) If you have an operating limitation 

that requires the use of a temperature 

measurement device, you must meet the 

requirements in paragraphs (k)(1) 

through (4) of this section. 

(1) Locate the temperature sensor and 

other necessary equipment in a position 

that provides a representative 

temperature. 

(2) Use a temperature sensor with a 

minimum tolerance of 2.8 degrees 

Celsius (5 degrees Fahrenheit), or 1.0 

percent of the temperature value, 

whichever is larger, for a noncryogenic 

temperature range. 

(3) Use a temperature sensor with a 

minimum tolerance of 2.8 degrees 

Celsius (5 degrees Fahrenheit), or 2.5 

percent of the temperature value, 

whichever is larger, for a cryogenic 

temperature range. 

(4) Conduct a temperature 

measurement device calibration check 

at least every 3 months. 

■ 11. Section 63.6640 is amended by 

revising paragraph (f) to read as follows: 

§ 63.6640 How do I demonstrate 

continuous compliance with the emission 

limitations and operating limitations? 

* * * * * 

(f) Requirements for emergency 

stationary RICE. (1) If you own or 

operate an existing emergency 

stationary RICE with a site rating of less 

than or equal to 500 brake HP located 

at a major source of HAP emissions, a 

new or reconstructed emergency 

stationary RICE with a site rating of 

more than 500 brake HP located at a 

major source of HAP emissions that was 

installed on or after June 12, 2006, or an 

existing emergency stationary RICE 

located at an area source of HAP 

emissions, you must operate the 

emergency stationary RICE according to 

the requirements in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) 

through (iii) of this section. Any 

operation other than emergency 

operation, maintenance and testing, and 

operation in non-emergency situations 

for 50 hours per year, as described in 

paragraphs (f)(1)(i) through (iii) of this 

section, is prohibited. If you do not 

operate the engine according to the 

requirements in paragraphs (f)(1)(i) 

through (iii) of this section, the engine 

will not be considered an emergency 

engine under this subpart and will need 

to meet all requirements for nonemergency engines. 

(i) There is no time limit on the use 

of emergency stationary RICE in 

emergency situations. 

(ii) You may operate your emergency 

stationary RICE for the purpose of 

maintenance checks and readiness 

testing, provided that the tests are 

recommended by Federal, State or local 

government, the manufacturer, the 

vendor, or the insurance company 

associated with the engine. Maintenance 

checks and readiness testing of such 

units is limited to 100 hours per year. 

The owner or operator may petition the 

Administrator for approval of additional 

hours to be used for maintenance checks 

and readiness testing, but a petition is 

not required if the owner or operator 

maintains records indicating that 

Federal, State, or local standards require 

maintenance and testing of emergency 

RICE beyond 100 hours per year. 

(iii) You may operate your emergency 

stationary RICE up to 50 hours per year 

in non-emergency situations, but those 

50 hours are counted towards the 100 

hours per year provided for 

maintenance and testing. The 50 hours 

per year for non-emergency situations 

cannot be used for peak shaving or to 

generate income for a facility to supply 

power to an electric grid or otherwise 

supply power as part of a financial 

arrangement with another entity; except 

that owners and operators may operate 

the emergency engine for a maximum of 

15 hours per year as part of a demand 

response program if the regional 

transmission organization or equivalent 

balancing authority and transmission 

operator has determined there are 

emergency conditions that could lead to 

a potential electrical blackout, such as 

unusually low frequency, equipment 

overload, capacity or energy deficiency, 

or unacceptable voltage level. The 

engine may not be operated for more 

than 30 minutes prior to the time when 

the emergency condition is expected to 

occur, and the engine operation must be 

terminated immediately after the facility 

is notified that the emergency condition 

is no longer imminent. The 15 hours per 

year of demand response operation are 

counted as part of the 50 hours of 

operation per year provided for nonemergency situations. The supply of 

emergency power to another entity or 

entities pursuant to financial 

arrangement is not limited by this 

paragraph (f)(1)(iii), as long as the power 

provided by the financial arrangement is 

limited to emergency power. 

(2) If you own or operate an 

emergency stationary RICE with a site 

rating of more than 500 brake HP 

located at a major source of HAP 

emissions that was installed prior to 

June 12, 2006, you must operate the 

engine according to the conditions 

described in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) through 

(iii) of this section. If you do not operate 

the engine according to the 

requirements in paragraphs (f)(2)(i) 

through (iii) of this section, the engine 

will not be considered an emergency 

engine under this subpart and will need 

to meet all requirements for nonemergency engines. 

(i) There is no time limit on the use 

of emergency stationary RICE in 

emergency situations. 

(ii) You may operate your emergency 

stationary RICE for the purpose of 

maintenance checks and readiness 

testing, provided that the tests are 

recommended by the manufacturer, the 

vendor, or the insurance company 

associated with the engine. Required 

testing of such units should be 

minimized, but there is no time limit on 

the use of emergency stationary RICE in 

emergency situations and for routine 

testing and maintenance. 

(iii) You may operate your emergency 

stationary RICE for an additional 50 

hours per year in non-emergency 

situations. The 50 hours per year for 

non-emergency situations cannot be 

used for peak shaving or to generate 

income for a facility to supply power to 

an electric grid or otherwise supply 

power as part of a financial arrangement 

with another entity. 

■ 12. Section 63.6645 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), and 

(a)(5) to read as follows: 

§ 63.6645 What notifications must I submit 

and when? 

(a) * * * 

(1) An existing stationary RICE with a 

site rating of less than or equal to 500 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51592 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

brake HP located at a major source of 

HAP emissions. 

(2) An existing stationary RICE 

located at an area source of HAP 

emissions. 

* * * * * 

(5) This requirement does not apply if 

you own or operate an existing 

stationary RICE less than 100 HP, an 

existing stationary emergency RICE, or 

an existing stationary RICE that is not 

subject to any numerical emission 

standards. 

* * * * * 

■ 13. Section 63.6655 is amended by 

revising paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(3) 

and (f)(1) and (f)(2) to read as follows: 

§ 63.6655 What records must I keep? 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(1) An existing stationary RICE with a 

site rating of less than 100 brake HP 

located at a major source of HAP 

emissions. 

(2) An existing stationary emergency 

RICE. 

(3) An existing stationary RICE 

located at an area source of HAP 

emissions subject to management 

practices as shown in Table 2d to this 

subpart. 

(f) * * * 

(1) An existing emergency stationary 

RICE with a site rating of less than or 

equal to 500 brake HP located at a major 

source of HAP emissions that does not 

meet the standards applicable to nonemergency engines. 

(2) An existing emergency stationary 

RICE located at an area source of HAP 

emissions that does not meet the 

standards applicable to non-emergency 

engines. 

■ 14. Section 63.6675 is amended by: 

■ a. Adding in alphabetical order the 

definition of Commercial emergency 

stationary RICE; 

■ b. Revising the definition of 

Emergency stationary RICE; 

■ c. Adding in alphabetical order the 

definition of Institutional emergency 

stationary RICE; 

■ d. Adding in alphabetical order the 

definition of Residential emergency 

stationary RICE; and 

■ e. Removing the definition of 

Residential/commercial/institutional 

emergency stationary RICE to read as 

follows: 

§ 63.6675 What definitions apply to this 

subpart? 

* * * * * 

Commercial emergency stationary 

RICE means an emergency stationary 

RICE used in commercial 

establishments such as office buildings, 

hotels, stores, telecommunications 

facilities, restaurants, financial 

institutions such as banks, doctor’s 

offices, and sports and performing arts 

facilities. 

* * * * * 

Emergency stationary RICE means any 

stationary internal combustion engine 

whose operation is limited to emergency 

situations and required testing and 

maintenance. Examples include 

stationary RICE used to produce power 

for critical networks or equipment 

(including power supplied to portions 

of a facility) when electric power from 

the local utility (or the normal power 

source, if the facility runs on its own 

power production) is interrupted, or 

stationary RICE used to pump water in 

the case of fire or flood, etc. Stationary 

RICE used for peak shaving are not 

considered emergency stationary RICE. 

Stationary RICE used to supply power to 

an electric grid or that supply nonemergency power as part of a financial 

arrangement with another entity are not 

considered to be emergency engines, 

except as permitted under § 63.6640(f). 

All emergency stationary RICE must 

comply with the requirements specified 

in § 63.6640(f) in order to be considered 

emergency stationary RICE. If the engine 

does not comply with the requirements 

specified in § 63.6640(f), then it is not 

considered to be an emergency 

stationary RICE under this subpart. 

* * * * * 

Institutional emergency stationary 

RICE means an emergency stationary 

RICE used in institutional 

establishments such as medical centers, 

nursing homes, research centers, 

institutions of higher education, 

correctional facilities, elementary and 

secondary schools, libraries, religious 

establishments, police stations, and fire 

stations. 

* * * * * 

Residential emergency stationary 

RICE means an emergency stationary 

RICE used in residential establishments 

such as homes or apartment buildings. 

* * * * * 

■ 15. Table 1a to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 

63 heading and introductory text is 

revised to read as follows: 

Table 1a to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 63. 

Emission Limitations for Existing, New, 

and Reconstructed Spark Ignition, 

4SRB Stationary RICE > 500 HP 

Located at a Major Source of HAP 

Emissions 

As stated in §§ 63.6600 and 63.6640, 

you must comply with the following 

emission limitations at 100 percent load 

plus or minus 10 percent for existing, 

new and reconstructed 4SRB stationary 

RICE >500 HP located at a major source 

of HAP emissions: 

* * * * * 

■ 16. Table 1b to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 

63 is revised to read as follows: 

Table 1b to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 63. 

Operating Limitations for Existing, 

New, and Reconstructed Spark Ignition 

4SRB Stationary RICE > 500 HP 

Located at a Major Source of HAP 

Emissions and Existing Spark Ignition 

4SRB Stationary RICE > 500 HP 

Located at an Area Source of HAP 

Emissions 

As stated in §§ 63.6600, 63.6630 and 

63.6640, you must comply with the 

following operating limitations for 

existing, new and reconstructed 4SRB 

stationary RICE > 500 HP located at a 

major source of HAP emissions and 

existing 4SRB stationary RICE > 500 HP 

located at an area source of HAP 

emissions that operate more than 24 

hours per calendar year: 

For each . . . You must meet the following operating limitation . . . 

1. 4SRB stationary RICE complying with the requirement to reduce 

formaldehyde emissions by 76 percent or more (or by 75 percent or 

more, if applicable) and using NSCR; or 

a. maintain your catalyst so that the pressure drop across the catalyst 

does not change by more than 2 inches of water at 100 percent load 

plus or minus; 10 percent from the pressure drop across the catalyst 

measured during the initial performance test and 

4SRB stationary RICE complying with the requirement to limit the concentration of formaldehyde in the stationary RICE exhaust to 350 

ppbvd or less at 15 percent O2 and using NSCR; or 

b. maintain the termperature of your stationary RICE exhaust so the 

catalyst inlet temperature is greater than or equal to 750 °F and less 

than or equal to 1250 °F. 

4SRB stationary RICE complying with the requirement to limit the concentration of formaldehyde in the stationary RICE exhaust to 2.7 

ppmvd or less at 15 percent O2 and using NSCR. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51593 

For each . . . You must meet the following operating limitation . . . 

2. 4SRB stationary RICE complying with the requirement to reduce 

formaldehyde emissions by 76 percent or more (or by 75 percent or 

more, if applicable) and not using NSCR; or 

Comply with any operating limitations approved by the Administrator. 

4SRB stationary RICE complying with the requirement to limit the concentration of formaldehyde in the stationary RICE exhaust to 350 

ppbvd or less at 15 percent O2 and not using NSCR; or 

4SRB stationary RICE complying with the requirement to limit the concentration of formaldehyde in the stationary RICE exhaust to 2.7 

ppmvd or less at 15 percent O2 and using NSCR. 

■ 17. Table 2b to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 

63 is revised to read as follows: 

Table 2b to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 63. 

Operating Limitations for New and 

Reconstructed 2SLB and Compression 

Ignition Stationary RICE > 500 HP 

Located at a Major Source of HAP 

Emissions, New and Reconstructed 

4SLB Stationary RICE ≥ 250 HP Located 

at a Major Source of HAP Emissions, 

Existing Compression Ignition 

Stationary RICE > 500 HP, and Existing 

4SLB Stationary RICE > 500 HP Located 

at an Area Source of HAP Emissions 

As stated in §§ 63.6600, 63.6601, 

63.6630, and 63.6640, you must comply 

with the following operating limitations 

for new and reconstructed 2SLB and 

compression ignition stationary RICE 

located at a major source of HAP 

emissions; new and reconstructed 4SLB 

stationary RICE ≥ 250 HP located at a 

major source of HAP emissions; existing 

compression ignition stationary RICE 

> 500 HP; and existing 4SLB stationary 

RICE > 500 HP located at an area source 

of HAP emissions that operate more 

than 24 hours per calendar year: 

For each . . . You must meet the following operating limitation . . . 

1. 2SLB and 4SLB stationary RICE and CI stationary RICE complying 

with the requirement to reduce CO emissions and using an oxidation 

catalyst; or 2SLB and 4SLB stationary RICE and CI stationary RICE 

complying with the requirement to limit the concentration of formaldehyde in the stationary RICE exhaust and using an oxidation catalyst; 

or 4SLB stationary RICE and CI stationary RICE complying with the 

requirement to limit the concentration of CO in the stationary RICE 

exhaust and using an oxidation catalyst.

a. maintain your catalyst so that the pressure drop across the catalyst 

does not change by more than 2 inches of water at 100 percent load 

plus or minus 10 percent from the pressure drop across the catalyst 

that was measured during the initial performance test; and 

b. maintain the temperature of your stationary RICE exhaust so that 

the catalyst inlet temperature is greater than or equal to 450 °F and 

less than or equal to 1350 °F.1

2. 2SLB and 4SLB stationary RICE and CI stationary RICE complying 

with the requirement to reduce CO emissions and not using an oxidation catalyst; or 2SLB and 4SLB stationary RICE and CI stationary 

RICE complying with the requirement to limit the concentration of 

formaldehyde in the stationary RICE exhaust and not using an oxidation catalyst; or 4SLB stationary RICE and CI stationary RICE complying with the requirement to limit the concentration of CO in the 

stationary RICE exhaust and not using an oxidation catalyst.

Comply with any operating limitations approved by the Administrator. 

1Sources can petition the Administrator pursuant to the requirements of 40 CFR 63.8(g) for a different temperature range. 

■ 18. Table 2c to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 

63 is revised to read as follows: 

Table 2c to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 63. 

Requirements for Existing Compression 

Ignition Stationary RICE Located at a 

Major Source of HAP Emissions and 

Existing Spark Ignition Stationary RICE 

≤ 500 HP Located at a Major Source of 

HAP Emissions 

As stated in §§ 63.6600, 63.6602, and 

63.6640, you must comply with the 

following requirements for existing 

compression ignition stationary RICE 

located at a major source of HAP 

emissions and existing spark ignition 

stationary RICE ≤ 500 HP located at a 

major source of HAP emissions: 

For each . . . You must meet the following requirement, except during periods of startup . . . During periods of startup you must . . . 

1. Emergency stationary CI RICE and black 

start stationary CI RICE. 1

a. Change oil and filter every 500 hours of operation or annually, whichever comes first; 2

b. Inspect air cleaner every 1,000 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; 

c. Inspect all hoses and belts every 500 hours 

of operation or annually, whichever comes 

first, and replace as necessary.3

Minimize the engine’s time spent at idle and 

minimize the engine’s startup time at startup to a period needed for appropriate and 

safe loading of the engine, not to exceed 

30 minutes, after which time the non-startup 

emission limitations apply.3

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51594 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

For each . . . You must meet the following requirement, except during periods of startup . . . During periods of startup you must . . . 

2. Non-Emergency, non-black start stationary 

CI RICE < 100 HP.

a. Change oil and filter every 1,000 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; 2

b. Inspect air cleaner every 1,000 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; 

c. Inspect all hoses and belts every 500 hours 

of operation or annually, whichever comes 

first, and replace as necessary.3

3. Non-Emergency, non-black start CI stationary RICE 100 ≤ HP≤ 300 HP.Limit concentration of CO in the stationary 

RICE exhaust to 230 ppmvd or less at 15 

percent O2.

4. Non-Emergency, non-black start CI stationary RICE 300 < HP≤ 500.a. Limit concentration of CO in the stationary 

RICE exhaust to 49 ppmvd or less at 15 

percent O2; or 

b. Reduce CO emissions by 70 percent or 

more. 

5. Non-Emergency, non-black start stationary 

CI RICE >500 HP.

a. Limit concentration of CO in the stationary 

RICE exhaust to 23 ppmvd or less at 15 

percent O2; or 

b. Reduce CO emissions by 70 percent or 

more. 

6. Emergency stationary SI RICE and black 

start stationary SI RICE.1

a. Change oil and filter every 500 hours of operation or annually, whichever comes first; 2

b. Inspect spark plugs every 1,000 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; 

c. Inspect all hoses and belts every 500 hours 

of operation or annually, whichever comes 

first, and replace as necessary.3

7. Non-Emergency, non-black start stationary 

SI RICE < 100 HP that are not 2SLB stationary RICE.

a. Change oil and filter every 1,440 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; 2

b. Inspect spark plugs every 1,440 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; 

c. Inspect all hoses and belts every 1,440 

hours of operation or annually, whichever 

comes first, and replace as necessary.3

8. Non-Emergency, non-black start 2SLB stationary SI RICE < 100 HP.a. Change oil and filter every 4,320 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; 2

b. Inspect spark plugs every 4,320 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; 

c. Inspect all hoses and belts every 4,320 

hours of operation or annually, whichever 

comes first, and replace as necessary.3

9. Non-emergency, non-black start 2SLB stationary RICE 100 ≤ HP≤ 500.Limit concentration of CO in the stationary 

RICE exhaust to 225 ppmvd or less at 15 

percent O2.

10. Non-emergency, non-black start 4SLB stationary RICE 100 ≤ HP≤ 500.Limit concentration of CO in the stationary 

RICE exhaust to 47 ppmvd or less at 15 

percent O2.

11. Non-emergency, non-black start 4SRB stationary RICE 100 ≤ HP≤ 500.Limit concentration of formaldehyde in the 

stationary RICE exhaust to 10.3 ppmvd or 

less at 15 percent O2.

12. Non-emergency, non-black start landfill or 

digester gas-fired stationary RICE 

100 ≤ HP≤ 500.

Limit concentration of CO in the stationary 

RICE exhaust to 177 ppmvd or less at 15 

percent O2.

1 If an emergency engine is operating during an emergency and it is not possible to shut down the engine in order to perform the work practice 

requirements on the schedule required in Table 2c of this subpart, or if performing the work practice on the required schedule would otherwise 

pose an unacceptable risk under Federal, State, or local law, the work practice can be delayed until the emergency is over or the unacceptable 

risk under Federal, State, or local law has abated. The work practice should be performed as soon as practicable after the emergency has ended 

or the unacceptable risk under Federal, State, or local law has abated. Sources must report any failure to perform the work practice on the 

schedule required and the Federal, State or local law under which the risk was deemed unacceptable. 2Sources have the option to utilize an oil analysis program as described in § 63.6625(i) in order to extend the specified oil change requirement 

in Table 2c of this subpart. 3Sources can petition the Administrator pursuant to the requirements of 40 CFR 63.6(g) for alternative work practices. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51595 

■ 19. Table 2d to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 

63 is revised to read as follows: 

Table 2d to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 63. 

Requirements for Existing Stationary 

RICE Located at Area Sources of HAP 

Emissions 

As stated in §§ 63.6603 and 63.6640, 

you must comply with the following 

requirements for existing stationary 

RICE located at area sources of HAP 

emissions: 

For each . . . You must meet the following requirement, 

except during periods of startup . . . During periods of startup you must . . . 

1. Non-Emergency, non-black start CI stationary RICE ≤ 300 HP.a. Change oil and filter every 1,000 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; 1

Minimize the engine’s time spent at idle and 

minimize the engine’s startup time at startup to a period needed for appropriate and 

safe loading of the engine, not to exceed 

30 minutes, after which time the non-startup 

emission limitations apply. 

b. Inspect air cleaner every 1,000 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; 

c. Inspect all hoses and belts every 500 hours 

of operation or annually, whichever comes 

first, and replace as necessary. 

2. Non-Emergency, non-black start CI stationary RICE 300 <HP≤ 500.a. Limit concentration of CO in the stationary 

RICE exhaust to 49 ppmvd at 15 percent 

O2; or 

b. Reduce CO emissions by 70 percent or 

more. 

3. Non-Emergency, non-black start CI stationary RICE > 500 HP.a. Limit concentration of CO in the stationary 

RICE exhaust to 23 ppmvd at 15 percent 

O2; or 

b. Reduce CO emissions by 70 percent or 

more. 

4. Emergency stationary CI RICE and black 

start stationary CI RICE.2

a. Change oil and filter every 500 hours of operation or annually, whichever comes first; 1

b. Inspect air cleaner every 1,000 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; and 

c. Inspect all hoses and belts every 500 hours 

of operation or annually, whichever comes 

first, and replace as necessary. 

5. Emergency stationary SI RICE; black start 

stationary SI RICE; non-emergency, nonblack start 4SLB stationary RICE > 500 HP 

that operate 24 hours or less per calendar 

year; non-emergency, non-black start 4SRB 

stationary RICE > 500 HP that operate 24 

hours or less per calendar year.2

a. Change oil and filter every 500 hours of operation or annually, whichever comes first; 1

b. Inspect spark plugs every 1,000 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; and 

c. Inspect all hoses and belts every 500 hours 

of operation or annually, whichever comes 

first, and replace as necessary. 

6. Non-emergency, non-black start 2SLB stationary RICE.a. Change oil and filter every 4,320 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; 1

b. Inspect spark plugs every 4,320 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; and 

c. Inspect all hoses and belts every 4,320 

hours of operation or annually, whichever 

comes first, and replace as necessary. 

7. Non-emergency, non-black start 4SLB stationary RICE ≤ 500 HP.a. Change oil and filter every 1,440 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; 1

b. Inspect spark plugs every 1,440 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; and 

c. Inspect all hoses and belts every 1,440 

hours of operation or annually, whichever 

comes first, and replace as necessary. 

8. Non-emergency, non-black start 4SLB stationary RICE > 500 HP.a. Limit concentration of CO in the stationary 

RICE exhaust to 47 ppmvd at 15 percent 

O2; or 

b. Reduce CO emissions by 93 percent or 

more. 

9. Non-emergency, non-black start 4SRB stationary RICE ≤ 500 HP.a. Change oil and filter every 1,440 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; 1

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51596 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

For each . . . You must meet the following requirement, 

except during periods of startup . . . During periods of startup you must . . . 

b. Inspect spark plugs every 1,440 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; and 

c. Inspect all hoses and belts every 1,440 

hours of operation or annually, whichever 

comes first, and replace as necessary. 

10. Non-emergency, non-black start 4SRB stationary RICE > 500 HP.a. Limit concentration of formaldehyde in the 

stationary RICE exhaust to 2.7 ppmvd at 15 

percent O2; or 

b. Reduce formaldehyde emissions by 76 percent or more. 

11. Non-emergency, non-black start landfill or 

digester gas-fired stationary RICE.

a. Change oil and filter every 1,440 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; 1

b. Inspect spark plugs every 1,440 hours of 

operation or annually, whichever comes 

first; and 

c. Inspect all hoses and belts every 1,440 

hours of operation or annually, whichever 

comes first, and replace as necessary. 

1Sources have the option to utilize an oil analysis program as described in § 63.6625(i) in order to extend the specified oil change requirement 

in Table 2d of this subpart. 2 If an emergency engine is operating during an emergency and it is not possible to shut down the engine in order to perform the management 

practice requirements on the schedule required in Table 2d of this subpart, or if performing the management practice on the required schedule 

would otherwise pose an unacceptable risk under Federal, State, or local law, the management practice can be delayed until the emergency is 

over or the unacceptable risk under Federal, State, or local law has abated. The management practice should be performed as soon as practicable after the emergency has ended or the unacceptable risk under Federal, State, or local law has abated. Sources must report any failure to 

perform the management practice on the schedule required and the Federal, State or local law under which the risk was deemed unacceptable. 

■ 20. Table 3 to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 

63 is revised to read as follows: 

Table 3 to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 63. 

Subsequent Performance Tests 

As stated in §§ 63.6615 and 63.6620, 

you must comply with the following 

subsequent performance test 

requirements: 

For each . . . Complying with the requirement to . . . You must . . . 

1. New or reconstructed 2SLB stationary RICE 

with a brake horsepower > 500 located at 

major sources; new or reconstructed 4SLB 

stationary RICE with a brake horsepower 

≥ 250 located at major sources; and new or 

reconstructed CI stationary RICE with a 

brake horsepower > 500 located at major 

sources.

Reduce CO emissions and not using a CEMS Conduct subsequent performance tests semiannually.1

2. 4SRB stationary RICE with a brake horsepower ≥ 5,000 located at major sources.Reduce formaldehyde emissions ..................... Conduct subsequent performance tests semiannually.1

3. Stationary RICE with a brake horsepower 

> 500 located at major sources and new or 

reconstructed 4SLB stationary RICE with a 

brake horsepower 250 ≤ HP≤ 500 located at 

major sources.

Limit the concentration of formaldehyde in the 

stationary RICE exhaust.

Conduct subsequent performance tests semiannually.1

4. Existing non-emergency, non-black start CI 

stationary RICE with a brake horsepower 

> 500 that are not limited use stationary 

RICE; existing non-emergency, non-black 

start 4SLB and 4SRB stationary RICE located at an area source of HAP emissions 

with a brake horsepower > 500 that are operated more than 24 hours per calendar year 

that are not limited use stationary RICE.

Limit or reduce CO or formaldehyde emissions.Conduct subsequent performance tests every 

8,760 hrs. or 3 years, whichever comes 

first. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51597 

For each . . . Complying with the requirement to . . . You must . . . 

5. Existing non-emergency, non-black start CI 

stationary RICE with a brake horsepower 

> 500 that are limited use stationary RICE; 

existing non-emergency, non-black start 

4SLB and 4SRB stationary RICE located at 

an area source of HAP emissions with a 

brake horsepower > 500 that are operated 

more than 24 hours per calendar year and 

are limited use stationary RICE.

Limit or reduce CO or formaldehyde emissions.Conduct subsequent performance tests every 

8,760 hrs. or 5 years, whichever comes 

first. 

1After you have demonstrated compliance for two consecutive tests, you may reduce the frequency of subsequent performance tests to annually. If the results of any subsequent annual performance test indicate the stationary RICE is not in compliance with the CO or formaldehyde 

emission limitation, or you deviate from any of your operating limitations, you must resume semiannual performance tests. 

■ 21. Table 4 to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 

63 is revised to read as follows: 

Table 4 to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 63— 

Requirements for Performance Tests 

As stated in §§ 63.6610, 63.6611, 

63.6612, 63.6620, and 63.6640, you 

must comply with the following 

requirements for performance tests for 

stationary RICE: 

For each . . . Complying with the 

requirement to . . . You must . . . Using . . . According to the following requirements . . . 

1. 2SLB, 4SLB, and CI stationary RICE.a. Reduce CO emissions .. i. Measure the O2 at the 

inlet and outlet of the 

control device; and 

(1) Portable CO and O2

analyzer.

(a) Using ASTM D6522–00 

(2005) a (incorporated by 

reference, see § 63.14). 

Measurements to determine O2 must be made 

at the same time as the 

measurements for CO 

concentration. 

ii. Measure the CO at the 

inlet and the outlet of 

the control device.

(1) Portable CO and O2

analyzer.

(a) Using ASTM D6522–00 

(2005) a b (incorporated 

by reference, see 

§ 63.14) or Method 10 of 

40 CFR appendix A. 

The CO concentration 

must be at 15 percent 

O2, dry basis. 

2. 4SRB stationary RICE .. a. Reduce formaldehyde 

emissions.

i. Select the sampling port 

location and the number 

of traverse points; and 

(1) Method 1 or 1A of 40 

CFR part 60, appendix 

A § 63.7(d)(1)(i).

(a) Sampling sites must be 

located at the inlet and 

outlet of the control device. 

ii. Measure O2 at the inlet 

and outlet of the control 

device; and 

(1) Method 3 or 3A or 3B 

of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, or ASTM 

Method D6522–00m 

(2005).

(a) Measurements to determine O2 concentration 

must be made at the 

same time as the measurements for formaldehyde concentration. 

iii. Measure moisture content at the inlet and outlet of the control device; 

and 

(1) Method 4 of 40 CFR 

part 60, appendix A, or 

Test Method 320 of 40 

CFR part 63, appendix 

A, or ASTM D 6348–03.

(a) Measurements to determine moisture content 

must be made at the 

same time and location 

as the measurements 

for formaldehyde concentration. 

iv. Measure formaldehyde 

at the inlet and the outlet of the control device.

(1) Method 320 or 323 of 

40 CFR part 63, appendix A; or ASTM D6348– 

03,c provided in ASTM 

D6348–03 Annex A5 

(Analyte Spiking Technique), the percent R 

must be greater than or 

equal to 70 and less 

than or equal to 130.

(a) Formaldehyde concentration must be at 15 

percent O2, dry basis. 

Results of this test consist of the average of 

the three 1-hour or 

longer runs. 

3. Stationary RICE ............ a. Limit the concentration 

of formaldehyde or CO 

in the stationary RICE 

exhaust.

i. Select the sampling port 

location and the number 

of traverse points; and 

(1) Method 1 or 1A of 40 

CFR part 60, appendix 

A § 63.7(d)(1)(i).

(a) If using a control device, the sampling site 

must be located at the 

outlet of the control device. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51598 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

For each . . . Complying with the 

requirement to . . . You must . . . Using . . . According to the following requirements . . . 

ii. Determine the O2 concentration of the stationary RICE exhaust at 

the sampling port location; and 

(1) Method 3 or 3A or 3B 

of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, or ASTM 

Method D6522–00 

(2005).

(a) Measurements to determine O2 concentration 

must be made at the 

same time and location 

as the measurements 

for formaldehyde concentration. 

iii. Measure moisture content of the stationary 

RICE exhaust at the 

sampling port location; 

and 

(1) Method 4 of 40 CFR 

part 60, appendix A, or 

Test Method 320 of 40 

CFR part 63, appendix 

A, or ASTM D 6348–03.

(a) Measurements to determine moisture content 

must be made at the 

same time and location 

as the measurements 

for formaldehyde concentration. 

iv. Measure formaldehyde 

at the exhaust of the 

stationary RICE; or 

(1) Method 320 or 323 of 

40 CFR part 63, appendix A; or ASTM D6348– 

03,c provided in ASTM 

D6348–03 Annex A5 

(Analyte Spiking Technique), the percent R 

must be greater than or 

equal to 70 and less 

than or equal to 130.

(a) Formaldehyde concentration must be at 15 

percent O2, dry basis. 

Results of this test consist of the average of 

the three 1-hour or 

longer runs. 

v. Measure CO at the exhaust of the stationary 

RICE.

(1) Method 10 of 40 CFR 

part 60, appendix A, 

ASTM Method D6522– 

00 (2005),a Method 320 

of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A, or ASTM 

D6348–03.

(a) CO Concentration must 

be at 15 percent O2, dry 

basis. Results of this 

test consist of the average of the three 1-hour 

longer runs. 

aYou may also use Methods 3A and 10 as options to ASTM–D6522–00 (2005). You may obtain a copy of ASTM–D6522–00 (2005) from at 

least one of the following addresses: American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959, 

or University Microfilms International, 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. ASTM–D6522–00 (2005) may be used to test both CI and SI 

stationary RICE. bYou may also use Method 320 of 40 CFR part 63, appendix A, or ASTM D6348–03. 

cYou may obtain a copy of ASTM–D6348–03 from at least one of the following addresses: American Society for Testing and Materials, 100 

Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428–2959, or University Microfilms International, 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. 

■ 22. Table 5 to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 

63 is revised to read as follows: 

Table 5 to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 63. 

Initial Compliance With Emission 

Limitations and Operating Limitations 

As stated in §§ 63.6612, 63.6625 and 

63.6630, you must initially comply with 

the emission and operating limitations 

as required by the following: 

For each . . . Complying with the requirement to . . . You have demonstrated initial compliance 

if . . .

1. New or reconstructed non-emergency 2SLB 

stationary RICE > 500 HP located at a major 

source of HAP, new or reconstructed nonemergency 4SLB stationary RICE ≥ 250 HP 

located at a major source of HAP, non-emergency stationary CI RICE > 500 HP located 

at a major source of HAP, existing nonemergency stationary CI RICE > 500 HP located at an area source of HAP, and existing 

non-emergency 4SLB stationary RICE > 500 

HP located at an area source of HAP that 

are operated more than 24 hours per calendar year.

a. Reduce CO emissions and using oxidation 

catalyst, and using a CPMS.

i. The average reduction of emissions of CO 

determined from the initial performance test 

achieves the required CO percent reduction; 

and 

ii. You have installed a CPMS to continuously 

monitor catalyst inlet temperature according 

to the requirements in § 63.6625(b); and 

iii. You have recorded the catalyst pressure 

drop and catalyst inlet temperature during 

the initial performance test. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51599 

For each . . . Complying with the requirement to . . . You have demonstrated initial compliance 

if . . .

2. New or reconstructed non-emergency 2SLB 

stationary RICE > 500 HP located at a major 

source of HAP, new or reconstructed nonemergency 4SLB stationary RICE ≥ 250 HP 

located at a major source of HAP, non-emergency stationary CI RICE > 500 HP located 

at a major source of HAP, existing nonemergency stationary CI RICE > 500 HP located at an area source of HAP, and existing 

non-emergency 4SLB stationary RICE > 500 

HP located at an area source of HAP that 

are operated more than 24 hours per calendar year.

a. Reduce CO emissions and not using oxidation catalyst.i. The average reduction of emissions of CO 

determined from the initial performance test 

achieves the required CO percent reduction; 

and 

ii. You have installed a CPMS to continuously 

monitor operating parameters approved by 

the Administrator (if any) according to the 

requirements in § 63.6625(b); and 

iii. You have recorded the approved operating 

parameters (if any) during the initial performance test. 

3. New or reconstructed non-emergency 2SLB 

stationary RICE > 500 HP located at a major 

source of HAP, new or reconstructed nonemergency 4SLB stationary RICE ≥ 250 HP 

located at a major source of HAP, non-emergency stationary CI RICE > 500 HP located 

at a major source of HAP, existing nonemergency stationary CI RICE > 500 HP located at an area source of HAP, and existing 

non-emergency 4SLB stationary RICE > 500 

HP located at an area source of HAP that 

are operated more than 24 hours per calendar year.

a. Reduce CO emissions, and using a CEMS i. You have installed a CEMS to continuously 

monitor CO and either O2 or CO2 at both 

the inlet and outlet of the oxidation catalyst 

according to the requirements in 

§ 63.6625(a); and 

ii. You have conducted a performance evaluation of your CEMS using PS 3 and 4A of 40 

CFR part 60, appendix B; and 

iii. The average reduction of CO calculated 

using § 63.6620 equals or exceeds the required percent reduction. The initial test 

comprises the first 4-hour period after successful validation of the CEMS. Compliance 

is based on the average percent reduction 

achieved during the 4-hour period. 

4. Non-emergency 4SRB stationary RICE 

> 500 HP located at a major source of HAP, 

and existing non-emergency 4SRB stationary 

RICE > 500 HP located at an area source of 

HAP that are operated more than 24 hours 

per calendar year.

a. Reduce formaldehyde emissions and using 

NSCR.

i. The average reduction of emissions of formaldehyde determined from the initial performance test is equal to or greater than the 

required formaldehyde percent reduction; 

and 

ii. You have installed a CPMS to continuously 

monitor catalyst inlet temperature according 

to the requirements in § 63.6625(b); and 

iii. You have recorded the catalyst pressure 

drop and catalyst inlet temperature during 

the initial performance test. 

5. Non-emergency 4SRB stationary RICE 

> 500 HP located at a major source of HAP, 

and existing non-emergency 4SRB stationary 

RICE > 500 HP located at an area source of 

HAP that are operated more than 24 hours 

per calendar year.

a. Reduce formaldehyde emissions and not 

using NSCR.

i. The average reduction of emissions of formaldehyde determined from the initial performance test is equal to or greater than the 

required formaldehyde percent reduction; 

and 

ii. You have installed a CPMS to continuously 

monitor operating parameters approved by 

the Administrator (if any) according to the 

requirements in § 63.6625(b); and 

iii. You have recorded the approved operating 

parameters (if any) during the initial performance test. 

6. New or reconstructed non-emergency stationary RICE > 500 HP located at a major 

source of HAP, new or reconstructed nonemergency 4SLB stationary RICE 

250 ≤ HP≤500 located at a major source of 

HAP, and existing non-emergency 4SRB stationary RICE > 500 HP.

a. Limit the concentration of formaldehyde in 

the stationary RICE exhaust and using oxidation catalyst or NSCR.

i. The average formaldehyde concentration, 

corrected to 15 percent O2, dry basis, from 

the three test runs is less than or equal to 

the formaldehyde emission limitation; and 

ii. You have installed a CPMS to continuously 

monitor catalyst inlet temperature according 

to the requirements in § 63.6625(b); and 

iii. You have recorded the catalyst pressure 

drop and catalyst inlet temperature during 

the initial performance test. 

7. New or reconstructed non-emergency stationary RICE > 500 HP located at a major 

source of HAP, new or reconstructed nonemergency 4SLB stationary RICE 

250 ≤ HP≤500 located at a major source of 

HAP, and existing non-emergency 4SRB stationary RICE > 500 HP.

a. Limit the concentration of formaldehyde in 

the stationary RICE exhaust and not using 

oxidation catalyst or NSCR.

i. The average formaldehyde concentration, 

corrected to 15 percent O2, dry basis, from 

the three test runs is less than or equal to 

the formaldehyde emission limitation; and 

ii. You have installed a CPMS to continuously 

monitor operating parameters approved by 

the Administrator (if any) according to the 

requirements in § 63.6625(b); and 

iii. You have recorded the approved operating 

parameters (if any) during the initial performance test. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51600 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

For each . . . Complying with the requirement to . . . You have demonstrated initial compliance 

if . . .

8. Existing non-emergency stationary RICE 

100 ≤ HP≤ 500 located at a major source of 

HAP, and existing non-emergency stationary 

CI RICE 300 < HP≤ 500 located at an area 

source of HAP.

a. Reduce CO or formaldehyde emissions ...... i. The average reduction of emissions of CO 

or formaldehyde, as applicable determined 

from the initial performance test is equal to 

or greater than the required CO or formaldehyde, as applicable, percent reduction. 

9. Existing non-emergency stationary RICE 

100 ≤ HP≤ 500 located at a major source of 

HAP, and existing non-emergency stationary 

CI RICE 300 < HP≤ 500 located at an area 

source of HAP.

a. Limit the concentration of formaldehyde or 

CO in the stationary RICE exhaust.

i. The average formaldehyde or CO concentration, as applicable, corrected to 15 

percent O2, dry basis, from the three test 

runs is less than or equal to the formaldehyde or CO emission limitation, as applicable. 

■ 23. Table 6 to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 

63 is revised to read as follows: 

Table 6 to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 63. 

Continuous Compliance With Emission 

Limitations, Operating Limitations, 

Work Practices, and Management 

Practices 

As stated in § 63.6640, you must 

continuously comply with the 

emissions and operating limitations and 

work or management practices as 

required by the following: 

For each . . . Complying with the requirement to . . . You must demonstrate continuous compliance 

by . . . 

1. New or reconstructed non-emergency 2SLB 

stationary RICE > 500 HP located at a major 

source of HAP, new or reconstructed nonemergency 4SLB stationary RICE ≥ 250 HP 

located at a major source of HAP, and new 

or reconstructed non-emergency CI stationary RICE > 500 HP located at a major 

source of HAP.

a. Reduce CO emissions and using an oxidation catalyst, and using a CPMS.i. Conducting semiannual performance tests 

for CO to demonstrate that the required CO 

percent reduction is achieved; a and 

ii. Collecting the catalyst inlet temperature 

data according to § 63.6625(b); and 

iii. Reducing these data to 4-hour rolling averages; and 

iv. Maintaining the 4-hour rolling averages 

within the operating limitations for the catalyst inlet temperature; and 

v. Measuring the pressure drop across the 

catalyst once per month and demonstrating 

that the pressure drop across the catalyst is 

within the operating limitation established 

during the performance test. 

2. New or reconstructed non-emergency 2SLB 

stationary RICE > 500 HP located at a major 

source of HAP, new or reconstructed nonemergency 4SLB stationary RICE ≥ 250 HP 

located at a major source of HAP, and new 

or reconstructed non-emergency CI stationary RICE > 500 HP located at a major 

source of HAP.

a. Reduce CO emissions and not using an oxidation catalyst, and using a CPMS.i. Conducting semiannual performance tests 

for CO to demonstrate that the required CO 

percent reduction is achieved;a and 

ii. Collecting the approved operating parameter (if any) data according to § 63.6625(b); 

and 

iii. Reducing these data to 4-hour rolling averages; and 

iv. Maintaining the 4-hour rolling averages 

within the operating limitations for the operating parameters established during the performance test. 

3. New or reconstructed non-emergency 2SLB 

stationary RICE > 500 HP located at a major 

source of HAP, new or reconstructed nonemergency 4SLB stationary RICE ≥ 250 HP 

located at a major source of HAP, new or reconstructed non-emergency stationary CI 

RICE > 500 HP located at a major source of 

HAP, existing non-emergency stationary CI 

RICE > 500 HP, existing non-emergency 

4SLB stationary RICE > 500 HP located at 

an area source of HAP that are operated 

more than 24 hours per calendar year.

a. Reduce CO emissions and using a CEMS i. Collecting the monitoring data according to 

§ 63.6625(a), reducing the measurements to 

1-hour averages, calculating the percent reduction of CO emissions according to 

§ 63.6620; and 

ii. Demonstrating that the catalyst achieves 

the required percent reduction of CO emissions over the 4-hour averaging period; and 

iii. Conducting an annual RATA of your CEMS 

using PS 3 and 4A of 40 CFR part 60, appendix B, as well as daily and periodic data 

quality checks in accordance with 40 CFR 

part 60, appendix F, procedure 1. 

4. Non-emergency 4SRB stationary RICE 

> 500 HP located at a major source of HAP.

a. Reduce formaldehyde emissions and using 

NSCR.

i. Collecting the catalyst inlet temperature data 

according to § 63.6625(b); and 

ii. Reducing these data to 4-hour rolling averages; and 

iii. Maintaining the 4-hour rolling averages 

within the operating limitations for the catalyst inlet temperature; and 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51601 

For each . . . Complying with the requirement to . . . You must demonstrate continuous compliance 

by . . . 

iv. Measuring the pressure drop across the 

catalyst once per month and demonstrating 

that the pressure drop across the catalyst is 

within the operating limitation established 

during the performance test. 

5. Non-emergency 4SRB stationary RICE 

> 500 HP located at a major source of HAP.

a. Reduce formaldehyde emissions and not 

using NSCR.

i. Collecting the approved operating parameter 

(if any) data according to § 63.6625(b); and 

ii. Reducing these data to 4-hour rolling averages; and 

iii. Maintaining the 4-hour rolling averages 

within the operating limitations for the operating parameters established during the performance test. 

6. Non-emergency 4SRB stationary RICE with 

a brake HP ≥ 5,000 located at a major 

source of HAP.

a. Reduce formaldehyde emissions ................. Conducting semiannual performance tests for 

formaldehyde to demonstrate that the required formaldehyde percent reduction is 

achieved.a

7. New or reconstructed non-emergency stationary RICE > 500 HP located at a major 

source of HAP and new or reconstructed 

non-emergency 4SLB stationary RICE 

250 ≤ HP≤ 500 located at a major source of 

HAP.

a. Limit the concentration of formaldehyde in 

the stationary RICE exhaust and using oxidation catalyst or NSCR.

i. Conducting semiannual performance tests 

for formaldehyde to demonstrate that your 

emissions remain at or below the formaldehyde concentration limit;a and 

ii. Collecting the catalyst inlet temperature 

data according to § 63.6625(b); and 

iii. Reducing these data to 4-hour rolling averages; and 

iv. Maintaining the 4-hour rolling averages 

within the operating limitations for the catalyst inlet temperature; and 

v. Measuring the pressure drop across the 

catalyst once per month and demonstrating 

that the pressure drop across the catalyst is 

within the operating limitation established 

during the performance test. 

8. New or reconstructed non-emergency stationary RICE > 500 HP located at a major 

source of HAP and new or reconstructed 

non-emergency 4SLB stationary RICE 

250 ≤ HP≤ 500 located at a major source of 

HAP.

a. Limit the concentration of formaldehyde in 

the stationary RICE exhaust and not using 

oxidation catalyst or NSCR.

i. Conducting semiannual performance tests 

for formaldehyde to demonstrate that your 

emissions remain at or below the formaldehyde concentration limit;a and 

ii. Collecting the approved operating parameter (if any) data according to § 63.6625(b); 

and 

iii. Reducing these data to 4-hour rolling averages; and 

iv. Maintaining the 4-hour rolling averages 

within the operating limitations for the operating parameters established during the performance test. 

9. Existing emergency and black start stationary RICE ≤ 500 HP located at a major 

source of HAP, existing non-emergency stationary RICE < 100 HP located at a major 

source of HAP, existing emergency and 

black start stationary RICE located at an 

area source of HAP, existing non-emergency 

stationary CI RICE ≤ 300 HP located at an 

area source of HAP, existing non-emergency 

2SLB stationary RICE located at an area 

source of HAP, existing non-emergency 

landfill or digester gas stationary SI RICE located at an area source of HAP, existing 

non-emergency 4SLB and 4SRB stationary 

RICE ≤ 500 HP located at an area source of 

HAP, existing non-emergency 4SLB and 

4SRB stationary RICE > 500 HP located at 

an area source of HAP that operate 24 

hours or less per calendar year.

a. Work or Management practices ................... i. Operating and maintaining the stationary 

RICE according to the manufacturer’s emission-related operation and maintenance instructions; or 

ii. Develop and follow your own maintenance 

plan which must provide to the extent practicable for the maintenance and operation of 

the engine in a manner consistent with 

good air pollution control practice for minimizing emissions. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51602 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

For each . . . Complying with the requirement to . . . You must demonstrate continuous compliance 

by . . . 

10. Existing stationary CI RICE > 500 HP that 

are not limited use stationary RICE, and existing 4SLB and 4SRB stationary RICE > 500 

HP located at an area source of HAP that 

operate more than 24 hours per calendar 

year and are not limited use stationary RICE.

a. Reduce CO or formaldehyde emissions, or 

limit the concentration of formaldehyde or 

CO in the stationary RICE exhaust, and 

using oxidation catalyst or NSCR.

i. Conducting performance tests every 8,760 

hours or 3 years, whichever comes first, for 

CO or formaldehyde, as appropriate, to 

demonstrate that the required CO or formaldehyde, as appropriate, percent reduction 

is achieved or that your emissions remain at 

or below the CO or formaldehyde concentration limit; and 

ii. Collecting the catalyst inlet temperature 

data according to § 63.6625(b); and 

iii. Reducing these data to 4-hour rolling averages; and 

iv. Maintaining the 4-hour rolling averages 

within the operating limitations for the catalyst inlet temperature; and 

v. Measuring the pressure drop across the 

catalyst once per month and demonstrating 

that the pressure drop across the catalyst is 

within the operating limitation established 

during the performance test. 

11. Existing stationary CI RICE > 500 HP that 

are not limited use stationary RICE, and existing 4SLB and 4SRB stationary RICE > 500 

HP located at an area source of HAP that 

operate more than 24 hours per calendar 

year and are not limited use stationary RICE.

a. Reduce CO or formaldehyde emissions, or 

limit the concentration of formaldehyde or 

CO in the stationary RICE exhaust, and not 

using oxidation catalyst or NSCR.

i. Conducting performance tests every 8,760 

hours or 3 years, whichever comes first, for 

CO or formaldehyde, as appropriate, to 

demonstrate that the required CO or formaldehyde, as appropriate, percent reduction 

is achieved or that your emissions remain at 

or below the CO or formaldehyde concentration limit; and 

ii. Collecting the approved operating parameter (if any) data according to § 63.6625(b); 

and 

iii. Reducing these data to 4-hour rolling averages; and 

iv. Maintaining the 4-hour rolling averages 

within the operating limitations for the operating parameters established during the performance test. 

12. Existing limited use CI stationary RICE 

> 500 HP and existing limited use 4SLB and 

4SRB stationary RICE > 500 HP located at 

an area source of HAP that operate more 

than 24 hours per calendar year.

a. Reduce CO or formaldehyde emissions or 

limit the concentration of formaldehyde or 

CO in the stationary RICE exhaust, and 

using an oxidation catalyst or NSCR.

i. Conducting performance tests every 8,760 

hours or 5 years, whichever comes first, for 

CO or formaldehyde, as appropriate, to 

demonstrate that the required CO or formaldehyde, as appropriate, percent reduction 

is achieved or that your emissions remain at 

or below the CO or formaldehyde concentration limit; and 

ii. Collecting the catalyst inlet temperature 

data according to § 63.6625(b); and 

iii. Reducing these data to 4-hour rolling averages; and 

iv. Maintaining the 4-hour rolling averages 

within the operating limitations for the catalyst inlet temperature; and 

v. Measuring the pressure drop across the 

catalyst once per month and demonstrating 

that the pressure drop across the catalyst is 

within the operating limitation established 

during the performance test. 

13. Existing limited use CI stationary RICE 

> 500 HP and existing limited use 4SLB and 

4SRB stationary RICE > 500 HP located at 

an area source of HAP that operate more 

than 24 hours per calendar year.

a. Reduce CO or formaldehyde emissions or 

limit the concentration of formaldehyde or 

CO in the stationary RICE exhaust, and 

using an oxidation catalyst or NSCR.

i. Conducting performance tests every 8,760 

hours or 5 years, whichever comes first, for 

CO or formaldehyde, as appropriate, to 

demonstrate that the required CO or formaldehyde, as appropriate, percent reduction 

is achieved or that your emissions remain at 

or below the CO or formaldehyde concentration limit; and 

ii. Collecting the approved operating parameter (if any) data according to § 63.6625(b); 

and 

iii. Reducing these data to 4-hour rolling averages; and 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51603 

For each . . . Complying with the requirement to . . . You must demonstrate continuous compliance 

by . . . 

iv. Maintaining the 4-hour rolling averages 

within the operating limitations for the operating parameters established during the performance test. 

aAfter you have demonstrated compliance for two consecutive tests, you may reduce the frequency of subsequent performance tests to annually. If the results of any subsequent annual performance test indicate the stationary RICE is not in compliance with the CO or formaldehyde 

emission limitation, or you deviate from any of your operating limitations, you must resume semiannual performance tests. 

■ 24. Table 7 to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 

63 is revised to read as follows: 

Table 7 to Subpart ZZZZ of Part 63. 

Requirements for Reports 

As stated in § 63.6650, you must 

comply with the following requirements 

for reports: 

For each ... You must submit a ... The report must contain ... You must submit the report ... 

1. Existing non-emergency, non-black start 

stationary RICE 100 ≤ HP≤ 500 located 

at a major source of HAP; existing nonemergency, non-black start stationary CI 

RICE > 500 HP located at a major 

source of HAP; existing non-emergency 

4SRB stationary RICE > 500 HP located 

at a major source of HAP; existing nonemergency, non-black start stationary CI 

RICE > 300 HP located at an area 

source of HAP; existing non-emergency, 

non-black start 4SLB and 4SRB stationary RICE > 500 HP located at an 

area source of HAP and operated more 

than 24 hours per calendar year; new or 

reconstructed non-emergency stationary 

RICE > 500 HP located at a major 

source of HAP; and new or reconstructed non-emergency 4SLB stationary 

RICE 250 ≤ HP≤ 500 located at a major 

source of HAP.

Compliance report .... a. If there are no deviations from any 

emission limitations or operating limitations that apply to you, a statement that 

there were no deviations from the emission limitations or operating limitations 

during the reporting period. If there were 

no periods during which the CMS, including CEMS and CPMS, was out-ofcontrol, as specified in § 63.8(c)(7), a 

statement that there were not periods 

during which the CMS was out-of-control 

during the reporting period; or 

b. If you had a deviation from any emission limitation or operating limitation during the reporting period, the information 

in § 63.6650(d). If there were periods 

during which the CMS, including CEMS 

and CPMS, was out-of-control, as specified in § 63.8(c)(7), the information in 

§ 63.6650(e); or 

c. If you had a malfunction during the reporting period, the information in 

§ 63.6650(c)(4) 

i. Semiannually according to 

the requirements in 

§ 63.6650(b)(1)–(5) for engines that are not limited 

use stationary RICE subject 

to numerical emission limitations; and 

ii. Annually according to the 

requirements in 

§ 63.6650(b)(6)–(9) for engines that are limited use 

stationary RICE subject to 

numerical emission limitations. 

i. Semiannually according to 

the requirements in 

§ 63.6650(b). 

i. Semiannually according to 

the requirements in 

§ 63.6650(b). 

2. New or reconstructed non-emergency 

stationary RICE that combusts landfill 

gas or digester gas equivalent to 10 percent or more of the gross heat input on 

an annual basis.

Report ...................... a. The fuel flow rate of each fuel and the 

heating values that were used in your 

calculations, and you must demonstrate 

that the percentage of heat input provided by landfill gas or digester gas, is 

equivalent to 10 percent or more of the 

gross heat input on an annual basis; 

and 

i. Annually, according to the 

requirements in § 63.6650. 

b. The operating limits provided in your 

federally enforceable permit, and any 

deviations from these limits; and 

i. See item 2.a.i. 

c. Any problems or errors suspected with 

the meters. 

i. See item 2.a.i. 

■ 25. Appendix A to Part 63 is amended 

by adding, in numerical order, Method 

323 to read as follows: 

Appendix A to Part 63—Test Methods 

* * * * * 

Method 323—Measurement of 

Formaldehyde Emissions From Natural GasFired Stationary Sources—Acetyl Acetone 

Derivitization Method 

1.0 Introduction. This method describes 

the sampling and analysis procedures of the 

acetyl acetone colorimetric method for 

measuring formaldehyde emissions in the 

exhaust of natural gas-fired, stationary 

combustion sources. This method, which was 

prepared by the Gas Research Institute (GRI), 

is based on the Chilled Impinger Train 

Method for Methanol, Acetone, 

Acetaldehyde, Methyl Ethyl Ketone, and 

Formaldehyde (Technical Bulletin No. 684) 

developed and published by the National 

Council of the Paper Industry for Air and 

Stream Improvement, Inc. (NCASI). However, 

this method has been prepared specifically 

for formaldehyde and does not include 

specifications (e.g., equipment and supplies) 

and procedures (e.g., sampling and 

analytical) for methanol, acetone, 

acetaldehyde, and methyl ethyl ketone. To 

obtain reliable results, persons using this 

method should have a thorough knowledge 

of at least Methods 1 and 2 of 40 CFR Part 

60, Appendix A–1; Method 3 of 40 CFR Part 

60, Appendix A–2; and Method 4 of 40 CFR 

Part 60, Appendix A–3. 

1.1 Scope and Application 

1.1.1 Analytes. The only analyte 

measured by this method is formaldehyde 

(CAS Number 50–00–0). 

1.1.2 Applicability. This method is for 

analyzing formaldehyde emissions from 

uncontrolled and controlled natural gas-fired, 

stationary combustion sources. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51604 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

1.1.3 Data Quality Objectives. If you 

adhere to the quality control and quality 

assurance requirements of this method, then 

you and future users of your data will be able 

to assess the quality of the data you obtain 

and estimate the uncertainty in the 

measurements. 

2.0 Summary of Method. An emission 

sample from the combustion exhaust is 

drawn through a midget impinger train 

containing chilled reagent water to absorb 

formaldehyde. The formaldehyde 

concentration in the impinger is determined 

by reaction with acetyl acetone to form a 

colored derivative which is measured 

colorimetrically. 

3.0 Definitions 

[Reserved]. 

4.0 Interferences. The presence of 

acetaldehyde, amines, polymers of 

formaldehyde, periodate, and sulfites can 

cause interferences with the acetyl acetone 

procedure which is used to determine the 

formaldehyde concentration. However, based 

on experience gained from extensive testing 

of natural gas-fired combustion sources using 

FTIR to measure a variety of compounds, GRI 

expects only acetaldehyde to be potentially 

present when combusting natural gas. 

Acetaldehyde has been reported to be a 

significant interference only when present at 

concentrations above 50 ppmv. However, GRI 

reports that the concentration of 

acetaldehyde from gas-fired sources is very 

low (typically below the FTIR detection limit 

of around 0.5 ppmv); therefore, the potential 

positive bias due to acetaldehyde 

interference is expected to be negligible. 

5.0 Safety 

5.1 Prior to applying the method in the 

field, a site-specific Health and Safety Plan 

should be prepared. General safety 

precautions include the use of steel-toed 

boots, safety glasses, hard hats, and work 

gloves. In certain cases, facility policy may 

require the use of fire-resistant clothing while 

on-site. Since the method involves testing at 

high-temperature sampling locations, 

precautions must be taken to limit the 

potential for exposure to high-temperature 

gases and surfaces while inserting or 

removing the sample probe. In warm 

locations, precautions must also be taken to 

avoid dehydration. 

5.2 Potential chemical hazards associated 

with sampling include formaldehyde, 

nitrogen oxides (NOX), and carbon monoxide 

(CO). Formalin solution, used for field 

spiking, is an aqueous solution containing 

formaldehyde and methanol. Formaldehyde 

is a skin, eye, and respiratory irritant and a 

carcinogen, and should be handled 

accordingly. Eye and skin contact and 

inhalation of formaldehyde vapors should be 

avoided. Natural gas-fired combustion 

sources can potentially emit CO at toxic 

concentrations. Care should be taken to 

minimize exposure to the sample gas while 

inserting or removing the sample probe. If the 

work area is enclosed, personal CO monitors 

should be used to insure that the 

concentration of CO in the work area is 

maintained at safe levels. 

5.3 Potential chemical hazards associated 

with the analytical procedures include acetyl 

acetone and glacial acetic acid. Acetyl 

acetone is an irritant to the skin and 

respiratory system, as well as being 

moderately toxic. Glacial acetic acid is highly 

corrosive and is an irritant to the skin, eyes, 

and respiratory system. Eye and skin contact 

and inhalation of vapors should be avoided. 

Acetyl acetone and glacial acetic acid have 

flash points of 41 °C (105.8 °F) and 43 °C 

(109.4 °F), respectively. Exposure to heat or 

flame should be avoided. 

6.0 Equipment and Supplies 

6.1 Sampling Probe. Quartz glass probe 

with stainless steel sheath or stainless steel 

probe. 

6.2 Teflon Tubing. Teflon tubing to 

connect the sample probe to the impinger 

train. A heated sample line is not needed 

since the sample transfer system is rinsed to 

recover condensed formaldehyde and the 

rinsate combined with the impinger contents 

prior to sample analysis. 

6.3 Midget Impingers. Three midget 

impingers are required for sample collection. 

The first impinger serves as a moisture 

knockout, the second impinger contains 20 

mL of reagent water, and the third impinger 

contains silica gel to remove residual 

moisture from the sample prior to the dry gas 

meter. 

6.4 Vacuum Pump. Vacuum pump 

capable of delivering a controlled extraction 

flow rate between 0.2 and 0.4 L/min. 

6.5 Flow Measurement Device. A 

rotameter or other flow measurement device 

is required to indicate consistent sample 

flow. 

6.6 Dry Gas Meter. A dry gas meter is 

used to measure the total sample volume 

collected. The dry gas meter must be 

sufficiently accurate to measure the sample 

volume to within 2 percent, calibrated at the 

selected flow rate and conditions actually 

encountered during sampling, and equipped 

with a temperature sensor (dial thermometer, 

or equivalent) capable of measuring 

temperature accurately to within 3 °C 

(5.4 °F). 

6.7 Spectrophotometer. A 

spectrophotometer is required for 

formaldehyde analysis, and must be capable 

of measuring absorbance at 412 nm. 

7.0 Reagents and Standards 

7.1 Sampling Reagents 

7.1.1 Reagent water. Deionized, distilled, 

organic-free water. This water is used as the 

capture solution, for rinsing the sample 

probe, sample line, and impingers at the 

completion of the sampling run, in reagent 

dilutions, and in blanks. 

7.1.2 Ice. Ice is necessary to pack around 

the impingers during sampling in order to 

keep the impingers cold. Ice is also needed 

for sample transport and storage. 

7.2 Analysis 

7.2.1 Acetyl acetone Reagent. Prepare the 

acetyl acetone reagent by dissolving 15.4 g of 

ammonium acetate in 50 mL of reagent water 

in a 100-mL volumetric flask. To this 

solution, add 0.20 mL of acetyl acetone and 

0.30 mL of glacial acetic acid. Mix the 

solution thoroughly, then dilute to 100 mL 

with reagent water. The solution can be 

stored in a brown glass bottle in the 

refrigerator, and is stable for at least two 

weeks. 

7.2.2 Formaldehyde. Reagent grade. 

7.2.3 Ammonium Acetate 

7.2.4 Glacial Acetic Acid 

8.0 Sample Collection, Preservation, 

Storage, and Transport 

8.1 Pre-test 

8.1.1 Collect information about the site 

characteristics such as exhaust pipe 

diameter, gas flow rates, port location, access 

to ports, and safety requirements during a 

pre-test site survey. You should then decide 

the sample collection period per run and the 

target sample flow rate based on your best 

estimate of the formaldehyde concentration 

likely to be present. You want to assure that 

sufficient formaldehyde is captured in the 

impinger solution so that it can be measured 

precisely by the spectrophotometer. You may 

use Equation 323–1 to design your test 

program. As a guideline for optimum 

performance, if you can, design your test so 

that the liquid concentration (Cl) is 

approximately 10 times the assumed 

spectrophotometer detection limit of 0.2 μg/ 

mL. However, since actual detection limits 

are instrument specific, we also suggest that 

you confirm that the laboratory equipment 

can meet or exceed this detection limit. 

8.1.2 Prepare and then weigh the midget 

impingers prior to configuring the sampling 

train. The first impinger is initially dry. The 

second impinger contains 20 mL of reagent 

water, and the third impinger contains silica 

gel that is added before weighing the 

impinger. Each prepared impinger is weighed 

and the pre-sampling weight is recorded to 

the nearest 0.5 gm. 

8.1.3 Assemble the sampling train (see 

Figure 1). Ice is packed around the impingers 

in order to keep them cold during sample 

collection. A small amount of water may be 

added to the ice to improve thermal transfer. 

8.1.4 Perform a sampling system leak 

check (from the probe tip to the pump outlet) 

as follows: Connect a rotameter to the outlet 

of the pump. Close off the inlet to the probe 

and observe the leak rate. The leak rate must 

be less than 2 percent of the planned 

sampling rate of 0.2 or 0.4 L/min. 

8.1.5 Source gas temperature and static 

pressure should also be considered prior to 

field sampling to ensure adequate safety 

precautions during sampling. 

8.2 Sample Collection 

8.2.1 Set the sample flow rate between 0.2– 

0.4 L/min, depending upon the anticipated 

concentration of formaldehyde in the engine 

exhaust. (You may have to refer to published 

data for anticipated concentration levels—see 

References 5 and 6.) If no information is 

available for the anticipated levels of 

formaldehyde, use the higher sampling rate 

of 0.4 L/min. 

8.2.2 Record the sampling flow rate every 

5 to 10 minutes during the sample collection 

period. NOTE: It is critical that you do not 

sample at a flow rate higher than 0.4 L/min. 

Sampling at higher flow rates may reduce 

formaldehyde collection efficiency resulting 

in measured formaldehyde concentrations 

that are less than the actual concentrations. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51605 

8.2.3 Monitor the amount of ice 

surrounding the impingers and add ice as 

necessary to maintain the proper impinger 

temperature. Remove excess water as needed 

to maintain an adequate amount of ice. 

8.2.4 Record measured leak rate, 

beginning and ending times and dry gas 

meter readings for each sampling run, 

impinger weights before and after sampling, 

and sampling flow rates and dry gas meter 

exhaust temperature every 5 to 10 minutes 

during the run, in a signed and dated 

notebook. 

8.2.5 If possible, monitor and record the 

fuel flow rate to the engine and the exhaust 

oxygen concentration during the sampling 

period. This data can be used to estimate the 

engine exhaust flow rate based on the 

Method 19 approach. This approach, if 

accurate fuel flow rates can be determined, 

is preferred for reciprocating IC engine 

exhaust flow rate estimation due to the 

pulsating nature of the engine exhaust. The 

F–Factor procedures described in Method 19 

may be used based on measurement of fuel 

flow rate and exhaust oxygen concentration. 

One example equation is Equation 323–2. 

8.3 Post-test. Perform a sampling system 

leak-check (from the probe tip to pump 

outlet). Connect a rotameter to the outlet of 

the pump. Close off the inlet to the probe and 

observe the leak rate. The leak rate must be 

less than 2 percent of the sampling rate. 

Weigh and record each impinger 

immediately after sampling to determine the 

moisture weight gain. The impinger weights 

are measured before transferring the impinger 

contents, and before rinsing the sample probe 

and sample line. The moisture content of the 

exhaust gas is determined by measuring the 

weight gain of the impinger solutions and 

volume of gas sampled as described in 

Method 4. Rinse the sample probe and 

sample line with reagent water. Transfer the 

impinger catch to an amber 40-mL VOA 

bottle with a Teflon-lined cap. If there is a 

small amount of liquid in the dropout 

impinger (< 10 mL), the impinger catches can 

be combined in one 40 mL VOA bottle. If 

there is a larger amount of liquid in the 

dropout impinger, use a larger VOA bottle to 

combine the impinger catches. Rinse the 

impingers and combine the rinsings from the 

sample probe, sample line, and impingers 

with the impinger catch. In general, 

combined rinse volumes should not exceed 

10 mL. However, in cases where a long, 

flexible extension line must be used to 

connect the sample probe to the sample box, 

sufficient water must be used to rinse the 

connecting line to insure that any sample 

that may have collected there is recovered. 

The volume of the rinses during sample 

recovery should not be excessive as this may 

result in your having to use a larger VOA 

bottle. This in turn would raise the detection 

limit of the method since after combining the 

rinses with the impinger catches in the VOA 

bottle, the bottle should be filled with reagent 

water to eliminate the headspace in the 

sample vial. Keep the sample bottles over ice 

until analyzed on-site or received at the 

laboratory. Samples should be analyzed as 

soon as possible to minimize possible sample 

degradation. Based on a limited number of 

previous analyses, samples held in 

refrigerated conditions showed some sample 

degradation over time. 

8.4 Quality Control Samples 

8.4.1 Field Duplicates. During at least one 

run, a pair of samples should be collected 

concurrently and analyzed as separate 

samples. Results of the field duplicate 

samples should be identified and reported 

with the sample results. The percent 

difference in exhaust (stack) concentration 

indicated by field duplicates should be 

within 20 percent of their mean 

concentration. Data are to be flagged as 

suspect if the duplicates do not meet the 

acceptance criteria. 

8.4.2 Spiked Samples. An aliquot of one 

sample from each source sample set should 

be spiked at 2 to 3 times the formaldehyde 

level found in the unspiked sample. It is also 

recommended that a second aliquot of the 

same sample be spiked at around half the 

level of the first spike; however, the second 

spike is not mandatory. The results are 

acceptable if the measured spike recovery is 

80 to 120 percent. Use Equation 323–4. Data 

are to be flagged as suspect if the spike 

recovery do not meet the acceptance criteria. 

8.4.3 Field Blank. A field blank 

consisting of reagent water placed in a clean 

impinger train, taken to the test site but not 

sampled, then recovered and analyzed in the 

same manner as the other samples, should be 

collected with each set of source samples. 

The field blank results should be less than 50 

percent of the lowest calibration standard 

used in the sample analysis. If this criteria is 

not met, the data should be flagged as 

suspect. 

9.0 Quality Control 

QA/QC Acceptance Frequency Corrective action 

Leak-check—Sections 8.1.4, 8.3 ... < 2% of Sampling rate Pre- and Post-sampling ................ Pre-sampling: Repair leak and recheck 

Post-sampling: Flag data and repeat run if for regulatory compliance. 

Sample flow rate ............................ Between 0.2 and 0.4 L/min Throughout sampling .................... Adjust. 

VOA vial headspace ...................... No headspace .............................. After sample recovery .................. Flag data. 

Sample preservation ...................... Maintain on ice ............................. After sample recovery .................. Flag data. 

Sample hold time ........................... 14 day maximum .......................... After sample recovery .................. Flag data. 

Field Duplicates—Section 8.4.1 ..... Within 20% of mean of original 

and duplicate sample.

One duplicate per source sample 

set.

Flag data. 

Spiked Sample—Section 8.4.2 ...... Recovery between 80 and 120% One spike per source sample set Flag data. 

Field Blank—Section 8.4.3 ............ < 50% of the lowest calibration 

standard.

One blank per source sample set Flag data. 

Calibration Linearity—Section 10.1 Correlation coefficient of 0.99 or 

higher.

Per source sample set ................. Repeat calibration procedures. 

Calibration Check Standard—Section 10.3.Within 10% of theoretical value .... One calibration check per source 

sample set.

Repeat check, remake standard 

and repeat, repeat calibration. 

Lab Duplicates—Section 11.2.1 .... Within 10% of mean of original 

and duplicate sample analysis.

One duplicate per 10 samples ..... Flag data. 

Analytical Blanks—Section 11.2.2 < 50% of the lowest calibration 

standard.

One blank per source sample set Clean glassware/analytical equipment and repeat. 

10.0 Calibration and Standardization 

10.1 Spectrophotometer Calibration. 

Prepare a stock solution of 10 μg/mL 

formaldehyde. Prepare a series of calibration 

standards from the stock solution by adding 

0, 0.1, 0.3, 0.7, 1.0, and 1.5 mL of stock 

solution (corresponding to 0, 1.0, 3.0, 7.0, 

10.0, and 15.0 μg formaldehyde, respectively) 

to screw-capped vials. Adjust each vial’s 

volume to 2.0 mL with reagent water. At this 

point the concentration of formaldehyde in 

the standards is 0.0, 0.5, 1.5, 3.5, 5.0, and 7.5 

μg/mL, respectively. Add 2.0 mL of acetyl 

acetone reagent, thoroughly mix the solution, 

and place the vials in a water bath (or heating 

block) at 60 °C for 10 minutes. Remove the 

vials and allow to cool to room temperature. 

Transfer each solution to a cuvette and 

measure the absorbance at 412 nm using the 

spectrophotometer. Develop a calibration 

curve from the analytical results of these 

standards. The acceptance criteria for the 

spectrophotometer calibration is a correlation 

coefficient of 0.99 or higher. If this criteria is 

not met, the calibration procedures should be 

repeated. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2

51606 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

10.2 Spectrophotometer Zero. The 

spectrophotometer should be zeroed with 

reagent water when analyzing each set of 

samples. 

10.3 Calibration Checks. Calibration 

checks consisting of analyzing a standard 

separate from the calibration standards must 

be performed with each set of samples. The 

calibration check standard should not be 

prepared from the calibration stock solution. 

The result of the check standard must be 

within 10 percent of the theoretical value to 

be acceptable. If the acceptance criteria are 

not met, the standard must be reanalyzed. If 

still unacceptable, a new calibration curve 

must be prepared using freshly prepared 

standards. 

11.0 Analytical Procedure 

11.1 Sample Analysis. A 2.0-mL aliquot 

of the impinger catch/rinsate is transferred to 

a screw-capped vial. Two mL of the acetyl 

acetone reagent are added and the solution is 

thoroughly mixed. Once mixed, the vial is 

placed in a water bath (or heating block) at 

60 °C for 10 minutes. Remove the vial and 

allow to cool to room temperature. Transfer 

the solution to a cuvette and measure the 

absorbance using the spectrophotometer at 

412 nm. The quantity of formaldehyde 

present is determined by comparing the 

sample response to the calibration curve. Use 

Equation 323–5. If the sample response is out 

of the calibration range, the sample must be 

diluted and reanalyzed. Such dilutions must 

be performed on another aliquot of the 

original sample before the addition of the 

acetyl acetone reagent. The full procedure is 

repeated with the diluted sample. 

11.2 Analytical Quality Control 

11.2.1 Laboratory Duplicates. Two 

aliquots of one sample from each source 

sample set should be prepared and analyzed 

(with a minimum of one pair of aliquots for 

every 10 samples). The percent difference 

between aliquot analysis should be within 10 

percent of their mean. Use Equation 323–3. 

Data are flagged if the laboratory duplicates 

do not meet this criteria. 

11.2.2 Analytical blanks. Blank samples 

(reagent water) should be incorporated into 

each sample set to evaluate the possible 

presence of any cross-contamination. The 

acceptance criteria for the analytical blank is 

less than 50 percent of the lowest calibration 

standard. If the analytical blank does not 

meet this criteria, the glassware/analytical 

equipment should be cleaned and the 

analytical blank repeated. 

12.0 Calculations and Data Analysis 

12.1 Nomenclature 

A = measured absorbance of 2 mL aliquot 

B = estimated sampling rate, Lpm 

Cl = target concentration in liquid, μg/mL 

D = estimated stack formaldehyde 

concentration (ppmv) 

E = estimated liquid volume, normally 40 mL 

(the size of the VOA used) 

cform = formaldehyde concentration in gas 

stream, ppmvd 

cform @15%02 = formaldehyde concentration 

in gas stream corrected to 15% oxygen, 

ppmvd 

Csm = measured concentration of 

formaldehyde in the spiked aliquot 

Cu = measured concentration of 

formaldehyde in the unspiked aliquot of 

the same sample 

Cs = calculated concentration of 

formaldehyde spiking solution added to 

the spiked aliquot 

F = dilution factor, 1 unless dilution of the 

sample was needed to reduce the 

absorbance into the calibration range 

Fd = dry basis F-factor from Method 19, dscf 

per million btu GCVg = Gross calorific 

value (or higher heating value), btu per 

scf 

Kc = spectrophotometer calibration factor, 

slope of the least square regression line, 

μg/absorbance (Note: Most spreadsheets 

are capable of calculating a least squares 

line.) 

K1 = 0.3855 °K/mm Hg for metric units, 

(17.65 °R/in.Hg for English units.) 

MW = molecular weight, 30 g/g-mole, for 

formaldehyde 24.05 = mole specific 

volume constant, liters per g-mole 

m = mass of formaldehyde in liquid sample, 

mg 

Pstd = Standard pressure, 760 mm Hg (29.92 

in.Hg) 

Pbar = Barometric pressure, mm Hg (in.Hg) 

PD = Percent Difference 

Qe = exhaust flow rate, dscf per minute 

Qg = natural gas fuel flow rate, scf per minute 

Tm = Average DGM absolute temperature, °K 

(°R). 

Tstd = Standard absolute temperature, 293 °K 

(528 °R). 

t = sample time (minutes) 

Vm = Dry gas volume as measured by the 

DGM, dcm (dcf). 

Vm(std) = Dry gas volume measured by the 

DGM, corrected to standard conditions of 

1 atmosphere and 20 °C, dscm (dscf). 

Vt = actual total volume of impinger catch/ 

rinsate, mL 

Va = volume (2.0) of aliquot analyzed, mL 

X1 = first value 

X2 = second value 

O2d = oxygen concentration measured, 

percent by volume, dry basis 

%R = percent recovery of spike 

Zu = volume fraction of unspiked (native) 

sample contained in the final spiked 

aliquot [e.g., Vu/(Vu + Vs), where Vu + 

Vs should = 2.0 mL] 

Zs = volume fraction of spike solution 

contained in the final spiked aliquot 

[e.g., Vs/(Vu + Vs)] 

R = 0.02405 dscm per g-mole, for metric units 

at standard conditions of 1 atmosphere 

and 20 °C 

Y = Dry Gas Meter calibration factor 

12.2 Pretest Design 

C BtD

E 1

30

24 05 = ∗∗ ∗

. ∗ Eq 323-1 .

12.3 Exhaust Flow Rate 

Q = F Q GCV

O

dg g

10 d

20.9

20.9 6 − 2

⎡

⎣

⎢ ⎤

⎦

⎥ Eq. 323-2

12.4 Percent Difference—(Applicable to 

Field and Lab Duplicates) 

PD

X X

X X = +

1

2

( ) −

⎛

⎝

⎜ ⎞

⎠

⎟

∗ 2

1

100 Eq. 323-3

2

12.5 Percent Recovery of Spike 

%R = 100 Eq. 323-4

C ZC

Z C

sm u u

s s

( ) − ∗

12.6 Mass of Formaldehyde in Liquid 

Sample 

m K AF V

V

mg

g c

t

a

= ∗∗ ⎛

⎝

⎜ ⎞

⎠

⎟

⎛

⎝

⎜ ⎞

⎠

⎟ 1

1000 Eq. 323-5 ...


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER20AU10.005</MATH> ER20AU10.006</MATH> ER20AU10.007</MATH> ER20AU10.008</MATH> ER20AU10.009</MATH>
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 51607 

12.7 Dry Gas Sample Volume Corrected 

to Standard Conditions V

V YT P

T P

= K YV P

T

m std

m std bar

m std

i m bar

m

( ) = ( ) Eq. 323-6

12.8 Formaldehyde Concentration in gas 

Stream 

c

R

MW

m

V

g

 mg

ppmv form

m std

= ⎛

⎝

⎜

⎜

⎞

⎠

⎟

⎟

⎛

⎝

⎜ ⎞

⎠

⎟( ) ×

( )

1

1000 1 Eq. 32 106 3-7

12.9 Formaldehyde Concentration 

Corrected to 15% Oxygen 

c c

O form O form

2d

@15% 2 = ∗ ( ) −

( ) −

20 9 15

2 9

.

. Eq. 323-8

13.0 Method Performance 

13.1 Precision. Based on a Method 301 

validation using quad train arrangement with 

post sampling spiking study of the method at 

a natural gas-fired IC engine, the relative 

standard deviation of six pairs of unspiked 

samples was 11.2 percent at a mean stack gas 

concentration of 16.7 ppmvd. 

13.2 Bias. No bias correction is allowed. 

The single Method 301 validation study of 

the method at a natural gas-fired IC engine, 

indicated a bias correction factor of 0.91 for 

that set of data. An earlier spiking study got 

similar average percent spike recovery when 

spiking into a blank sample. This data set is 

too limited to justify using a bias correction 

factor for future tests at other sources. 

13.3 Range. The range of this method for 

formaldehyde is 0.2 to 7.5 μg/mL in the 

liquid phase. (This corresponds to a range of 

0.27 to 10 ppmv in the engine exhaust if 

sampling at a rate of 0.4 Lpm for 60 minutes 

and using a 40-mL VOA bottle.) If the liquid 

sample concentration is above this range, 

perform the appropriate dilution for accurate 

measurement. Any dilutions must be taken 

from new aliquots of the original sample 

before reanalysis. 

13.4 Sample Stability. Based on a sample 

stability study conducted in conjunction 

with the method validation, sample 

degradation for 7- and 14-day hold times 

does not exceed 2.3 and 4.6 percent, 

respectively, based on a 95 percent level of 

confidence. Therefore, the recommended 

maximum sample holding time for the 

underivatized impinger catch/rinsings is 14 

days, where projected sample degradation is 

below 5 percent. 

14.0 Pollution Prevention 

Sample gas from the combustion source 

exhaust is vented to the atmosphere after 

passing through the chilled impinger 

sampling train. Reagent solutions and 

samples should be collected for disposal as 

aqueous waste. 

15.0 Waste Management 

Standards of formaldehyde and the 

analytical reagents should be handled 

according to the Material Safety Data Sheets. 

16.0 References 

1. National Council of the Paper Industry 

for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc. 

‘‘Volatile Organic Emissions from Pulp and 

Paper Mill Sources, Part X—Test Methods, 

Quality Assurance/Quality Control 

Procedures, and Data Analysis Protocols.’’ 

Technical Bulletin No. 684, December 1994. 

2. National Council of the Paper Industry 

for Air and Stream Improvement, Inc., ‘‘Field 

Validation of a Source Sampling Method for 

Formaldehyde, Methanol, and Phenol at 

Wood Products Mills.’’ 1997 TAPPI 

International Environmental Conference. 

3. Roy F. Weston, Inc. ‘‘Formaldehyde 

Sampling Method Field Evaluation and 

Emission Test Report for Georgia-Pacific 

Resins, Inc., Russellville, South Carolina.’’ 

August 1996. 

4. Hoechst Celanese Method CL 8–4. 

‘‘Standard Test Method for Free 

Formaldehyde in Air Using Acetyl Acetone.’’ 

Revision 0, September 1986. 

5. Shareef, G.S., et al. ‘‘Measurement of Air 

Toxic Emissions from Natural Gas-Fired 

Internal Combustion Engines at Natural Gas 

Transmission and Storage Facilities.’’ Report 

No. GRI–96/0009.1, Gas Research Institute, 

Chicago, Illinois, February 1996. 

6. Gundappa, M., et al. ‘‘Characteristics of 

Formaldehyde Emissions from Natural GasFired Reciprocating Internal Combustion 

Engines in Gas Transmission. Volume I: 

Phase I Predictive Model for Estimating 

Formaldehyde Emissions from 2–Stroke 

Engines.’’ Report No. GRI–97/0376.1, Gas 

Research Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 

September 1997. 

17.0 Tables, Diagrams, Flowcharts, and 

Validation Data 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER20AU10.010</MATH> ER20AU10.011</MATH> ER20AU10.012</MATH>
51608 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 161 / Friday, August 20, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

[FR Doc. 2010–20298 Filed 8–19–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES2ER20AU10.004</GPH>