1

 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[OAR-2003-0196; FRL- ]

RIN:2060-AK73

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for Stationary Combustion Turbines

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: On August 29, 2003, EPA promulgated a final National Emission 

Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for stationary combustion 

turbines, which will be codified at 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart YYYY. As part of that 

standard, EPA established eight subcategories of stationary combustion 

turbines. Elsewhere in today’s FEDERAL REGISTER, EPA is publishing a 

proposed rule to delete four of these subcategories from the source category list 

required by section 112(c)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA has made an 

initial determination that these subcategories satisfy the criteria for deletion from 

the source category list established by CAA section 112(c)(9)(B).

In this companion action, EPA is proposing to stay the effectiveness of the 

combustion turbines NESHAP for new sources in the lean premix gas-fired 

turbines and diffusion flame gas-fired turbines subcategories, which are the two 

principal subcategories we are proposing to delist. This action is necessary to 
2

avoid wasteful and unwarranted expenditures on installation of emission controls 

which will not be required if these subcategories are delisted.

DATES: Comments. Written comments on the proposed rule 

must be received by EPA no later than [INSERT DATE 45 DAYS 

FROM PUBLICATION OF THIS PROPOSED RULE IN THE FEDERAL 

REGISTER].

Public Hearing. A public hearing regarding the proposed 

rule will be held if requests to speak are received by the 

EPA on or before [INSERT DATE 7 DAYS FROM PUBLICATION OF 

THIS PROPOSED RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. If requested, 

a public hearing will be held on [INSERT DATE 14 DAYS FROM 

PUBLICATION OF THIS PROPOSED RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. 

ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments may be submitted 

electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/courier. 

Electronic comments may be submitted on-line at 

http://www.epa.gov/edocket/. Written comments sent by U.S. 

mail should be submitted (in duplicate if possible) to: Air 

and Radiation Docket and Information Center (Mail Code 

6102T), Attention Docket Number OAR-2003-0196, Room B108, 

U.S. EPA, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 

20460. Written comments delivered in person or by courier 

(e.g., FedEx, Airborne, and UPS) should be submitted (in 

duplicate if possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket and 
3

Information Center (Mail Code 6102T), Attention Docket 

Number OAR-2003-0196, Room B102, U.S. EPA, 1301 Constitution

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. The EPA requests a 

separate copy also be sent to the contact person listed 

below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Public Hearing. If a public hearing is requested by [INSERT

DATE 7 DAYS FROM PUBLICATION OF THIS PROPOSED RULE IN THE 

FEDERAL REGISTER], the public hearing will be held in our 

EPA Office of Administration Auditorium, Research Triangle 

Park, NC on [INSERT DATE 14 DAYS FROM PUBLICATION OF THIS 

PROPOSED RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. Persons interested 

in presenting oral testimony should contact Ms. Kelly A. 

Rimer, Risk and Exposure Assessment Group, Emission 

Standards Division (C404-01), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle 

Park, North Carolina 27711, telephone number (919) 541-2962.

Persons interested in attending the public hearing should 

also contact Ms. Rimer to verify the time of the hearing. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Kelly A. Rimer, Risk 

and Exposure Assessment Group, Emission Standards Division 

(C404-01), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, 

telephone number (919) 541-2962, electronic mail address 

rimer.kelly@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated Entities. Categories and 
4

entities potentially regulated by this action include:

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

 Category SIC NAICS Examples of

 regulated entities

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

Any industry 4911 2211 Electric power generation, using a

 transmission, or stationary distribution

combustion 4922 486210 Natural gas transmission

turbine as 1311 211111 Crude petroleum and natural defined 

 gas production

in the 1321 211112 Natural gas liquids producers

regulation. 4931 221 Electric and other services 

 combined

This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for 

readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this action. To determine 

whether your facility is regulated by this action, you should examine the 

applicability criteria in §63.6085 of the final rule. If you have any questions 

regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person 

listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Docket. The EPA has established an official public docket 

for this action under Docket ID Number OAR-2003-0196. The 

official public docket is the collection of materials that 

is available for public viewing at the EPA Docket Center 

(Air Docket), EPA West, Room B-108, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20004. The Docket Center is open

from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the 

Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for
5

the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742.

Electronic Access. An electronic version of the public 

docket is available through EPA’s electronic public docket 

and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at

http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ to submit or view public 

comments, access the index of the contents of the official 

public docket, and access those documents in the public 

docket that are available electronically. Once in the 

system, select "search" and key in the appropriate docket 

identification number.

Certain types of information will not be placed in the 

EPA dockets. Information claimed as confidential business 

information (CBI) and other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute, which is not included in the official

public docket, will not be available for public viewing in 

EPA’s electronic public docket. The EPA’s policy is that 

copyrighted material will not be placed in EPA’s electronic 

public docket but will be available only in printed, paper 

form in the official public docket. Although not all docket

materials may be available electronically, you may still 

access any of the publicly available docket materials 

through the EPA Docket Center.

For public commenters, it is important to note that 

EPA’s policy is that public comments, whether submitted 
6

electronically or in paper, will be made available for 

public viewing in EPA’s electronic public docket as EPA 

receives them and without change unless the comment contains

copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a 

comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide a 

reference to that material in the version of the comment 

that is placed in EPA’s electronic public docket. The 

entire printed comment, including the copyrighted material, 

will be available in the public docket.

Public comments submitted on computer disks that are 

mailed or delivered to the docket will be transferred to 

EPA’s electronic public docket. Public comments that are 

mailed or delivered to the docket will be scanned and placed

in EPA’s electronic public docket. Where practical, 

physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph

will be placed in EPA’s electronic public docket along with 

a brief description written by the docket staff.

Comments. You may submit comments electronically, by mail, 

by facsimile, or through hand delivery/courier. To ensure 

proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate docket 

identification number in the subject line on the first page 

of your comment. Please ensure that your comments are 

submitted within the specified comment period. Comments 
7

submitted after the close of the comment period will be 

marked “late”. The EPA is not required to consider these 

late comments.

Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as 

prescribed below, EPA recommends that you include your name,

mailing address, and an e-mail address or other contact 

information in the body of your comment. Also include this 

contact information on the outside of any disk or CD ROM you

submit and in any cover letter accompanying the disk or CD 

ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the 

submitter of the comment and allows EPA to contact you in 

case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical 

difficulties or needs further information on the substance 

of your comment. The EPA’s policy is that EPA will not edit

your comment and any identifying or contact information 

provided in the body of a comment will be included as part 

of the comment that is placed in the official public docket 

and made available in EPA’s electronic public docket. If 

EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment.

Your use of EPA’s electronic public docket to submit 

comments to EPA electronically is EPA’s preferred method for

receiving comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets at 
8

http://www.epa.gov/edocket, and follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. Once in the system, 

select “search” and key in Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0196. The

system is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will

not know your identity, e-mail address, or other contact 

information unless you provide it in the body of your 

comment.

Comments may be sent by electronic mail (e-mail) to 

a-and-r-docket@epa.gov, Attention Docket ID No. OAR-2003-

0196. In contrast to EPA’s electronic public docket, EPA’s 

e-mail system is not an “anonymous access” system. If you 

send an e-mail comment directly to the docket without going 

through EPA’s electronic public docket, EPA’s e-mail system 

automatically captures your e-mail address. E-mail 

addresses that are automatically captured by EPA’s e-mail 

system are included as part of the comment that is placed in

the official public docket and made available in EPA’s 

electronic public docket.

You may submit comments on a disk or CD ROM that you 

mail to the mailing address identified in this document. 

These electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect

or ASCII file format. Avoid the use of special characters 

and any form of encryption.

By Mail. Send your comments (in duplicate, if possible) to:
9

EPA Docket Center (Air Docket), U.S. EPA West, (MD-6102T), 

Room B-108, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 

20460, Attention Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0196.

By Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments (in 

duplicate, if possible) to: EPA Docket Center, Room B-108, 

U.S. EPA West, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 

20004, Attention Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0196. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the Docket Center’s 

normal hours of operation.

By Facsimile. Fax your comments to: (202) 566-1741, Docket 

ID No. OAR-2003-0196.

CBI. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI 

through EPA’s electronic public docket or by e-mail. Send 

or deliver information identified as CBI only to the 

following address: Kelly Rimer, c/o Roberto Morales, OAQPS 

Document Control Officer (C404-02), U.S. EPA, 109 TW 

Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, Attention

Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0196. You may claim information that

you submit to EPA as CBI by marking any part or all of that 

information as CBI (if you submit CBI on disk or CD ROM, 

mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the 

specific information that is CBI). Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures 
10

set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the 

docket, an electronic copy of today’s proposed rule will 

also be available on the WWW through the Technology Transfer

Network (TTN). Following the Administrator’s signature, a 

copy of the proposed rule will be placed on the TTN’s policy

and guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules at

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information 

and technology exchange in various areas of air pollution 

control. If more information regarding the TTN is needed, 

call the TTN HELP line at (919) 541-5384.

Applicable Law Pursuant to CAA section 307(d)(1)(V), the 

Administrator has determined that it is appropriate to 

conduct this rulemaking according to the procedures 

established by CAA section 307(d).

I. Description of the Proposed Action

Elsewhere in today’s issue of the FEDERAL REGISTER, 

EPA is proposing a rule to amend the list of categories of 

sources that was developed pursuant to CAA section 

112(c)(1). EPA is proposing to delete four subcategories 

from the Combustion Turbine Source Category. A final MACT 

standard creating these subcategories was promulgated on 

August 29, 2003. This standard will be published soon and 

will be codified at 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart YYYY. These 
11

subcategories are (1) lean premix gas-fired stationary 

combustion turbines as defined in 40 CFR §63.6175 (also 

referred to herein as “lean premix gas-fired turbines”), (2)

diffusion flame gas-fired stationary combustion turbines as 

defined in 40 CFR §63.6175 (also referred to herein as 

“diffusion flame gas-fired turbines”), (3) emergency 

stationary combustion turbines as defined in 40 CFR 

§63.6175, and 4) stationary combustion turbines located on 

the North Slope of Alaska, as defined in 40 CFR §63.6175.

This proposed rule to amend the source category list 

is being issued in part to respond to a petition submitted 

by the Gas Turbine Association (GTA) and in part upon the 

Administrator’s own motion. Petitions to remove a source 

category from the source category list are permitted under 

section 112(c)(9) of the CAA. The proposed rule to delete 

these four subcategories is based on an initial 

determination by EPA that these subcategories satisfy the 

substantive criteria for deletion set forth in CAA section 

112(c)(9)(B). The proposed rule to delete these 

subcategories that appears elsewhere in today’s FEDERAL 

REGISTER contains a detailed description of the technical 

basis for this initial determination.

Although EPA is proposing to delete from the source 

category list four subcategories established by the final 
12

MACT standard for stationary combustion turbines, CAA 

section 112(d)(10) provides that the standard for those 

subcategories will take effect upon publication of the 

standard. All turbines in the lean premix gas-fired 

turbines and the diffusion flame gas-fired turbines 

subcategories which were constructed or reconstructed after 

January 14, 2003, will then be required to comply 

immediately with the emission standard for new sources. 

This may cause some sources in these two subcategories to 

make immediate expenditures on installation and testing of 

emission controls, even though such controls will not be 

required if we adopt a final rule to delete these 

subcategories. In view of our initial determination that 

the statutory criteria for delisting have been met for all 

sources in these subcategories, we consider it inappropriate

and contrary to statutory intent to mandate such 

expenditures until after a final determination has been made

whether or not these subcategories should be delisted. Such

expenditures would be wasteful and unwarranted if we take 

final action to delist these subcategories. Moreover, if we

take final action to delist these subcategories, sources 

constructed or reconstructed while the rulemaking to delist 

is pending would bear a regulatory burden not placed on 

identical sources constructed or reconstructed thereafter. 
13

Accordingly, we are proposing this rule to stay the 

effectiveness of the emission standard for new sources for 

the lean premix gas-fired turbines and diffusion flame gasfired turbines subcategories during the pendency of the 

rulemaking to delete these subcategories.

We are mindful that there would be no need to stay the 

effectiveness of the standard for new sources in these two 

subcategories if a rulemaking to delist the affected sources

had been completed before promulgation of the final MACT 

standard for combustion turbines. However, we note that the

GTA petition was not submitted until quite late in the regulatory process. 

Moreover, we generally do not make a definite determination concerning the 

characteristics of subcategories until promulgation of a final MACT standard. 

In these circumstances, we do not believe it would be fair to make certain 

affected sources bear the burden of a delay in our determination that a 

subcategory meets the statutory criteria for delisting.

This proposed stay is consistent with the precedents we

have established in similar circumstances in the past. In 

1991, we issued a final rule staying the effectiveness of 

the National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

for radionuclides, 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart I, for commercial

nuclear power reactors during the pendency of another 

rulemaking to rescind the standard for these facilities (56 
14

FR, 37158 August 5, 1991). The rescission was authorized by

section 112(d)(9) of the CAA (the “Simpson amendment”), 

which provides that we may decline to regulate Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensees under CAA section 112 

if the Administrator determines that the regulatory program 

established by the NRC for a category or subcategory 

provides an ample margin of safety to protect the public 

health. We had made an initial determination that the NRC 

program for commercial nuclear power reactors met this test,

and we reasoned that “it would frustrate the evident purpose

of Section 112(d)(9) if EPA were to permit Subpart I to take

effect for this subcategory during the pendency of the 

rulemaking on rescission” (56 FR 37159). This final rule 

was not challenged.

In 1995, we acted to provide another type of interim 

relief during a delisting rulemaking. We suspended the 

listing of caprolactam, during a rulemaking to delete 

caprolactam from the list of hazardous air pollutants 

established by CAA section 112(b)(1), for purposes of 

determining the applicability of Title V permitting 

requirements (60 FR 081, September 18, 1995). We based that

action on our determination that “retention, during the 

rulemaking to delist caprolactam, of permit application 

requirements which will no longer exist after the delisting 
15

process has been completed would result in unnecessary 

private and public expenditures on preparation, submission, 

and processing of such applications, and would yield no 

environmental benefits” (60 FR 084-85). This interim relief

also was not challenged.

We are proposing to stay the effectiveness of the 

combustion turbines emission standard for new sources in the

lean premix gas-fired turbines and the diffusion flame gasfired turbines subcategories, but only during the pendency 

of the rulemaking to delist these subcategories. It is not 

our intention by staying the effectiveness of the standard 

to change the definition of new sources within these 

subcategories, or to alter the status of any individual 

source. If these subcategories are not ultimately delisted,

the stay will be lifted, and all sources in these 

subcategories constructed or reconstructed after January 14,

2003 will then be subject to the standard. These sources 

will then be given the same time to make the requisite 

demonstration of compliance they would have had if there had

been no stay.

II. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), EPA must 

determine whether the regulatory action is “significant” and therefore subject to 
16

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and the requirements of the 

Executive Order. The Executive Order defines “significant regulatory action” as 

one that is likely to result in a rule that may:

(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 

adverse affect in a material way the economy, a sector to the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or state, 

local or tribal governments or communities;

(2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action 

taken or planned by another agency; 

(3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user 

fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligation of recipients thereof; or 

(4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the 

President’s priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order.

Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been determined 

that the proposed action does not constitute a “significant regulatory action” and 

is, therefore, not subject to OMB review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

This action does not impose an information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The 

proposed action will stay the effectiveness of the combustion turbines NESHAP 

for new sources in the lean premix gas-fired turbines and diffusion flame gasfired turbines subcategories until a conclusion is reached regarding deletion and 
17

therefore eliminate the need for information collection toward regulatory 

compliance under the CAA. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial 

resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or 

provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to 

review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems 

for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing 

and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the 

existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and 

requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; 

search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and 

transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An Agency may not conduct or 

sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information

unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA’s regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 

15.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility 

analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements 

under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency 

certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Small entities include small business, small 

organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For the purposes of 
18

assessing the impacts of today’s proposed rule on small entities, small entity is 

defined as: (1) a small business that meets the definitions for small business 

based on the Small Business Association (SBA) size standards which, for this 

proposed action, can include manufacturing (NAICS 3999-03) and air 

transportation (NAICS 4522-98 and 4512-98) operations that employ less 1,000 

people and engineering services (NAICS 8711-98) operations that earn less than 

$20 million annually; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of 

a city, county, town, school district or special district with a population of less 

than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise 

which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.

After considering the economic impact of today’s proposed rule on small 

entities, I certify that this proposed action will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small entities. In determining whether a rule 

has significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, the 

impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities, 

since the primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analysis is to identify and 

address regulatory alternatives “which minimize any significant economic impact 

of the proposed rule on small entities.” (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Thus, an 

agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or 

otherwise has a positive economic effect on all of the small entities subject to the 

rule. The proposed rule will stay the effectiveness of the combustion turbines 
19

NESHAP for new sources in the lean premix gas-fired turbines and diffusion 

flame gas-fired turbines subcategories. This will stay the requirements to apply 

controls and will also stay associated operating, monitoring and reporting 

requirements. These burdens will be permanently lifted if EPA ultimately 

removes the four source categories from the stationary combustion turbine 

source category, and temporarily lifted if EPA does not ultimately delist the 

subcategories. We have, therefore, concluded that today’s proposed rule will 

relieve regulatory burden for all small entities. We continue to be interested in 

the potential impacts of the proposed rule on small entities and welcome 

comments on issues related to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 

Law 1044, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects 

of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and the private 

sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA generally must prepare a written 

statement, including a cost-benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with 

“Federal mandates” that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in 

any 1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is 

needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and 

consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least 

costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the 
20

objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are 

inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to adopt an 

alternative other than the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome 

alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why 

that alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 

requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, 

including tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the 

UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying 

potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small 

governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA 

regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and 

informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the 

regulatory requirements.

Today’s proposed rule contains no Federal mandates for State, local, or 

tribal governments or the private sector. The proposed rule imposes no

enforceable duty on any State, local or tribal governments or the private sector. 

In any event, EPA has determined that the proposed rule does not contain 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 

one year. Thus, today’s proposed rule is not subject to the requirements of 

sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
21

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) requires EPA to 

develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by State 

and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism 

implications.” “Policies that have federalism implications” is defined in the 

Executive Order to include regulations that have “substantial direct effects on the 

States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or 

on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 

government.”

Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that has 

federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance costs, and 

that is not required by statute, unless the Federal government provides the funds 

necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by State and local 

governments, or EPA consults with State and local officials early in the process 

of developing the proposed regulation. The EPA also may not issue a regulation 

that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the Agency 

consults with State and local officials early in the process of developing the 

proposed regulation.

Today’s action proposes to stay the effectiveness of the combustion 

turbines NESHAP for new sources in the lean premix gas-fired turbines and 

diffusion flame gas-fired turbines subcategories. It does not impose any 

additional requirements on the States and does not affect the balance of power 

between the States and the Federal government. Thus, the requirements of 
22

section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to the proposed rule.

F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments

Executive Order 13175, entitled “Consultation and Coordination with 

Indian Tribal Governments” (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA to 

develop an accountable process to ensure “meaningful and timely input by tribal 

officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.” 

The proposed rule does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175. The proposed action will stay the effectiveness of the combustion 

turbines NESHAP for new sources in the lean premix gas-fired turbines and 

diffusion flame gas-fired turbines subcategories. Executive Order 13175 does 

not apply to the proposed rule.

G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule 

that: (1) is determined to be “economically significant” as defined under 

Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk 

that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. 

If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the 

environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and 

explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 

reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
23

The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 

regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that the analysis 

required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has the potential to 

influence the regulation. The proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 

13045 because it is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 

12866, and because this action is not based on health or safety risks. Thus, 

Executive Order 13045 does not apply to this rule.

H. Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly 

Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly 

Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), 

requires EPA to prepare and submit a Statement of Energy Effects to the 

Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of 

Management and Budget, for certain actions identified as “significant energy 

actions.” The proposed rule is not a “significant energy action” because it is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 

Section 112(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 

of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 104-113, section 12(d) 915 U.S.C. 272 note), 

directs all Federal agencies to use voluntary consensus standards instead of 

government-unique standards in their regulatory activities unless to do so would 
24

be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary 

consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., material specifications, test 

method, sampling and analytical procedures, business practices, etc.) that are 

developed or adopted by one or more voluntary consensus standards bodies. 

Examples of organizations generally regarded as voluntary consensus standards 

bodies include the American society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), the 

National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and the Society of Automotive 

Engineers (SAE). The NTTAA requires Federal agencies like EPA to provide 

Congress, through OMB, with explanations when an agency decides not to use 

available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. The proposed rule 

does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA is not considering the use 

of any voluntary consensus standards.

______________________

Dated:

______________________

Administrator.