[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 223 (Wednesday, November 19, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68777-68795]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27125]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 60 and 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234; EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0044; FRL-9919-29-OAR]
RIN 2060-AS07


Reconsideration of Certain Startup/Shutdown Issues: National 
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants From Coal- and Oil-
Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units and Standards of 
Performance for Fossil-Fuel-Fired Electric Utility, Industrial-
Commercial-Institutional, and Small Industrial-Commercial-Institutional 
Steam Generating Units

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule; notice of final action on reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final 
action on its reconsideration of the startup and shutdown provisions in 
the final rules titled, ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants from Coal- and Oil-fired Electric Utility Steam Generating 
Units and Standards of Performance for Fossil-Fuel-Fired Electric 
Utility, Industrial-Commercial-Institutional, and Small Industrial-
Commercial-Institutional Steam Generating Units.'' The national 
emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) issued 
pursuant to Clean Air Act (CAA) section 112 are referred to as the 
Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), and the new source performance 
standards (NSPS) issued pursuant to CAA section 111 are referred to as 
the Utility NSPS.
    On November 30, 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) granted reconsideration of, proposed, and requested comment on a 
limited set of issues in the February 16, 2012, final MATS and Utility 
NSPS, including certain issues related to the final work practice 
standards applicable during startup periods and shutdown periods. On 
June 25, 2013, the EPA reopened the public comment period for the 
reconsideration issues related to the startup and shutdown provisions 
of MATS and the startup and shutdown provisions related to the 
particulate matter (PM) standard in the Utility NSPS. The EPA is now 
taking final action on the standards applicable during startup periods 
and shutdown periods in MATS and on startup and shutdown provisions 
related to the PM standard in the Utility NSPS.

DATES: The effective date of the rule is November 19, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Docket. The EPA established two dockets for this action: 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0044 (NSPS action) and Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2009-0234 (MATS NESHAP action). All documents in the dockets are 
listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. 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, will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly 
available docket materials are available either electronically in 
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, 
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. The Public 
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public 
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air 
Docket is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For the MATS NESHAP action: Mr. 
William Maxwell, Energy Strategies Group, Sector Policies and Programs 
Division (D243-01), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 
27711; Telephone number: (919) 541-5430; Fax number (919) 541-5450; 
Email address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#197478616e7c7575377b707575597c6978377e766f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="cda0acb5baa8a1a1e3afa4a1a18da8bdace3aaa2bb">[email protected]</span></a>. For the NSPS action: Mr. Christian 
Fellner, Energy Strategies Group, Sector Policies and Programs Division 
(D243-01), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 
27711; Telephone number: (919) 541-4003; Fax number (919) 541-5450; 
Email address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#95f3f0f9f9fbf0e7bbf6fde7fce6e1fcf4fbd5f0e5f4bbf2fae3"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d6b0b3babab8b3a4f8b5bea4bfa5a2bfb7b896b3a6b7f8b1b9a0">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as 
follows:

I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to me?
    B. How do I obtain a copy of this document?
    C. Judicial Review
II. Background
III. Summary of This Action
IV. Summary of Final Action and Changes Since Proposal--MATS 
Startup/Shutdown Issues
V. Summary of Final Action and Changes Since Proposal--Utility NSPS
VI. Impacts of This Final Rule
    A. Summary of Emissions Impacts, Costs and Benefits
    B. What are the air impacts?
    C. What are the energy impacts?
    D. What are the compliance costs?
    E. What are the economic and employment impacts?
    F. What are the benefits of the final standards?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 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?

    Categories and entities potentially affected by this action 
include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Examples of potentially
            Category             NAICS Code \1\     regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.......................          221112  Fossil fuel-fired
                                                  electric utility steam
                                                  generating units.
Federal government.............      \2\ 221122  Fossil fuel-fired
                                                  electric utility steam
                                                  generating units owned
                                                  by the federal
                                                  government.
State/local/tribal government..      \2\ 221122  Fossil fuel-fired
                                                  electric utility steam
                                                  generating units owned
                                                  by municipalities.

[[Page 68778]]

 
                                         921150  Fossil fuel-fired
                                                  electric utility steam
                                                  generating units in
                                                  Indian country.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System.
\2\ Federal, state, or local government-owned and operated
  establishments are classified according to the activity in which they
  are engaged.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to provide 
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this 
action. To determine whether your facility, company, business, 
organization, etc., would be regulated by this action, you should 
examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 60.40, 60.40Da, or 60.40c 
or in 40 CFR 63.9982. If you have any questions regarding the 
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult either the 
air permitting authority for the entity or your EPA regional 
representative as listed in 40 CFR 60.4 or 40 CFR 63.13 (General 
Provisions).

B. How do I obtain a copy of this document?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of 
this final rule will be available on the World Wide Web (WWW) through 
the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature, a copy of 
the 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. A copy of this 
action will also be available on: www.epa.gov/mats/.

C. Judicial Review

    Under CAA section 307(b)(1), 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 January 20, 2015. Under 
CAA section 307(d)(7)(B), 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. Note, under CAA section 
307(b)(2), the requirements established by this final rule may not be 
challenged separately in any civil or criminal proceedings brought by 
the EPA to enforce these requirements.

II. Background

    On February 16, 2012, the final MATS and the Utility NSPS rules 
were published in the Federal Register. 77 FR 9304. Following 
promulgation of the final rules, the Administrator received petitions 
for reconsideration of various provisions of both MATS and the Utility 
NSPS pursuant to CAA section 307(d)(7)(B), including requests to 
reconsider the work practice standards applicable during startup 
periods and shutdown periods that were included in the final rule. 
Copies of the MATS petitions are provided in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2009-0234. Copies of the Utility NSPS petitions are provided in Docket 
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0044. The EPA granted reconsideration of the 
startup and shutdown provisions because the agency proposed to require 
sources to comply with the numeric standards at all times and did not 
propose a work practice standard for startup periods and shutdown 
periods; thus, the public was not provided an opportunity to comment on 
the work practice requirements contained in the final rule.\1\ On 
November 30, 2012, the EPA published a proposed rule reconsidering 
certain new source standards issued in MATS and the startup and 
shutdown provisions in MATS and the Utility NSPS, among other things. 
77 FR 71323. The EPA proposed certain minor changes to the startup and 
shutdown provisions contained in the 2012 final rule based on 
information obtained in the petitions for reconsideration. On April 24, 
2013 (78 FR 24073), the EPA took final action on the new source 
standards that were reconsidered and also the technical corrections 
contained in the November 30, 2012, proposed action. The EPA did not 
take final action on the startup and shutdown provisions, and, on June 
25, 2013, the EPA added new information and analysis to the docket and 
reopened the public comment period for the proposed revisions to the 
startup and shutdown provisions in MATS and the startup and shutdown 
provisions related to the PM standard in the Utility NSPS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The EPA continues to believe that the final existing source 
standards contain sufficient variability to include startup periods 
and shutdown periods. Furthermore, in light of what we have learned 
concerning the performance of the best performing sources during 
startup and shutdown (e.g., clean fuel use and efficient engagement 
of air pollution control devices (APCDs)), we believe that the best 
performing electric utility steam generating units (EGUs) for 
startup periods and shutdown periods will have hazardous air 
pollutant (HAP) emissions that are lower than the numeric standards, 
when averaged over the startup and shutdown period as defined. 
However, as explained in the record, the lack of HAP data for these 
periods and the current technical challenges to accurately measure 
HAP emissions during startup and shutdown cause us to establish a 
work practice for such periods.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of This Action

    This final action includes final amendments to the startup and 
shutdown provisions of the final MATS and Utility NSPS issued by the 
EPA on February 16, 2012. This action does not alter or reopen any 
other MATS or Utility NSPS provisions, including those provisions 
recently upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 
Columbia Circuit (Court) in White Stallion Energy Center v. EPA on 
April 15, 2014. 784 F.3d 1222 (D.C. Cir. 2014). The February 2012 final 
rule is and remains in effect for all sources, and existing sources 
must comply with the final rule by April 16, 2015, or seek an extension 
of that compliance date from the appropriate title V permitting 
authority.
    The November 30, 2012, proposed reconsideration rule reopened, 
among other things: (1) The requirements applicable during startup 
periods and shutdown periods in MATS, and (2) the startup and shutdown 
provisions related to the PM standard in the Utility NSPS. We are 
taking final action today on the requirements for startup periods and 
shutdown periods contained in 40 CFR Part 63, subpart UUUUU, and 40 CFR 
Part 60, subpart Da.
    As noted above, in the proposed reconsideration rule, the EPA 
proposed revisions to, and took comment on, the definitions of 
``startup'' and ``shutdown'' and the work practice requirements 
associated with those periods in the final MATS rule. The EPA also took 
comment on the startup and shutdown provisions relating to the PM 
standard in the Utility NSPS. The EPA received a number of comments 
regarding the proposed startup and shutdown provisions, including data 
and information relevant to the proposed work practice standard that 
applies during such periods, and the agency also reviewed EGU nitrogen 
oxides (NO<INF>X</INF>) and sulfur dioxide (SO<INF>2</INF>) emissions 
data generated during startup periods and shutdown periods and 
submitted to the EPA pursuant to title IV of the CAA (i.e. the Acid 
Rain Program). On June 25, 2013 (78 FR 38001), the EPA reopened the 
public comment period on the startup/shutdown provision and solicited 
comment on both the public comments

[[Page 68779]]

provided in response to the November 30, 2012, proposal, as well as the 
startup and shutdown technical support document (TSD) that was based on 
the Acid Rain Program data that was made available in the docket.\2\ 
The agency has reviewed all of the comments received on the startup and 
shutdown issues. As described below, the EPA is taking final action on 
the startup and shutdown provisions in MATS and the Utility NSPS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The EPA is still reviewing the other issues raised in the 
petitions for reconsideration and is not taking any action at this 
time with respect to those issues.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because this final rule is very similar to the February 2012 final 
rule, the impacts of these revisions on the costs and the benefits of 
the final rule are minor.

IV. Summary of Final Action and Changes Since Proposal--MATS Startup/
Shutdown Issues

    After consideration of the public comments received and other 
information, the EPA is finalizing the startup and shutdown provisions 
contained in the final MATS rule and we are also finalizing an 
alternative compliance option for startup periods and shutdown 
periods.\3\ We address several significant comments in this preamble. 
For a complete summary of the comments received on the issues we are 
finalizing today and our responses thereto, please refer to the 
memorandum ``National Emission Standards For Hazardous Air Pollutants 
From Coal- And Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units--
Reconsideration Of Certain Startup/Shutdown Issues; Summary Of Public 
Comments And Responses'' (RTC) in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ This preamble does not discuss the startup and shutdown 
provisions provided in the February 2012 final MATS rule. (See 77 FR 
9486, 9493-9494.) We are not altering those provisions in this final 
action. However, the critical control requirement (i.e., the 
requirement to use clean fuels to start and warm the EGU and 
relevant controls prior to coal, residual, or solid oil-derived fuel 
combustion, as well as recordkeeping and reporting procedures for 
those requirements) is the same for both. We are maintaining the 
final rule approach and will evaluate the continued need for the 
alternative definition during our ongoing 8-year reviews. We intend 
to use HAP and HAP surrogate data collected during periods of 
startup and periods of shutdown to evaluate the accuracy of CEMS 
from the start of electricity generation to the end of startup as 
defined under the alternative included in this final rule (i.e., 4 
hours after electricity generation). We will use these data to help 
determine whether it is appropriate to make changes to the rule in 
the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in more detail below, the alternative work practice 
standard for startup periods and shutdown periods requires coal- and 
oil-fired EGUs to initiate startup using only clean fuels and to 
continue combusting the maximum amount of clean fuels possible at the 
facility throughout the entire startup period. EGUs that chose to 
comply with the alternative work practice will be required to have 
sufficient clean fuel capacity to startup and warm the facility to the 
point where the primary PM controls (e.g., fabric filters (FFs) and 
electrostatic precipitators (ESPs)) can be brought on line at the same 
time as, or within 1 hour of, the addition of the primary fuel (i.e., 
coal, residual oil, or solid oil-derived fuel) to the EGU. If a 
facility does not have sufficient clean fuel capacity to enable 
initiation and operation of the PM controls within 1 hour of addition 
of primary fuel, then the source will have to increase its clean fuel 
capacity or take other action to comply with the work practice 
requirements in this final rule.\4\ The alternate included in this 
final rule also requires EGUs to comply with the applicable numeric 
standards within 4 hours of the generation of electricity or thermal 
energy for use either on site or for sale over the grid (i.e., the end 
of startup) and to continue to maximize clean fuel use throughout that 
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ We note that the startup and shutdown provisions contained 
in the February 16, 2012, final MATS rule also required EGUs to 
maximize clean fuels during startup periods and shutdown periods, as 
sources are required to comply with all MATS and NSPS standards at 
the time of electricity generation. Therefore, EGUs complying with 
the work practice as finalized on February 16, 2012, will 
necessarily be required to warm their units on clean fuels alone for 
extended periods unless the operators determine that compliance over 
the 30-day averaging period can be achieved without certain HAP 
controls for a portion of time after the defined startup period. EGU 
operators may conclude compliance without controls for a short 
period after startup is possible for a number of reasons, including 
the variability included in the numeric standards and our 
understanding from regulating many HAP categories that sources 
generally over-control to ensure a compliance margin is maintained.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA has established these final alternative requirements after 
determining what the best performing EGUs do during startup periods and 
shutdown periods. The EPA used several different metrics to determine 
the best performing sources for various aspects of the work practice 
requirements and definitions. Specifically, concerning the use of clean 
fuels, the comments received and the Acid Rain data in the record 
indicate that most EGU operations start using clean fuels and that many 
of those EGUs generate electricity while using clean fuels and/or 
routinely engage their PM controls before or within 1 hour of beginning 
to combust coal, residual oil, or solid oil-derived fuel. The clean 
fuels identified by the commenters and included in the final rule are 
inherently cleaner from a HAP emissions perspective than coal, residual 
oil, or solid oil-derived fuel, and, for this reason, maximizing the 
use of clean fuels during startup will greatly limit the emissions of 
HAP while EGUs are warming up to temperatures sufficient to engage the 
air pollution control devices (APCDs). Thus, we considered those EGUs 
that use clean fuels for the longest period of time before the 
introduction of coal and the generation of electricity to be the best 
performing EGUs because they are likely to have the lowest amount of 
HAP emissions during the startup period. In addition, the best 
performing EGUs were also determined to be those with the ability to 
engage PM control devices at the time (i.e., within 1 hour) of 
introduction of primary fuel. Further, we believe all of the concerns 
raised by commenters about the ability to engage the PM controls can be 
safely resolved to allow compliance with the final work practice, as 
explained in the RTC.\5\ We believe it is appropriate to use generation 
of electricity as an indicator of startup for two reasons. First, the 
information we have indicates that the only reason the owner/operator 
of an EGU chooses to fire fuel in a boiler is to generate electricity. 
Therefore, any event that starts with firing of fuel in a boiler that 
has been shut down will culminate in generation of electricity. Second, 
introduction of coal to the boiler is also always associated with 
generation of electricity. The TSD and other information confirm our 
understanding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See, e.g., EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234-20269, -20275, and -20303.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For determining the appropriate time after generation to define the 
end of startup (i.e., the time when the numerical standards apply), the 
EPA conducted an analysis of continuous emission monitor system (CEMS) 
data for NO<INF>X</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF> from EGUs to determine the 
range of times after initial generation of electricity or thermal 
energy that EGUs typically take to engage and operate all of their 
APCDs. The EPA determined the best performing 12 percent of EGUs by 
identifying those EGUs that were able to engage their APCDs most 
quickly after the initial generation of electricity or thermal energy 
and averaged that time to determine the end of the startup period when 
the numeric standards would become applicable. Specifically, we 
evaluated the average startup period for the best performing 12 percent 
of EGUs for which the EPA has the relevant data (i.e., those with the 
relevant NO<INF>X</INF> and/or SO<INF>2</INF> controls). We

[[Page 68780]]

used 12 percent of the sources with the relevant controls because the 
metric upon which the end of startup is based depends on the presence 
of the relevant controls, not on the actual NO<INF>X</INF> and 
SO<INF>2</INF> emissions. Thus, sources without the relevant controls 
cannot be compared against sources with the relevant controls for 
purposes of defining the end of startup in this final rule. CAA section 
112(d)(3)(A) directs the EPA to establish MACT floor standards based on 
the performance on the best performing 12 percent of sources for which 
the Administrator has data, and, in this case, the agency does not have 
relevant data from all sources in the category. For this reason, it is 
reasonable to establish the work practice based on 12 percent of the 
sources with the relevant data (i.e., those EGUs with the relevant 
NO<INF>X</INF> or SO<INF>2</INF> controls).
    We used this approach to determine the end of startup because it is 
reasonable to expect the EGUs that are able to most quickly and 
efficiently engage their controls after the generation of electricity 
to be the best performing sources and to have the lowest HAP emissions 
during and directly after the startup period, and because we are 
confident that EGUs will be able to accurately measure HAP emissions 
with CEMS at this time. The requirement to maximize the use of clean 
fuels (with inherently low HAP emissions) during the startup period 
ensures that HAP emissions are minimized during that time. Because EGUs 
subject to Acid Rain Program requirements are required to submit 
continuous NO<INF>X</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF> data to the EPA, the 
agency believes it has data on all startup events from those EGUs 
subject to that program, which comprise nearly all EGUs subject to this 
rule, for over a decade. Thus, we believe we have a full data set from 
which to determine the end of the startup period for the best 
performing 12 percent of sources for which we have the relevant 
data.\6\ We maintain it is reasonable to use the CAA section 112(d)(3) 
metric for establishing MACT floors for existing sources as a starting 
point for determining the appropriate work practice when presented with 
such comprehensive data. See CAA 112(h)(1) (directing the agency to 
establish a work practice standard ``which in the Administrator's 
judgment is consistent with the provisions of subsection (d) or (f) of 
this section.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ We note that these data are not reliable for quantifying 
emissions for this analysis but, rather, the data allow us to 
evaluate when controls are turned on for the purpose of determining 
when startup ends.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For shutdown periods, the EPA determined that sources could cease 
adding coal or oil to the EGU prior to shutting down the APCDs. We 
determined that sources able to run their control devices even after 
coal or oil is added to the EGU for the last time before shutdown were 
the best performing sources because HAP emissions would be minimized as 
the EGU combusts the remaining coal or oil in the boiler.
    The final work practice standard, when applied across the industry, 
will greatly reduce HAP emissions during startup periods and shutdown 
periods. The requirement to maximize clean fuel use throughout the 
startup period will significantly limit HAP emissions because of the 
inherently low HAP emissions associated with the clean fuels identified 
in 40 CFR 63.10042.\7\ In addition, the requirement to engage and 
operate PM controls as expeditiously as possible and within 1 hour of 
coal, residual oil, or solid oil-derived fuel combustion will limit HAP 
emissions that are particulate in nature throughout the remainder of 
the startup period. We believe that application of this work practice 
will lead to HAP emissions during startup periods and shutdown periods 
that are comparable to, and potentially lower than, those levels 
authorized during normal operations when averaged over the entire 
startup and/or shutdown period. During the 8-year review required under 
CAA section 112(d)(6), the agency intends to further assess HAP 
emissions during startup and shutdown based on data collected from 
sources complying with the final rule, though we recognize that 
prospectively our ability to establish numerical standards during 
startup periods and shutdown periods will depend, at least in part, on 
the further development of testing methodologies that will allow the 
agency to accurately measure emissions during those periods with an 
acceptable level of certainty.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Natural gas is one of the clean fuels identified in this 
final rule and the agency determined in 2000 that it was neither 
appropriate nor necessary to regulate natural gas-fired EGUs because 
the impacts from HAP emissions from such units are ``negligible.'' 
See ``Regulatory Finding on the Emissions of Hazardous Air 
Pollutants from Electric Utility Steam Generating Units,'' 65 FR 
79825, 79831 (December 20, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The specific provisions of the alternative startup and shutdown 
requirements and our rationales for those provisions are discussed in 
more detail below and in the RTC document in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2009-0234.

1. Definitions

    In the November 2012 reconsideration proposal, we proposed 
revisions to the definitions of startup and shutdown contained in the 
final MATS rule and set forth in 40 CFR 63.10042, after receiving 
petitions for reconsideration of the startup and shutdown provisions in 
the final MATS rule. Petitioners asserted, among other things, that the 
final rule's definitions of startup and shutdown were not sufficiently 
clear, should accommodate operation of cogeneration units, and did not 
accurately reflect startup conditions for all affected units. We 
received additional comments on these issues during the public comment 
periods. For more discussion of the petitions for reconsideration and 
the comments on the definitions in the final rule, see the RTC in 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234.
    As a result of comments received on the November 2012 proposal and 
the June 2013 reopening of the public comment period, we have further 
revised the proposed definitions as follows.
    a. Startup. The definition of startup in the November 2012 
reconsideration proposed rule was similar to the definition the EPA 
finalized in MATS in February 2012. In this final reconsideration rule, 
we have maintained the final MATS definition of startup and, in 
addition, are finalizing an alternative definition of startup based on 
the November 2012 proposal and the analysis in the startup and shutdown 
TSD. Sources may choose to use either definition of startup when 
complying with the startup and shutdown requirements. We are finalizing 
both definitions because we believe that they both meet the 
requirements of CAA section 112 to reduce HAP emissions during this 
time period and will provide operators with flexibility, even though we 
question the ability to accurately measure HAP emissions at the start 
of electricity generation. A discussion of the comments and analyses 
that led to inclusion of the alternative startup definition is provided 
below.
    In the November 2012 reconsideration proposal, the EPA proposed 
that startup be defined as the period in which operation of an EGU is 
initiated for any purpose. The proposed definition indicated that 
startup begins with either the first-ever firing of fuel in an EGU for 
the purpose of producing electricity or useful thermal energy (such as 
heat or steam) for industrial, commercial, heating, or cooling purposes 
or the firing of fuel in an EGU for any purpose after a shutdown event. 
The proposed

[[Page 68781]]

definition indicated that startup ended when the EGU generates 
electricity that is sold or used for any other purpose (including on 
site use), or the EGU makes useful thermal energy (such as heat or 
steam) for industrial, commercial, heating, or cooling purposes, 
whichever is earlier. The agency received comments stating that the 
general approach provided in the proposed definition of ``startup'' 
(particularly the end of startup) was directionally correct but did not 
allow sufficient time for the APCDs to become effective and, thus, the 
industry was concerned that some EGUs would not be able to achieve the 
MATS emission limits finalized in the February 2012 rule at the end of 
startup as defined in the final MATS rule. The comments further stated 
the opinion that startup did not end with first generation of 
electricity or production of steam as the EPA had proposed. Instead, 
some comments suggested that the defined end of startup should be 
changed to be 4 hours after 25-percent load is first reached or 12 
hours after first electricity generation, whichever occurs first. Some 
comments stated that even longer time periods were necessary for 
certain types of EGUs, that different startup periods should be defined 
for different types of EGUs, and that additional consideration should 
be given to a wider variety of APCDs. Other comments maintained that 
the definition in the final MATS rule was appropriate and indicated 
that any extension of time during which the EGUs were not subject to 
the final rule's emission limits was not in accordance with CAA section 
112.
    The EPA disagrees with the commenters to the extent they maintain 
that a work practice is required after emissions can be accurately 
measured or that the agency is bound to the time contained in the final 
rule where, as here, we conclude that the HAP measurement methodologies 
are not capable of accurately measuring HAP emissions during the 
defined startup period. The EPA did, however, conduct an additional 
technical analysis after its initial review of the comments and in June 
2013 published a document reopening the public comment period. The 
document specifically requested comment on the additional technical 
analysis the EPA had conducted in response to comments received 
concerning the end of startup. See ``Assessment of startup period at 
coal-fired electric generating units'' (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-
0234-20378). In the analysis, the EPA examined several indicators that 
allowed the agency to assess the time required to engage APCDs at 
affected EGUs. Using these indicators, we found no significant 
difference in performance related to startup between the different 
groups or types of EGUs assessed in the analysis (e.g., circulating 
fluidized bed (CFB), stoker, subcritical, supercritical). We further 
indicated that the results of our analysis supported defining the end 
of startup at coal- and oil-fired EGUs as occurring at the time to 
achieve 25 percent of the EGU's nameplate generating capacity 
(megawatts, MW) plus 3 hours, or the start of electricity generation 
plus 6 hours, whichever comes first.
    The EPA has reviewed all of the comments received on the proposed 
definition of startup in response to these two opportunities for public 
comment and has revised the June 2013 analysis. Based on this review, 
we are finalizing a revised definition of ``startup'' that uses the 
approach outlined in the June 2013 assessment with revisions as 
discussed below.
Defining the End of ``Startup''
    The June 2013 analysis suggested a potential end time for startup 
of 6 hours after the start of electricity generation or 3 hours after a 
coal- or oil-fired EGU reaches 25 percent of nameplate capacity, 
whichever occurs first. In other words, 6 hours after the start of 
generation or 3 hours after reaching electricity generation equal to 25 
percent of nameplate capacity, whichever comes first, an EGU would have 
to start monitoring and reporting its emissions for the purpose of 
complying with the numeric emissions standards contained in MATS.
    The EPA took this approach because we determined that flue gas 
conditions will be adequate to accurately measure HAP emissions with 
CEMS 4 hours after the generation of electricity. The approach 
evaluated the time for all APCDs to be functioning because we 
determined that stack conditions will be stable at this point. The 
analysis was based on our review of hourly SO<INF>2</INF> and 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions from CEMS installations from nearly 9,500 
distinct startup events at more than 400 coal-fired EGUs, including CFB 
boilers, and subcritical and supercritical pulverized coal boilers 
equipped with SO<INF>2</INF> APCDs (e.g., wet or dry flue gas 
desulfurization (FGD)) and/or NO<INF>X</INF> APCDs (e.g., selective 
catalytic reduction (SCR)). The EPA analyzed hourly SO<INF>2</INF> and 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions primarily because changes in SO<INF>2</INF> 
and NO<INF>X</INF> emissions are reasonable indicators of when APCDs 
are operational and stack conditions will be sufficiently stable to 
allow for accurate measurement of HAP emissions with CEMS. We also note 
that SO<INF>2</INF> emissions are a surrogate for acid gases (e.g., 
hydrogen chloride); SO<INF>2</INF> APCDs can be used for co-benefit 
mercury (Hg) control; and NO<INF>X</INF> SCR APCDs may increase the 
oxidation of Hg, influencing the effectiveness of Hg controls.\8\ The 
goal of the analysis was to identify the approximate time it took, on 
average, to initiate operation of SO<INF>2</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF> 
APCDs because it was those controls (e.g., scrubbers and SCR) that 
industry commenters stated required additional time to engage after the 
start of generation of electricity or useful thermal energy. The goal 
in conducting the analysis was not to determine the time it took for 
APCDs at all EGUs to become fully operational, but instead to determine 
the average time for the engagement of APCD to determine a reasonable 
end of startup.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The EPA did not include hourly PM data in this analysis 
because PM CEMS data are not available and PM CEMS have not yet been 
certified to accurately measure during periods of startup and 
periods of shutdown as defined in this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA received detailed comments on the June 2013 analysis and 
the proposed rule. Although commenters' opinions varied, the EPA 
identified three distinct groups of comments. The first group agreed 
with the EPA's approach to define a time limit following the start of 
generation, but many commenters suggested that more time was necessary 
to safely and/or fully engage APCDs. The second group commented that 
CAA section 112 requires the EPA to establish standards based on the 
average of the best performing 12 percent of EGUs, not the average of 
the fleet. The third group disagreed with the EPA's approach, stating 
that many APCDs could not be fully functional within the time limits 
specified by the EPA, and citing the need for greater flexibility.
    The EPA evaluated the information provided by commenters and 
considered the different approaches to define the end of startup.\9\ 
After careful consideration and in light of issues raised in comments 
and data provided, the EPA has revised its initial approach for 
determining the end of startup in

[[Page 68782]]

several respects. First, in the June 2013 analysis, we did not attempt 
to identify the EGUs that were the best performing sources, but instead 
simply looked at a category-wide average time for engagement of APCDs. 
As certain commenters noted, the category-wide average may not satisfy 
the CAA section 112(h) requirement that the EPA establish work practice 
standards ``which in the Administrator's judgment [are] consistent with 
the provisions of subsections (d) or (f) of this section [112].'' To 
more appropriately track this statutory directive, the EPA revised the 
analysis and identified the EGUs that were able to most quickly engage 
their APCDs because we determined that the best performing EGUs for 
purposes of defining the end of startup are those that are able to most 
efficiently engage their controls after the start of electricity 
generation. The EPA then averaged the time it took for such EGUs to 
bring their APCDs on line to determine a reasonable time after 
generation of electricity to define the end of startup. The EPA chose 
this approach in the final rule because we believe it most closely 
follows the requirements of CAA section 112.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ It is important to remember that the hour at which startup 
ends is the hour at which reporting for the purpose of determining 
compliance begins. Therefore, EGUs must collect and report emissions 
and heat input or generation data following the end of startup. 
These data are used in calculating whether an EGU is in compliance 
with the 30-day average emission limits. MATS does not mandate that 
all APCDs must be fully operational at the end of startup (nor does 
it mandate that emissions during any given hour during this period 
must be below the 30-day average emission limits); rather, MATS 
mandates only that sources comply with the MATS emission standards 
at that time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA analysis of startup events at coal-fired EGUs indicates 
that the best performing EGUs can, on average, initiate operation of 
their SO<INF>2</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF> APCDs within 4 hours following 
the start of generation (see Technical Support Document (TSD) titled 
``Assessment of startup period at coal-fired electric generating 
units--Revised'' in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234). In addition, 
the Agency is confident that stack conditions at this time are 
conducive for accurate measurements of HAP emissions using CEMS. For 
these reason, and because SO<INF>2</INF> can be used as a surrogate for 
the control of acid gases and SO<INF>2</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF> APCDs 
can impact the control of Hg emissions, and because we believe based on 
comments and other information that SO<INF>2</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF> 
controls are generally the last APCDs to be engaged, the EPA has 
determined that the end of startup should be defined as the end of the 
4th hour following the start of generation of electricity or useful 
thermal energy. The agency has also determined that it is not necessary 
to include any additional variability because the agency believes it 
has information on all of the startup events from the EGUs with the 
relevant data so startup time variability is fully represented in the 
available data.
    b. Shutdown. The EPA is maintaining the definition of ``shutdown'' 
proposed in the November 2012 action, and further requiring that all 
APCDs must be operated as long as coal, residual oil, or solid oil-
derived fuel is being fired in the EGU and as long thereafter as 
possible, considering safety and system integrity.
    The RTC contains a summary of the comments received on this topic 
and the EPA's response to those comments.

2. Work Practice Standards and Clean Fuels

    The final work practice for startup periods requires EGUs to 
initiate startup using clean fuels and to combust only clean fuels 
until primary fuel (e.g., coal, residual oil, or solid oil-derived 
fuel) is fed into the EGU, at which time the EGU must engage and 
operate its PM controls as soon as possible and no later than 1 hour 
thereafter. After engagement of PM controls, EGUs are required to 
maintain maximum clean fuel use until the end of startup (i.e., 4 hours 
after the start of generation of electricity or useful thermal energy). 
The maximization of clean fuel use after addition of primary fuel to 
the EGU assures that the least amount of HAP possible will be emitted 
from the units during the startup period. The final rule also includes 
more fuels on the list of clean fuels that may be combusted during 
startup periods and shutdown periods, as discussed below.
    The EPA is finalizing a requirement in the work practice that PM 
controls be engaged and operated within 1 hour of coal, residual oil, 
or solid oil-derived fuel being fired. In the November 2012 proposal, 
the EPA proposed to require that once an EGU starts firing coal, 
residual oil, or solid oil-derived fuel, all of the applicable control 
devices had to be engaged, with certain listed exceptions. PM-specific 
control devices were not included in that list of excepted controls 
because the EPA believed that PM controls on EGUs could be engaged 
(i.e., operational) at the best performing EGUs at the time the primary 
fuel (i.e., coal, residual oil, or solid oil-derived fuel) is fired. 
The EPA has reviewed both the record and the comments received, and we 
have determined that the EGUs that are able to engage PM controls 
(through either use of PM-specific controls (e.g., ESP, FF) or wet FGD 
scrubber system alone or in conjunction with PM controls) within 1 hour 
following the initiation of firing of coal, residual oil, or solid oil-
derived fuel are the best performing sources for purposes of minimizing 
particulate HAP emissions during startup periods.\10\ Therefore, we are 
finalizing a requirement that an owner/operator must engage and operate 
the PM controls within 1 hour of first firing of coal, residual oil, or 
solid oil-derived fuel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Docket ID Nos. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234-20269, EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-
0234-20275.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, in order to demonstrate an EGU's capacity to maximize the 
use of clean fuels during startup periods and its ability to bring PM 
control devices online in an expeditious manner following first firing 
of coal, residual oil, or solid oil-derived fuel, the rule now requires 
EGU owners or operators to determine and report each EGU's maximum 
storage capacity for clean fuels and maximum capacity for heat input 
while combusting clean fuels alone. The rule also requires EGU owners 
or operators to identify, record, and report semiannually each instance 
of startup or shutdown, specifying the dates and times that clean fuel 
use begins and ends; the dates and times that primary (i.e., coal or 
oil) fuel use starts or ends; and the hourly clean fuel usage, heat 
input, and electrical output.
    In addition, for those non-liquid oil-fired EGUs not using PM CEMS, 
HAP metals CEMS, or PM continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) as 
a compliance determination method or not meeting low emitting EGU (LEE) 
status \11\ for PM or non-mercury HAP metals emissions or those liquid 
oil-fired EGUs not using PM CEMS or PM CPMS as a compliance 
determination method or not meeting LEE status for PM or HAP metals 
emissions, parametric monitoring data will be required to help show PM 
control device effectiveness upon first use of coal, residual oil, or 
solid oil-derived fuel. This type of data is not required from EGUs 
using PM CEMS, HAP metals CEMS, or PM CPMS, as those instruments are 
already required to provide these data during startup periods; those 
data are suitable for assessing how soon and how well PM control 
devices are operating. Likewise, once EGUs meet the LEE status for PM 
or non-mercury HAP metals emissions for non-liquid oil-fired EGUs (or 
HAP metals emissions for liquid oil-fired EGUs), they will no longer 
need to supply additional information regarding PM control device 
operation during startup periods, for it is reasonable to expect their 
PM control devices to be properly sized and operated in order to 
demonstrate consistent operation at less than 50 percent of the 
emissions limit over a 3-year period. It is also reasonable to expect 
that the information recorded and calculated during startup periods and 
shutdown periods from LEE-eligible EGUs will show better emissions 
performance

[[Page 68783]]

when compared to similar information obtained from EGUs without LEE 
status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See 40 CFR 63.10005(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Upon initiation of first use of coal, residual oil, or solid oil-
derived fuel, EGUs not using PM CEMS or PM CPMS as a compliance 
determination method or not meeting LEE status for PM or non-mercury 
HAP metals emissions for non-liquid oil-fired EGUs (or HAP metals 
emissions for liquid oil-fired EGUs) are also required to record hourly 
and report semi-annually the pre- and post-PM control device flow rates 
and temperatures, as well as fan amps. Moreover, the PM control device-
specific parameters are required to be recorded hourly and reported 
semi-annually. The EGUs with ESPs are required to record the number of 
fields in service and the secondary current and voltage for each hour 
of startup and shutdown. The EGUs with FFs are required to record the 
number of compartments in service and the differential pressure across 
the baghouse. Finally, the EGUs with wet scrubbers that are necessary 
for filterable PM emission control will record scrubber liquid-to-flue 
gas ratios and scrubber liquid differential pressure for each hour of 
startup and shutdown.
    Given that we do not have much information concerning continuous PM 
emissions or PM emission control devices during periods of startup, the 
final rule requires owners or operators of EGUs that choose to use 
definition (2) of ``startup'' contained in 40 CFR 63.10042 to provide a 
report prepared by an independent professional engineer that describes 
the EGU, PM emissions, and PM emissions control devices both as 
designed and in their current form. This information will show how each 
EGU is able, or has been modified, to meet the requirements of this 
rule. In addition, the information will specify the time needed to 
engage PM emission control devices from initial fuel combustion in the 
EGU; the effectiveness of each PM emission control device, both upon 
control device startup and at normal operation; the PM emission rate; 
and the uncontrolled PM emissions rate. The report will be submitted as 
part of the EGU's Notification of Compliance Status, and the 
information contained in the report will aid us in determining whether 
or not additional work practice requirements may be needed during 
startup periods to minimize HAP emissions.
    Finally, the EPA acknowledges the comments asserting safety issues 
that must be considered during startup of PM controls (e.g., carbon 
monoxide buildup, fabric blinding). We believe that almost all EGUs 
will be able to alter their source through any number of means, 
including increasing clean fuel capacity and modifying APCD operation, 
and comply with the final work practice requirements; however, we 
recognize that there may be rare occasions that preclude a viable 
compliance option consistent with the final rule. Therefore, we are 
finalizing that an owner/operator may submit to the Administrator a 
request for an EGU-specific case-by-case emission standard consistent 
with 40 CFR 63.6(g). Such a request requires notice-and-comment 
rulemaking. Approval or disapproval authority for this type of request 
is delegated to the Assistant Administrator of the Office of Air and 
Radiation, and, for purposes of this rule, will be delegated no 
further.\12\ However, the EPA will only consider requests that provide 
evidence of a documented manufacturer-identified safety issue and can 
provide proof that the PM control device is adequately designed and 
sized to meet the final PM emission limit. As identified in 40 CFR 
63.10011(g)(4), in its request for the case-by-case determination, the 
owner/operator must provide, among other materials, documentation that: 
(1) The EGU is using clean fuels to the maximum extent possible to 
bring the EGU and PM control device up to the temperature necessary to 
alleviate or prevent the identified safety issues prior to the 
combustion of primary fuel in the EGU, (2) the EGU has explicitly 
followed the manufacturer's procedures to alleviate or prevent the 
identified safety issue, (3) the source provides details of the 
manufacturer's statement of concern, and (4) the source provides 
evidence that the PM control device is adequately designed and sized to 
meet the final PM emission limit. In addition, the source will have to 
indicate the other measures it will take to limit HAP emissions during 
startup periods and shutdown periods to ensure a control level 
consistent with the final work practice requirements. In order to 
ensure compliance with the work practice standards during startup 
periods, EGU owners or operators who request an alternative non-opacity 
emission standard shall comply with definition (1) of startup contained 
in 40 CFR 63.10042 (i.e., the definition contained in the final rule 
promulgated on February 12, 2012) \13\ until the final alternative non-
opacity emission standard is promulgated in the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See Delegation 7-121 and Delegation of Authority under the 
Clean Air Act to Approve Alternatives to Test Methods and Procedures 
in Parts 60, 61, 63, and 65, from Gina McCarthy to Stephen Page, 
September 30, 2011, in docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234.
    \13\ See 77 FR 9303; February 16, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We also proposed several revisions to the work practice standards 
issued in the final MATS rule in response to petitions on the final 
rule. Petitioners asserted that the final rule's work practice 
standards should include additional fuels as ``clean fuels'' and 
recognize operating limitations of certain EGU types and APCDs. 
Specifically, petitioners contended that the list of clean fuels 
required for use during startup in order to minimize emissions should 
include, among others, synthetic natural gas, synthesis gas (syngas), 
biodiesel, and ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD). The EPA has also been 
informed that propane is used to startup some EGUs.
    In this final action, we are adding certain synthetic natural gas 
(that meets the specification necessary for that gas to be transported 
on a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulated pipeline), 
synthesis gas that has been processed through a gas clean-up train such 
that it is suitable for use in the system's combustion turbine, and 
ULSD to the list of clean fuels. In addition, the EPA does see merit, 
as suggested by some commenters, of further broadening the definition 
of ``clean fuels.'' After reviewing other rules that use or require 
clean fuels, we believe that inclusion of those fuels meeting the 
requirements of 40 CFR Part 80, subpart I (``Subpart I--Motor Vehicle 
Diesel Fuel; Nonroad, Locomotive, and Marine Diesel Fuel; and ECA 
Marine Fuel'') is appropriate. Specifically, the definitions and 
provisions of 40 CFR 80.2, 80.501, 80.510, and 80.520 address sulfur 
content restrictions relating to distillate, diesel (including ULSD), 
and biodiesel fuels. The EPA believes that requiring use of clean 
fuels, including those we are adding in this final rule, for EGUs will 
significantly limit the HAP emissions from these sources during startup 
periods and shutdown periods. For example, information provided to the 
EPA on another rulemaking (found in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0708-
1459) \14\ showed that the use of ULSD will significantly reduce 
emissions of air toxics, including metallic HAP (e.g., nickel, zinc, 
lead (Pb)) compared to the use of ``regular'' diesel. The EPA also 
believes that combustion of the other 40 CFR Part 80, subpart I, fuels 
meeting the subject definitions will cause significantly lower HAP 
emissions than

[[Page 68784]]

coal and residual oil, and, as stated above, EGUs must use clean fuels 
to the maximum extent possible during startup periods and shutdown 
periods.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Email and attachments from Paul Miller, NESCAUM, to Melanie 
King, EPA. NESCAUM's RICE NESHAP comments. October 11, 2012, also 
found in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are maintaining the work practice requirement in the final MATS 
that requires EGU source owners and operators, when firing coal, 
residual oil, or solid oil-derived fuel in the EGU during startup or 
shutdown, to vent emissions to the main stack(s) and operate all 
control devices necessary to meet all operating and emissions standards 
that are applicable to the source pursuant to other CAA or state 
requirements. In addition, any partial (fractional) operating hour that 
may occur at the beginning of a startup period or at the end of a 
shutdown period is to be flagged in reports as an hour of startup or 
shutdown.
    For more discussion of each of these issues, please refer to the 
RTC, the TSD, and the memo ``Startup and shutdown provisions'' (Docket 
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234-20224) in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-
0234.
3. Treatment of IGCC EGU Syngas
    The EPA is finalizing both the use of flares and the use of duct 
burners for integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) units to 
handle syngas not combusted in the turbine during startup periods and 
shutdown periods.
    An IGCC EGU includes both a gasification unit and a combustion unit 
and syngas is generated in the gasifier for the primary purpose of 
being combusted in the associated combustion turbine. The EPA 
understands that, in some cases, the gasified fuel can be used for 
other purposes such as the production of chemicals (e.g., fertilizers, 
methanol) if the facility has been designed to do so. During the 
startup periods and shutdown periods, some or all of the syngas 
produced for the purpose of power production may not be combusted in 
the turbine. We proposed two options for IGCC EGUs for handling syngas 
not fired in the combustion turbine: (1) Syngas must be flared, not 
vented, or (2) syngas must be routed to duct burners, which may need to 
be installed, and the flue gas from the duct burners must be routed to 
the heat recovery steam generator. We solicited comments on the need to 
flare the unfired syngas, if it is more appropriate to require routing 
of the unfired syngas back into the system for all IGCC EGUs, and on 
the costs of adding duct burners, should they be required.
    Industry commenters stated that it is important that flaring remain 
an option for routine startups and shutdowns for safety reasons and as 
a viable option for non-routine events such as EGU ``trips'' when the 
combustion turbine cannot combust syngas. Commenters noted that the 
flaring option is especially critical as the re-routing option can only 
be used by IGCC EGUs under limited circumstances as the syngas may lack 
sufficient pressure for re-injection and gasifiers are often once-
through systems that do not support re-routing of the syngas. 
Commenters indicated that the actual flaring step of an IGCC startup is 
relatively short and ordinarily lasts less than 2 hours and that only 
clean syngas is flared during a routine startup.
    The EPA is finalizing both options, use of flaring or duct burners, 
for handling of syngas not combusted in the turbine during startup 
periods and shutdown periods.\15\ The EPA believes that the controls 
are comparable and that allowing the option will provide flexibility to 
owners/operators of IGCC EGUs to choose either of the options subject 
to operational constraints at their IGCC EGUs. The EPA believes it 
appropriate to cover gasifier syngas during startup periods and 
shutdown periods of the combustion turbine portion of the IGCC because 
the units are inextricably linked and the unused gas would not be 
generated but for the startup of the combustion portion of the IGCC 
unit. The EPA is requiring the use of either flares or duct burners to 
combust unused syngas during startup periods and shutdown periods.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ IGCC units that are also designed to co-produce chemicals 
or other products using syngas may also choose to use the unburned 
syngas in that process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Common Stacks
    The final MATS rule at 40 CFR 63.10010(a)(1), (2), and (3) required 
owners or operators of EGUs with common stacks to either monitor the 
EGUs separately or monitor the common stack and assign the same 
emissions value to each EGU. No specific requirements concerning 
monitoring during startup periods or shutdown periods were given 
because the EPA believed the provisions as finalized were sufficient. 
Consistent with the monitoring provisions in the final rule, owners or 
operators of EGUs with common stacks are required to monitor and report 
emissions for compliance purposes at all times when any EGU using a 
common stack is operating in a non-startup/shutdown mode, even if 
another EGU using that common stack is in startup/shutdown mode. 40 CFR 
63.10005(a)(2)(iii) reinforces and clarifies this requirement. Also, 
consistent with the final rule, work practice standards, rather than 
numeric emissions limits, apply during startup periods or shutdown 
periods, but only to EGUs in startup or shutdown mode. Today's 
reconsidered rule maintains the approach of the final rule. Owners or 
operators of EGUs with common stacks may either monitor each EGU 
separately upstream of the common stack or from the common stack. 
Monitoring must be operational (except for periods of monitor 
malfunction and during required quality assurance (QA) and maintenance 
activities) at all times that any fuel is being combusted, and 
compliance with numeric emission limits is required except for periods 
when all EGUs sharing the common stack are in startup or shutdown mode. 
Should an owner or operator choose to monitor the common stack, then 
emissions obtained from the monitoring will be applied to each EGU that 
shares the stack. This approach remains consistent with the final rule, 
and is not expected to be problematic emissions-wise for any EGU using 
a common stack, because the EGUs in startup periods or shutdown periods 
are required to use clean fuels and comply with the other work practice 
requirements. In addition, the EGUs sharing the common stack and 
operating in a mode other than startup or shutdown are required to 
operate such that they meet their emissions limits. We believe, based 
on evaluation of source compliance for many years, that sources 
generally operate in a manner to ensure a compliance margin to avoid 
potential exceedances.\16\ Thus, we maintain the monitoring options 
available in the final rule are sufficient to address concerns from 
commenters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ ``. . . (S)ources do not design to meet a standard, but 
rather to meet a level comfortably lower. They do so in order to 
provide a compliance margin on those days where emissions rise due 
to inherent and uncontrollable variability . . .'' See 77 FR 42386; 
July 18, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed below, the EPA is also establishing a default 
electrical load of 5 percent of the maximum sustainable electrical load 
of the EGU. This default value will be allowed to be used during 
periods of startup or periods of shutdown when the electrical load is 
zero. For EGUs sharing a common stack with just one common monitoring 
system, this default value will be available only when the electrical 
load is zero for an EGU sharing the common stack that is in a period of 
startup or shutdown. As soon as a non-zero electrical load is produced, 
that non-zero load must be used in electrical output-based emission 
rate calculations for each EGU in a startup or shutdown period, even if 
the load is less than 5 percent of capacity. Note that the electrical 
load of all EGUs in operation and sharing a common stack with just

[[Page 68785]]

one common monitoring system are to be summed when electrical output-
based emission rate calculations are made.
    Section 1.2.5 of the RTC contains both a summary of comments 
received on this topic and the EPA's response to those comments.
5. Diluent Cap
    Apart from allowing use of a diluent cap when calculating Hg 
emissions during startup periods or shutdown periods, the final rule 
contained no allowance for use of a diluent cap. The November 2012 
proposal sought comment on the need for a diluent cap for other HAP 
emissions during startup periods and shutdown periods. Use of a diluent 
cap can be important during startup periods and shutdown periods 
because CEMS values can approach infinity because the denominator in 
the calculations for CEMS values can approach zero during those 
periods. Moreover, use of a diluent cap becomes a common stack issue 
when one or more of the EGUs is in a startup or shutdown mode and just 
one monitoring instrument is used in the stack.
    The EPA considered each comment and decided to allow use of default 
carbon dioxide (CO<INF>2</INF>) or oxygen (O<INF>2</INF>) values as 
identified in Section 3.3.4.1 of Appendix F of 40 CFR part 75, but only 
for startup periods or shutdown periods when CO<INF>2</INF> values are 
below or O<INF>2</INF> values are above default values for use in all 
pollutant calculations. For non-IGCC EGUs, the default CO<INF>2</INF> 
value is 5 percent and the default O<INF>2</INF> value is 14 percent. 
This means that when CEMS CO<INF>2</INF> measurements are below 5 
percent, EGU owners or operators are allowed to use 5 percent 
CO<INF>2</INF> in their calculations. Because the startup analysis 
showed that CEMS CO<INF>2</INF> measurements exceeded default values 
within 2 hours of generation, the EPA does not expect to find default 
values being used when startup periods end. Likewise, when CEMS 
O<INF>2</INF> measurements are larger than 14 percent, EGU owners or 
operators will be able to use 14-percent O<INF>2</INF> in their 
calculations. IGCC EGUs will be allowed to use 1 percent as a default 
CO<INF>2</INF> value or 19 percent as a default O<INF>2</INF> value. As 
mentioned earlier, default diluent gas values will be allowed for use 
in calculations for startup periods or shutdown periods when 
CO<INF>2</INF> CEMS values are below or O<INF>2</INF> CEMS values are 
above default values. The rule requires EGU owners or operators to use 
actual CO<INF>2</INF> or O<INF>2</INF> CEMS values for all other 
operating periods. Although the EPA has no specific data or information 
concerning emissions during transient events outside startup or 
shutdown periods, the EPA expects the short duration of these transient 
events outside startup or shutdown periods that could cause 
CO<INF>2</INF> or O<INF>2</INF> CEMS to be below (or above) default 
values to have little, if any, impact on the 30-boiler operating day 
rolling averages.
    The rule retains the requirement for EGU owners or operators to 
report instrumental CEMS, PM CPMS, and sorbent trap information, as 
well as flow rate information during startup periods or shutdown 
periods. Such information may prove useful in assessing potential 
emissions or operational limits in future rulemaking activities. 
Finally, the rule requires EGU owners or operators to identify each 
hour of startup or shutdown in which a diluent cap value is used.
    Section 5.1 of the RTC contains both a summary of comments received 
on this topic and the EPA's response.
6. Default Electrical Output
    The final rule provided no allowance regarding default electrical 
output. The November 2012 proposal sought comment on the need for a 
default electrical output for those owners or operators who choose to 
comply with a mass per electrical output standard. Use of a default 
electrical output cap can be important during startup periods and 
shutdown periods because the calculated mass per electrical output 
values can approach infinity when the electrical output is zero during 
those periods.
    Upon consideration of the comments, the rule will provide a default 
electrical load value that EGU owners or operators will be allowed to 
use during startup periods or shutdown periods to calculate emissions 
rates for an EGU, as long as the electrical load for the EGU is zero. 
Once the EGU begins generating electricity, the source must use the 
actual electrical output in compliance calculations, even if the output 
is below the 5 percent default value. Moreover, use of a default 
electrical load is not allowed during periods other than startup or 
shutdown. As suggested by one commenter, the default electrical load 
will be equivalent to 5 percent of the maximum sustainable electrical 
output in megawatts of an EGU, as defined in section 6.5.2.1(a)(1) of 
appendix A to part 75, and included in an EGU's Part 75 electronic 
monitoring plan. This maximum sustainable load is either the nameplate 
capacity of the EGU or the highest electrical load observed in at least 
four representative quarters of EGU operation. When used in a common 
stack application, the default electrical load is 5 percent of the 
combined maximum sustainable electrical load of the EGUs that are in 
startup or shutdown mode during an hour in which the electrical load is 
zero. The default electrical load is allowed to be used in electrical 
output-based emission rate calculations (either pounds per megawatt-
hour (lb/MWh) or pounds per gigawatt-hour (lb/GWh)) for any hour in 
which the actual electrical load for a single EGU or for every EGU 
venting to a common stack is zero. The EPA considered, but decided 
against, requiring measurement of thermal heat output and conversion 
back into equivalent electrical output; instead, the EPA decided to use 
a simpler approach based on already-existing requirements of the Acid 
Rain Program that we believe are most appropriate considering CAA 
section 112 and in light of the available data. Finally, the rule 
requires EGU owners or operators to identify each hour of startup or 
shutdown in which a default electrical load value is used.
    Section 5.2 of the RTC contains both a summary of comments received 
on this topic and the EPA's response to significant comments.
7. Use of Sorbent Traps
    The final rule required continuous Hg data collection using sorbent 
traps or Hg CEMS under all process operating conditions, including, but 
not limited to, startup periods and shutdown periods, over the entire 
30 boiler operating day LEE qualification testing period. For sorbent 
traps, the EPA allowed use of redundant backup sorbent trap monitoring 
systems during startup periods and shutdown periods; and required 
operation of sorbent trap monitoring systems and collection of Hg data 
at all times EGUs operate, but did not allow use of Hg data collected 
during startup or shutdown periods to be included in compliance 
calculations.
    After consideration of comments received on Hg monitoring during 
startup or shutdown periods using sorbent trap monitoring systems, the 
EPA decided that the final reconsidered rule will contain three 
alternative approaches for measuring Hg emissions during startup 
periods or shutdown periods. In the first approach, EGU owners or 
operators will continue to be able to use Hg CEMS for measuring Hg 
emissions.
    The second approach relies on at least two separate sorbent 
monitoring systems. Although the rule has no prohibition against an EGU 
owner or operator using one sorbent trap monitoring system for 
compliance purposes during periods other than startup or shutdown and 
one (or more) sorbent trap monitoring systems for

[[Page 68786]]

startup periods or shutdown periods through the use of a non-redundant 
backup system (per section 2.2.2 of Appendix A to subpart UUUUU of Part 
63), it will be clarified that two separate sorbent monitoring systems 
are allowed. Reliance on this second approach would address one 
commenter's concern that Hg compliance data could not be separated from 
Hg data collected during startup and/or shutdown periods when 
demonstrating compliance with numerical standards based on a sorbent 
trap system. When an EGU with at least two such systems (one for 
startup periods or shutdown periods and the other for all other 
periods) entered into a startup or shutdown period, the EGU owner or 
operator could switch monitoring systems either manually or 
automatically. As part of an EGU owner or operator's rubric for 
choosing which Hg measurement approach to use, the EGU owner or 
operator should take into account that any process operating hour for 
which quality assured Hg concentration data are not obtained is counted 
as an hour of monitoring system downtime, per section 1.4 of Appendix A 
to subpart UUUUU of Part 63. Therefore, if an EGU owner or operator 
believes change-out of sorbent monitoring traps may take too long, 
other approaches may be more suitable. An EGU owner or operator should 
carefully consider all costs--not only of sorbent tubes, analyses, and 
associated labor, but also of non-compliance due to data gaps, when 
determining whether this approach is appropriate.
    The third approach, relying on just one sorbent trap monitoring 
system for all periods of operation (startup, shutdown, and normal), 
will be identified in the rule as a viable option for Hg monitoring, 
and, for EGU owners or operators who choose this option, the rule will 
allow data collected during startup or shutdown periods to be used for 
compliance purposes. The EPA expects little impact on Hg emissions 
during startup or shutdown periods, because, as explained above, we 
believe the rule contains sufficient variability to include startup and 
shutdown periods; clean fuels will be used during those periods; 
default diluent and electrical output values, which tend to constrain 
emissions, will be available for use; and emissions occurring during 
those periods will be included in a 30- (or 90-) boiler operating day 
rolling average. EGU owners or operators may find that this third 
approach would work well for those instances in which sudden and 
unpredictable shutdown events occur, for there would be no need to swap 
sorbent trap monitoring systems to capture shutdown emissions.
    Finally, the EPA disagrees with commenters who claim that 
collecting data during startup and shutdown will serve no purpose 
relative to compliance with MATS and indicated that if the EPA needs to 
collect startup and shutdown data to better understand performance for 
a future rulemaking, that can be addressed through the information 
collection request (ICR) process where the EPA demonstrates the need 
and identifies a systematic plan to gather the data. As explained in 
the final rule preamble,\17\ collection of startup and shutdown 
information will provide the EPA with information to more fully analyze 
the ability and appropriateness of establishing numeric emissions and 
operating limits during startup periods or shutdown periods so the 
issue can be addressed as part of the ongoing 8-year review of this 
rule. Collection of these data as part of the rule will also serve to 
reduce, if not eliminate, future ICR requests on this topic. The EPA 
also disagrees with commenters who wish to place all startup and 
shutdown information on those EGU owners or operators who choose to use 
Hg CEMS, for EPA remains interested in how well sorbent tube monitoring 
systems operate during startup periods or shutdown periods. Not 
collecting that information from those systems would leave a gap in the 
EPA's knowledge base.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See 77 FR 9382 (February 16, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 5.3 of the RTC contains both a summary of comments received 
on this topic and the EPA's response to significant comments.

V. Summary of Final Action and Changes Since Proposal--Utility NSPS

    The current PM startup and shutdown requirements in the Utility 
NSPS are included in 40 CFR 60.42Da(e)(2) and require the owner/
operator of an affected EGU to meet the work practice standards 
specified in Table 3 of 40 CFR Part 63, subpart UUUUU (i.e., the MATS 
rule). The Utility NSPS docket received a total of 23 public comments 
on the startup/shutdown reconsideration proposal. One of these comments 
was a duplicate. Of the remaining 22 comments, 15 were received in both 
dockets, and 7 were received in the Utility NSPS docket alone. Of the 
seven comments received in the Utility NSPS docket alone, four were 
said to be sent to the MATS docket, but no documents that matched the 
ones in the Utility NSPS docket were found in the MATS docket. However, 
the majority of the comments overlap with issues raised as part of the 
startup and shutdown provision included in MATS. The EPA responses to 
these issues are discussed in the MATS portion of the preamble and 
docket and have not been repeated here or in the Utility NSPS docket.
    The sole NSPS-specific comment we received was that the Utility 
NSPS should include a definition of startup and shutdown that is 
consistent with the MATS definition and that the definitions of startup 
and shutdown in the Utility NSPS, MATS, and Industrial Boiler NESHAP 
(subpart DDDDD) rules should be consistent. There are situations where 
a facility is subject to the PM standard under 40 CFR Part 60, subpart 
Da, but is not subject to MATS (e.g., a biomass-fired EGU with natural 
gas burners >250 million British thermal units per hour). This facility 
would, therefore, be subject to the Industrial Boiler NESHAP. We have 
concluded that it is appropriate for industrial boilers and EGUs to 
have the same PM startup and shutdown work practice standards for both 
the NSPS and MATS. Therefore, we are amending 40 CFR 60.42Da(e)(2) so 
that owners or operators of facilities subject to 40 CFR Part 63, 
subpart UUUUU, shall meet the work practice standards specified in 
Table 3 to Subpart UUUUU of Part 63, and owners or operators of 
facilities subject to 40 CFR Part 63, subpart DDDDD, shall meet the 
work practice standards specified in Table 3 to Subpart DDDDD of Part 
63.
    We are also amending the regulatory text in the Utility NSPS to 
incorporate the relevant startup and shutdown definitions. We have 
concluded that the amended regulatory text is sufficient, and adding 
definitions of startup and shutdown are not necessary for the Utility 
NSPS. Using this approach is beneficial because any future amendments 
to the MATS startup and shutdown provisions will automatically be 
incorporated into the Utility NSPS.

VI. Impacts of This Final Rule

A. Summary of Emissions Impacts, Costs and Benefits

    Because this final rule is no more stringent than the February 2012 
final rule, we expect no additional costs or benefits associated with 
these revisions.

B. What are the air impacts?

    This final rule is no more stringent than the February 2012 final 
rule. Accordingly, we believe that this final action will not result in 
significant changes in emissions of any of the regulated pollutants.

[[Page 68787]]

C. What are the energy impacts?

    This final action is not anticipated to have an effect on the 
supply, distribution, or use of energy. As previously stated, this 
final rule is no more stringent than the February 2012 final rule.

D. What are the compliance costs?

    We believe there will be no significant change in compliance costs 
as a result of this final action because electric power companies would 
take the same or similar actions (e.g., operating control devices, 
recording clean fuel use, etc.) as they would have to comply with the 
previously finalized MATS standards. Moreover, we find no additional 
monitoring costs are necessary to comply with this final action because 
EGU owners or operators could continue to use the startup and shutdown 
provisions of the promulgated rule to demonstrate compliance; however, 
as in any other rule, EGU owners or operators may choose to conduct 
additional monitoring (and incur its expense) for their own purposes.

E. What are the economic and employment impacts?

    Because we expect that electric power companies would take the same 
or similar actions to meet the requirements finalized in this action as 
they would have chosen to comply with the previously finalized MATS 
standards, we do not anticipate that this final action will result in 
significant changes in emissions, energy impacts, costs, benefits, or 
economic impacts. Likewise, we believe this action will not have any 
impacts on the price of electricity, employment or labor markets, or 
the U.S. economy.

F. What are the benefits of the final standards?

    As previously stated, we do not anticipate any significant emission 
changes resulting from this action. Therefore, there are no direct 
monetized benefits or disbenefits associated with this action.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the 
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735; October 4, 1993) and is, 
therefore not subject to review under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 
(76 FR 3821; January 21, 2011).
    Because this final rule is no more stringent than the February 2012 
final rule, we do not expect any additional costs, benefits, or 
economic impacts associated with these revisions. The EPA prepared an 
analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated with the 2012 
final rule. This analysis is contained in the ``Economic Impact 
Analysis for the Final Reconsideration of the Mercury and Air Toxics 
Standards'' found in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden. 
This action clarifies but does not change the information collection 
requirements previously finalized and, as a result, does not impose any 
additional burden on industry. However, the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) has previously approved the information collection 
requirements contained in the existing regulations (see 77 FR 9304) 
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq. and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0567. The OMB control 
numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency to 
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice 
and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure 
Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, 
and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this action on small 
entities, a 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 jurisdiction that is a government of 
a city, county, town, school district, or special district with a 
population of less that 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. Categories and entities potentially 
regulated by the final rule with applicable NAICS codes are provided in 
section I.A of this preamble.
    According to the SBA size standards for NAICS code 221122, 
Utilities--Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation, a firm is small if, 
including its affiliates, it is primarily engaged in the generation, 
transmission, and/or distribution of electric energy for sale and its 
total electric output for the preceding fiscal year did not exceed 4 
million MWh.
    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.
    The EPA has determined that none of the small entities will 
experience a significant impact because the action imposes no 
additional regulatory requirements on owners or operators of affected 
sources.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action contains no federal mandates under the provisions of 
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 
1531-1538 for state, local, or tribal governments or the private 
sector. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local, or 
tribal governments or the private sector. Therefore, this action is not 
subject to the requirements of UMRA sections 202 or 205.
    This action is also not subject to the requirements of UMRA section 
203 because it contains no regulatory requirements that might 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. This action 
contains no requirements that apply to such governments or impose 
obligations upon them.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between 
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 
specified in Executive Order 13132. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does 
not apply to this action.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249; November 9, 2000). It will not have 
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship 
between the federal government and Indian tribes, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities between the federal 
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. No 
affected facilities are owned or operated by Indian tribal governments. 
Thus,

[[Page 68788]]

Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885; 
April 23, 1997) because it is not economically significant as defined 
in Executive Order 12866. The EPA has evaluated the environmental 
health or safety effects of the final MATS on children. The results of 
the evaluation are discussed in that final rule (77 FR 9304; February 
16, 2012) and are contained in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234.

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

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355; 
May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action under 
Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA); Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 
directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in their 
regulatory and procurement activities unless to do so would be 
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impracticable. VCS are 
technical standards (e.g., material specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or 
adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA requires the EPA to provide Congress, 
through OMB, explanations when the agency decides not to use available 
and applicable VCS.
    This action does not involve VCS. Therefore, the EPA did not 
consider the use of any VCS.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629; February 16, 1994) establishes 
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high 
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    The EPA has determined that this final rule will not have 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on minority, low-income, or indigenous populations because it 
does not affect the level of protection provided to human health or the 
environment. The EPA has evaluated the environmental health or 
environmental effects of the final MATS on minority, low-income, or 
indigenous populations. The results of the evaluation are discussed in 
that final rule (77 FR 9304; February 16, 2012) and are contained in 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234.

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. The EPA will submit a report containing this final rule 
and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2). This final rule will be effective on November 19, 2014.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 60

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 63

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Hazardous substances, Intergovernmental 
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 7, 2014.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR 
parts 60 and 63 to read as follows:

PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES

0
1. The authority citation for 40 CFR part 60 continues to read as 
follows:

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


0
2. Section 60.42Da is amended by revising paragraph (e)(2) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  60.42Da  Standards for particulate matter (PM).

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) During startup periods and shutdown periods, owners or 
operators of facilities subject to subpart UUUUU of part 63 of this 
chapter shall meet the work practice standards specified in Table 3 to 
subpart UUUUU of part 63 and use the relevant definitions in Sec.  
63.10042, and owners or operators of facilities subject to subpart 
DDDDD of part 63 shall meet the work practice standards specified in 
Table 3 to subpart DDDDD of part 63 and use the relevant definition 
used in Sec.  63.7575.
* * * * *

PART 63--NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS 
FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

0
3. The authority citation for 40 CFR part 63 continues to read as 
follows:

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


0
4. Section 63.10000 is amended by revising paragraph (c)(1)(vi) and 
adding paragraph (l) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.10000  What are my general requirements for complying with 
this subpart?

* * * * *
    (c)(1) * * *
    (vi) If your coal-fired or solid oil-derived fuel-fired EGU does 
not qualify as a LEE for Hg, you must demonstrate initial and 
continuous compliance through use of a Hg CEMS or a sorbent trap 
monitoring system, in accordance with appendix A to this subpart.
    (A) You may choose to use separate sorbent trap monitoring systems 
to comply with this subpart: One sorbent trap monitoring system to 
demonstrate compliance with the numeric mercury emissions limit during 
periods other than startup or shutdown and the other sorbent trap 
monitoring system to report average mercury concentration during 
startup periods or shutdown periods.
    (B) You may choose to use one sorbent trap monitoring system to 
demonstrate compliance with the mercury emissions limit at all times

[[Page 68789]]

(including startup periods and shutdown periods) and to report average 
mercury concentration. You must follow the startup or shutdown 
requirements that follow and as given in Table 3 to this subpart for 
each coal-fired, liquid oil-fired, or solid oil-derived fuel-fired EGU.
* * * * *
    (l) On or before the date an EGU is subject to this subpart, you 
must install, certify, operate, maintain, and quality assure each 
monitoring system necessary for demonstrating compliance with the work 
practice standards for PM or non-mercury HAP metals during startup 
periods and shutdown periods. You must collect, record, report, and 
maintain data obtained from these monitoring systems during startup 
periods and shutdown periods.

0
5. Section 63.10005 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(2) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.10005  What are my initial compliance requirements and by what 
date must I conduct them?

    (a) * * *
    (2) To demonstrate initial compliance using either a CMS that 
measures HAP concentrations directly (i.e., an Hg, HCl, or HF CEMS, or 
a sorbent trap monitoring system) or an SO<INF>2</INF> or PM CEMS, the 
initial performance test consists of 30- (or, if emissions averaging 
for Hg is used, 90-) boiler operating days of data collected by the 
initial compliance demonstration date specified in Sec.  63.9984(f) 
with the certified monitoring system. Pollutant emission rates measured 
during startup periods and shutdown period (as defined in Sec.  
63.10042) are not to be included in the compliance demonstration, 
except as otherwise provided in Sec.  63.10000(c)(1)(vi)(B) and 
paragraph (a)(2)(iii) of this section.
    (i) The 30- (or, if applicable, 90-) boiler operating day CMS 
performance test must demonstrate compliance with the applicable Hg, 
HCl, HF, PM, or SO<INF>2</INF> emissions limit in Table 1 or 2 to this 
subpart.
    (ii) You must collect hourly data from auxiliary monitoring systems 
(i.e., stack gas flow rate, CO<INF>2</INF>, O<INF>2</INF>, or moisture, 
as applicable) during the performance test period, in order to convert 
the pollutant concentrations to units of the standard. If you choose to 
comply with an electrical output-based emission limit, you must also 
collect hourly electrical load data during the performance test period.
    (iii) For a group of affected units that are in the same 
subcategory, are subject to the same emission standards, and share a 
common stack, if you elect to demonstrate compliance by monitoring 
emissions at the common stack, startup and shutdown emissions (if any) 
that occur during the 30-(or, if applicable, 90-) boiler operating day 
performance test must either be excluded from or included in the 
compliance demonstration as follows:
    (A) If one of the units that shares the stack either starts up or 
shuts down at a time when none of the other units is operating, you 
must exclude all pollutant emission rates measured during the startup 
or shutdown period, unless you are using a sorbent trap monitoring 
system to measure Hg emissions and have elected to include startup and 
shutdown emissions in the compliance demonstrations;
    (B) If all units that are currently operating are in the startup or 
shutdown mode, you must exclude all pollutant emission rates measured 
during the startup or shutdown period, unless you are using a sorbent 
trap monitoring system to measure Hg emissions and have elected to 
include startup and shutdown emissions in the compliance 
demonstrations; or
    (C) If any unit starts up or shuts down at a time when another unit 
is operating, and the other unit is not in the startup or shutdown 
mode, you must include all pollutant emission rates measured during the 
startup or shutdown period in the compliance demonstrations.
* * * * *

0
6. Section 63.10007 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1), 
redesignating paragraph (f) as paragraph (g), and adding a new 
paragraph (f) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.10007  What methods and other procedures must I use for the 
performance tests?

    (a) * * *
    (1) If you use CEMS (Hg, HCl, SO<INF>2</INF>, or other) to 
determine compliance with a 30- (or, if applicable, 90-) boiler 
operating day rolling average emission limit, you must collect quality- 
assured CEMS data for all unit operating conditions, including startup 
and shutdown (see Sec.  63.10011(g) and Table 3 to this subpart), 
except as otherwise provided in Sec.  63.10020(b). Emission rates 
determined during startup periods and shutdown periods (as defined in 
Sec.  63.10042) are not to be included in the compliance 
determinations, except as otherwise provided in Sec. Sec.  
63.10000(c)(1)(vi)(B) and 63.10005(a)(2)(iii).
* * * * *
    (f) If you elect to (or are required to) use CEMS to continuously 
monitor Hg, HCl, HF, SO<INF>2</INF>, or PM emissions (or, if 
applicable, sorbent trap monitoring systems to continuously collect Hg 
emissions data), the following default values are available for use in 
the emission rate calculations during startup periods or shutdown 
periods (as defined in Sec.  63.10042). For the purposes of this 
subpart, these default values are not considered to be substitute data.
    (1) Diluent cap values. If you use CEMS (or, if applicable, sorbent 
trap monitoring systems) to comply with a heat input-based emission 
rate limit, you may use the following diluent cap values for a startup 
or shutdown hour in which the measured CO<INF>2</INF> concentration is 
below the cap value or the measured O<INF>2</INF> concentration is 
above the cap value:
    (i) For an IGCC EGU, you may use 1% for CO<INF>2</INF> or 19% for 
O<INF>2</INF>.
    (ii) For all other EGUs, you may use 5% for CO<INF>2</INF> or 14% 
for O<INF>2</INF>.
    (2) Default electrical load. If you use CEMS to continuously 
monitor Hg, HCl, HF, SO<INF>2</INF>, or PM emissions (or, if 
applicable, sorbent trap monitoring systems to continuously collect Hg 
emissions data), the following default value is available for use in 
the emission rate calculations during startup periods or shutdown 
periods (as defined in Sec.  63.10042). For the purposes of this 
subpart, this default value is not considered to be substitute data. 
For a startup or shutdown hour in which there is heat input to an 
affected EGU but zero electrical load, you must calculate the pollutant 
emission rate using a value equivalent to 5% of the maximum sustainable 
electrical output, expressed in megawatts, as defined in section 
6.5.2.1(a)(1) of Appendix A to part 75 of this chapter. This default 
electrical load is either the nameplate capacity of the EGU or the 
highest electrical load observed in at least four representative 
quarters of EGU operation. For a monitored common stack, the default 
electrical load is used only when all EGUs are operating (i.e., 
combusting fuel) are in startup or shutdown mode, and have zero 
electrical generation. Under those conditions, a default electrical 
load equal to 5% of the combined maximum sustainable electrical load of 
the EGUs that are operating but have a total of zero electrical load 
must be used to calculate the hourly electrical output-based pollutant 
emissions rate.
* * * * *

0
7. Section 63.10010 is amended by revising paragraph (f)(4) and adding 
paragraph (l) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.10010  What are my monitoring, installation, operation, and 
maintenance requirements?

* * * * *

[[Page 68790]]

    (f) * * *
    (4) Use only unadjusted, quality-assured SO<INF>2</INF> 
concentration values in the emissions calculations; do not apply bias 
adjustment factors to the part 75 SO<INF>2</INF> data and do not use 
part 75 substitute data values. For startup or shutdown hours (as 
defined in Sec.  63.10042) the default electrical load and the diluent 
cap are available for use in the hourly SO<INF>2</INF> emission rate 
calculations, as described in Sec.  63.10007(f). Use a flag to identify 
each startup or shutdown hour and report a special code if the diluent 
cap or default electrical load is used to calculate the SO<INF>2</INF> 
emission rate for any of these hours.
* * * * *
    (l) You must install, certify, operate, maintain, and quality 
assure each monitoring system necessary for demonstrating compliance 
with the PM or non-mercury metals work practice standards for startup 
periods.
    (1) You shall develop a site-specific monitoring plan for PM or 
non-mercury metals work practice monitoring during startup periods.
    (2) You shall submit the site-specific monitoring plan upon request 
by the Administrator.
    (3) The provisions of the monitoring plan must address the 
following items:
    (i) Monitoring system installation;
    (ii) Performance and equipment specifications;
    (iii) Schedule for initial and periodic performance evaluations;
    (iv) Performance evaluation procedures and acceptance criteria;
    (v) On-going operation and maintenance procedures; and
    (vi) On-going recordkeeping and reporting procedures.
    (4) You may rely on monitoring system specifications or 
instructions to address paragraphs (l)(3)(i) through (vi) of this 
section.
    (5) You must operate and maintain the monitoring system according 
to the site-specific monitoring plan.

0
8. Section 63.10011 is amended by revising paragraph (g) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.10011  How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the 
emission limits and work practice standards?

* * * * *
    (g) You must follow the startup or shutdown requirements as given 
in Table 3 to this subpart for each coal-fired, liquid oil-fired, or 
solid oil-derived fuel-fired EGU.
    (1) You may use the diluent cap and default electrical load values, 
as described in Sec.  63.10007(f), during startup periods or shutdown 
periods.
    (2) You must operate all CMS, collect data, calculate pollutant 
emission rates, and record data during startup periods or shutdown 
periods.
    (3) You must report the information as required in Sec.  63.10031.
    (4) If you choose to use paragraph (2) of the definition of 
``startup'' in Sec.  63.10042 and you find that you are unable to 
safely engage and operate your particulate matter (PM) control(s) 
within 1 hour of first firing of coal, residual oil, or solid oil-
derived fuel, you may choose to rely on paragraph (1) of definition of 
``startup'' in Sec.  63.10042 or you may submit a request to use an 
alternative non-opacity emissions standard, as described below.
    (i) As mentioned in Sec.  63.6(g)(1), the request will be published 
in the Federal Register for notice and comment rulemaking. Until 
promulgation in the Federal Register of the final alternative non-
opacity emission standard, you shall comply with paragraph (1) of the 
definition of ``startup'' in Sec.  63.10042. You shall not implement 
the alternative non-opacity emissions standard until promulgation in 
the Federal Register of the final alternative non-opacity emission 
standard.
    (ii) The request need not address the items contained in Sec.  
63.6(g)(2).
    (iii) The request shall provide evidence of a documented 
manufacturer-identified safely issue.
    (iv) The request shall provide information to document that the PM 
control device is adequately designed and sized to meet the PM emission 
limit applicable to the EGU.
    (v) In addition, the request shall contain documentation that:
    (A) The EGU is using clean fuels to the maximum extent possible to 
bring the EGU and PM control device up to the temperature necessary to 
alleviate or prevent the identified safety issues prior to the 
combustion of primary fuel in the EGU;
    (B) The EGU has explicitly followed the manufacturer's procedures 
to alleviate or prevent the identified safety issue; and
    (C) Identifies with specificity the details of the manufacturer's 
statement of concern.
    (vi) The request shall specify the other work practice standards 
the EGU owner or operator will take to limit HAP emissions during 
startup periods and shutdown periods to ensure a control level 
consistent with the work practice standards of the final rule.
    (vii) You must comply with all other work practice requirements, 
including but not limited to data collection, recordkeeping, and 
reporting requirements.

0
9. Section 63.10020 is amended by revising paragraph (c) and adding 
paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.10020  How do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate 
continuous compliance?

* * * * *
    (c) You may not use data recorded during EGU startup or shutdown in 
calculations used to report emissions, except as otherwise provided in 
Sec. Sec.  63.10000(c)(1)(vi)(B) and 63.10005(a)(2)(iii). In addition, 
data recorded during monitoring system malfunctions or monitoring 
system out-of-control periods, repairs associated with monitoring 
system malfunctions or monitoring system out-of-control periods, or 
required monitoring system quality assurance or control activities may 
not be used in calculations used to report emissions or operating 
levels. You must use all of the quality-assured data collected during 
all other periods in assessing the operation of the control device and 
associated control system.
* * * * *
    (e) Additional requirements during startup periods or shutdown 
periods.
    (1) During each period of startup, you must record for each EGU:
    (i) The date and time that clean fuels being combusted for the 
purpose of startup begins;
    (ii) The quantity and heat input of clean fuel for each hour of 
startup;
    (iii) The electrical load for each hour of startup;
    (iv) The date and time that non-clean fuel combustion begins; and
    (v) The date and time that clean fuels being combusted for the 
purpose of startup ends.
    (2) During each period of shutdown, you must record for each EGU:
    (i) The date and time that clean fuels being combusted for the 
purpose of shutdown begins;
    (ii) The quantity and heat input of clean fuel for each hour of 
shutdown;
    (iii) The electrical load for each hour of shutdown;
    (iv) The date and time that non-clean fuel combustion ends; and
    (v) The date and time that clean fuels being combusted for the 
purpose of shutdown ends.
    (3) For PM or non-mercury HAP metals work practice monitoring 
during startup periods, you must monitor and collect data according to 
this section and the site-specific monitoring plan required by Sec.  
63.10011(l).
    (i) Except for an EGU that uses PM CEMS or PM CPMS to demonstrate 
compliance with the PM emissions limit or that has LEE status for 
filterable PM or total non-Hg HAP metals for non-

[[Page 68791]]

liquid oil-fired EGUs (or HAP metals emissions for liquid oil-fired 
EGUs), or individual non-mercury metals CEMS you must:
    (A) Record temperature and flow rate of post-combustion (exhaust) 
gas and amperage of forced draft fan(s) upstream of each filterable PM 
control device during each hour of startup.
    (B) Record temperature and flow rate of exhaust gas and amperage of 
induced draft fan(s) downstream of each filterable control device 
during each hour of startup.
    (C) For an EGU with an electrostatic precipitator, record the 
number of fields in service, as well as each field's secondary voltage 
and secondary current during each hour of startup.
    (D) For an EGU with a fabric filter, record the number of 
compartments in service, as well as the differential pressure across 
the baghouse during each hour of startup.
    (E) For an EGU with a wet scrubber needed for filterable PM 
control, record the scrubber liquid to fuel ratio and the differential 
pressure of the liquid during each hour of startup.
    (ii) [Reserved]

0
10. Section 63.10021 is amended by revising paragraph (h) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.10021  How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the 
emission limitations, operating limits, and work practice standards?

* * * * *
    (h) You must follow the startup or shutdown requirements as given 
in Table 3 to this subpart for each coal-fired, liquid oil-fired, or 
solid oil-derived fuel-fired EGU.
    (1) You may use the diluent cap and default electrical load values, 
as described in Sec.  63.10007(f), during startup periods or shutdown 
periods.
    (2) You must operate all CMS, collect data, calculate pollutant 
emission rates, and record data during startup periods or shutdown 
periods.
    (3) You must report the information as required in Sec.  63.10031.
    (4) You may choose to submit an alternative non-opacity emission 
standard, in accordance with the requirements contained in Sec.  
63.10011(g)(4). Until promulgation in the Federal Register of the final 
alternative non-opacity emission standard, you shall comply with 
paragraph (1) of the definition of ``startup'' in Sec.  63.10042.
* * * * *
0
11. Section 63.10022 is amended by revising the introductory text of 
paragraph (a) and adding paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.10022  How do I demonstrate continuous compliance under the 
emissions averaging provision?

    (a) Following the compliance date, the owner or operator must 
demonstrate compliance with this subpart on a continuous basis by 
meeting the requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this 
section.
* * * * *
    (4) For each existing EGU participating in the emissions averaging 
option, operate in accordance with the startup or shutdown work 
practice requirements given in Table 3 to this subpart.
* * * * *

0
12. Section 63.10030 is amended by revising the introductory text of 
paragraph (e) and adding paragraph (e)(8) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.10030  What notifications must I submit and when?

* * * * *
    (e) When you are required to conduct an initial compliance 
demonstration as specified in Sec.  63.10011(a), you must submit a 
Notification of Compliance Status according to Sec.  63.9(h)(2)(ii). 
The Notification of Compliance Status report must contain all the 
information specified in paragraphs (e)(1) through (8) of this section, 
as applicable.
* * * * *
    (8) Identification of whether you plan to rely on paragraph (1) or 
(2) of the definition of ``startup'' in Sec.  63.10042.
    (i) Should you choose to rely on paragraph (2) of the definition of 
``startup'' in Sec.  63.10042 for your EGU, you shall include a report 
that identifies:
    (A) The original EGU installation date;
    (B) The original EGU design characteristics, including, but not 
limited to, fuel and PM controls;
    (C) Each design PM control device efficiency;
    (D) The design PM emission rate from the EGU in terms of pounds PM 
per MMBtu and pounds PM per hour;
    (E) The design time from start of fuel combustion to necessary 
conditions for each PM control device startup;
    (F) Each design PM control device efficiency upon startup of the PM 
control device;
    (G) The design EGU uncontrolled PM emission rate in terms of pounds 
PM per hour;
    (H) Each change from the original design that did or could have 
changed PM emissions, including, but not limited to, each different 
fuel mix, each revision to each PM control device, and each EGU 
revision, along with the month and year that the change occurred;
    (I) Current EGU PM producing characteristics, including, but not 
limited to, fuel mix and PM controls;
    (J) Current PM emission rate from the EGU in terms of pounds PM per 
MMBtu and pounds per hour;
    (K) Current PM control device efficiency from each PM control 
device;
    (L) Current time from start of fuel combustion to conditions 
necessary for each PM control device startup;
    (M) Current PM control device efficiency upon startup of each PM 
control device; and
    (N) Current EGU uncontrolled PM emission rate in terms of pounds PM 
per hour.
    (ii) The report shall be prepared, signed, and sealed by a 
professional engineer licensed in the state where your EGU is located. 
Apart from preparing, signing, and sealing this report, the 
professional engineer shall be independent and not otherwise employed 
by your company, any parent company of your company, or any subsidiary 
of your company.

0
13. Section 63.10031 is amended by revising the introductory text of 
paragraph (c) and adding paragraph (c)(5) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.10031  What reports must I submit and when?

* * * * *
    (c) The compliance report must contain the information required in 
paragraphs (c)(1) through (5) of this section.
* * * * *
    (5) For each instance of startup or shutdown:
    (i) Include the maximum clean fuel storage capacity and the maximum 
hourly heat input that can be provided for each clean fuel determined 
according to the requirements of Sec.  63.10032(f).
    (ii) Include the information required to be monitored, collected, 
or recorded according to the requirements of Sec.  63.10020(e).
    (iii) If you choose to use CEMS for compliance purposes, include 
hourly average CEMS values and hourly average flow rates. Use units of 
milligrams per cubic meter for PM CEMS, micrograms per cubic meter for 
Hg CEMS, and ppmv for HCl, HF, or SO<INF>2</INF> CEMS. Use units of 
standard cubic meters per hour on a wet basis for flow rates.
    (iv) If you choose to use a separate sorbent trap measurement 
system for startup or shutdown reporting periods, include hourly 
average mercury

[[Page 68792]]

concentration in terms of micrograms per cubic meter.
    (v) If you choose to use a PM CPMS, include hourly average 
operating parameter values in terms of the operating limit, as well as 
the operating parameter to PM correlation equation.
* * * * *

0
14. Section 63.10032 is amended by revising paragraph (f) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.10032  What records must I keep?

* * * * *
    (f) Regarding startup periods or shutdown periods:
    (1) You must keep records of the occurrence and duration of each 
startup or shutdown;
    (2) You must keep records of the determination of the maximum clean 
fuel capacity for each EGU;
    (3) You must keep records of the determination of the maximum 
hourly clean fuel heat input and of the hourly clean fuel heat input 
for each EGU; and
    (4) You must keep records of the information required in Sec.  
63.10020(e).
* * * * *

0
15. In Sec.  63.10042:
0
a. Revise the definitions for ``Boiler operating day,'' ``Shutdown'', 
and ``Startup''; and
0
b. Add in alphabetical order new definitions for ``Clean fuel,'' 
``Default electrical load,'' and ``Diluent cap.''
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  63.10042  What definitions apply to this subpart?

* * * * *
    Boiler operating day means a 24-hour period that begins at midnight 
and ends the following midnight during which any fuel is combusted at 
any time in the EGU, excluding startup periods or shutdown periods. It 
is not necessary for the fuel to be combusted the entire 24-hour 
period.
* * * * *
    Clean fuel means natural gas, synthetic natural gas that meets the 
specification necessary for that gas to be transported on a Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulated pipeline, propane, 
distillate oil, synthesis gas that has been processed through a gas 
clean-up train such that it could be used in a system's combustion 
turbine, or ultra-low-sulfur diesel (ULSD) oil, including those fuels 
meeting the requirements of 40 CFR part 80, subpart I (``Subpart I--
Motor Vehicle Diesel Fuel; Nonroad, Locomotive, and Marine Diesel Fuel; 
and ECA Marine Fuel'').
* * * * *
    Default electrical load means an electrical load equal to 5 percent 
of the maximum sustainable electrical output (megawatts), as defined in 
section 6.5.2.1(a)(1) of Appendix A to part 75 of this chapter, of an 
affected EGU that is in startup or shutdown mode. For monitored common 
stack configurations, the default electrical load is 5 percent of the 
combined maximum sustainable electrical load of the EGUs that are in 
startup or shutdown mode during an hour in which the electrical load 
for all operating EGUs is zero. The default electrical load is used to 
calculate the electrical output-based emission rate (lb/MWh or lb/GWh, 
as applicable) for any startup or shutdown hour in which the actual 
electrical load is zero. The default electrical load is not used for 
EGUs required to make heat input-based emission rate (lb/MMBtu or lb/
TBtu, as applicable) calculations. For the purposes of this subpart, 
the default electrical load is not considered to be a substitute data 
value.
* * * * *
    Diluent cap means a default CO<INF>2</INF> or O<INF>2</INF> 
concentration that may be used to calculate the Hg, HCl, HF, or 
SO<INF>2</INF> emission rate (lb/MMBtu or lb/TBtu, as applicable) 
during a startup or shutdown hour in which the measured CO<INF>2</INF> 
concentration is below the cap value or the measured O<INF>2</INF> 
concentration is above the cap value. The appropriate diluent cap 
values for EGUs are presented in Sec.  63.10007(f) and in section 
6.2.1.2 of Appendix A to this subpart. For the purposes of this 
subpart, the diluent cap is not considered to be a substitute data 
value.
* * * * *
    Shutdown means the period in which cessation of operation of an EGU 
is initiated for any purpose. Shutdown begins when the EGU no longer 
generates electricity or makes useful thermal energy (such as heat or 
steam) for industrial, commercial, heating, or cooling purposes or when 
no coal, liquid oil, syngas, or solid oil-derived fuel is being fired 
in the EGU, whichever is earlier. Shutdown ends when the EGU no longer 
generates electricity or makes useful thermal energy (such as steam or 
heat) for industrial, commercial, heating, or cooling purposes, and no 
fuel is being fired in the EGU. Any fraction of an hour in which 
shutdown occurs constitutes a full hour of shutdown.
    Startup means:
    (1) Either the first-ever firing of fuel in a boiler for the 
purpose of producing electricity, or the firing of fuel in a boiler 
after a shutdown event for any purpose. Startup ends when any of the 
steam from the boiler is used to generate electricity for sale over the 
grid or for any other purpose (including on-site use). Any fraction of 
an hour in which startup occurs constitutes a full hour of startup; or
    (2) The period in which operation of an EGU is initiated for any 
purpose. Startup begins with either the firing of any fuel in an EGU 
for the purpose of producing electricity or useful thermal energy (such 
as heat or steam) for industrial, commercial, heating, or cooling 
purposes (other than the first-ever firing of fuel in a boiler 
following construction of the boiler) or for any other purpose after a 
shutdown event. Startup ends 4 hours after the EGU generates 
electricity that is sold or used for any other purpose (including on 
site use), or 4 hours after the EGU makes useful thermal energy (such 
as heat or steam) for industrial, commercial, heating, or cooling 
purposes (16 U.S.C. 796(18)(A) and 18 CFR 292.202(c)), whichever is 
earlier. Any fraction of an hour in which startup occurs constitutes a 
full hour of startup.
* * * * *

0
16. Revise Table 3 to subpart UUUUU of part 63 to read as follows:

      Table 3 to Subpart UUUUU of Part 63--Work Practice Standards
    [As stated in Sec.   63.9991, you must comply with the following
                  applicable work practice standards:]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     If your EGU is . . .          You must meet the following . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. An existing EGU...........  Conduct a tune-up of the EGU burner and
                                combustion controls at least each 36
                                calendar months, or each 48 calendar
                                months if neural network combustion
                                optimization software is employed, as
                                specified in Sec.   63.10021(e).
2. A new or reconstructed EGU  Conduct a tune-up of the EGU burner and
                                combustion controls at least each 36
                                calendar months, or each 48 calendar
                                months if neural network combustion
                                optimization software is employed, as
                                specified in Sec.   63.10021(e).

[[Page 68793]]

 
3. A coal-fired, liquid oil-   You have the option of complying using
 fired (excluding limited-use   either of the following work practice
 liquid oil-fired subcategory   standards.
 units), or solid oil-derived  (1) If you choose to comply using
 fuel-fired EGU during          paragraph (1) of the definition of
 startup.                       ``startup'' in Sec.   63.10042, you must
                                operate all CMS during startup. Startup
                                means either the first-ever firing of
                                fuel in a boiler for the purpose of
                                producing electricity, or the firing of
                                fuel in a boiler after a shutdown event
                                for any purpose. Startup ends when any
                                of the steam from the boiler is used to
                                generate electricity for sale over the
                                grid or for any other purpose (including
                                on site use). For startup of a unit, you
                                must use clean fuels as defined in Sec.
                                 63.10042 for ignition. Once you convert
                                to firing coal, residual oil, or solid
                                oil-derived fuel, you must engage all of
                                the applicable control technologies
                                except dry scrubber and SCR. You must
                                start your dry scrubber and SCR systems,
                                if present, appropriately to comply with
                                relevant standards applicable during
                                normal operation. You must comply with
                                all applicable emissions limits at all
                                times except for periods that meet the
                                applicable definitions of startup and
                                shutdown in this subpart. You must keep
                                records during startup periods. You must
                                provide reports concerning activities
                                and startup periods, as specified in
                                Sec.   63.10011(g) and Sec.
                                63.10021(h) and (i).
                               (2) If you choose to comply using
                                paragraph (2) of the definition of
                                ``startup'' in Sec.   63.10042, you must
                                operate all CMS during startup. You must
                                also collect appropriate data, and you
                                must calculate the pollutant emission
                                rate for each hour of startup.
                               For startup of an EGU, you must use one
                                or a combination of the clean fuels
                                defined in Sec.   63.10042 to the
                                maximum extent possible throughout the
                                startup period. You must have sufficient
                                clean fuel capacity to engage and
                                operate your PM control device within
                                one hour of adding coal, residual oil,
                                or solid oil-derived fuel to the unit.
                                You must meet the startup period work
                                practice requirements as identified in
                                Sec.   63.10020(e).
                               Once you start firing coal, residual oil,
                                or solid oil-derived fuel, you must vent
                                emissions to the main stack(s). You must
                                comply with the applicable emission
                                limits within 4 hours of start of
                                electricity generation. You must engage
                                and operate your particulate matter
                                control(s) within 1 hour of first firing
                                of coal, residual oil, or solid oil-
                                derived fuel.
                               You must start all other applicable
                                control devices as expeditiously as
                                possible, considering safety and
                                manufacturer/supplier recommendations,
                                but, in any case, when necessary to
                                comply with other standards made
                                applicable to the EGU by a permit limit
                                or a rule other than this Subpart that
                                require operation of the control
                                devices.
                               Relative to the syngas not fired in the
                                combustion turbine of an IGCC EGU during
                                startup, you must either: (1) flare the
                                syngas, or (2) route the syngas to duct
                                burners, which may need to be installed,
                                and route the flue gas from the duct
                                burners to the heat recovery steam
                                generator.
                               If you choose to use just one set of
                                sorbent traps to demonstrate compliance
                                with Hg emission limits, you must comply
                                with all applicable Hg emission limits
                                at all times; otherwise, you must comply
                                with all applicable emission limits at
                                all times except for startup or shutdown
                                periods conforming to this practice. You
                                must collect monitoring data during
                                startup periods, as specified in Sec.
                                63.10020(a) and (e). You must keep
                                records during startup periods, as
                                provided in Sec.  Sec.   63.10032 and
                                63.10021(h). Any fraction of an hour in
                                which startup occurs constitutes a full
                                hour of startup. You must provide
                                reports concerning activities and
                                startup periods, as specified in Sec.
                                Sec.   63.10011(g), 63.10021(i), and
                                63.10031.
4. A coal-fired, liquid oil-   You must operate all CMS during shutdown.
 fired (excluding limited-use   You must also collect appropriate data,
 liquid oil-fired subcategory   and you must calculate the pollutant
 units), or solid oil-derived   emission rate for each hour of shutdown.
 fuel-fired EGU during         While firing coal, residual oil, or solid
 shutdown.                      oil-derived fuel during shutdown, you
                                must vent emissions to the main stack(s)
                                and operate all applicable control
                                devices and continue to operate those
                                control devices after the cessation of
                                coal, residual oil, or solid oil-derived
                                fuel being fed into the EGU and for as
                                long as possible thereafter considering
                                operational and safety concerns. In any
                                case, you must operate your controls
                                when necessary to comply with other
                                standards made applicable to the EGU by
                                a permit limit or a rule other than this
                                Subpart and that require operation of
                                the control devices.
                               If, in addition to the fuel used prior to
                                initiation of shutdown, another fuel
                                must be used to support the shutdown
                                process, that additional fuel must be
                                one or a combination of the clean fuels
                                defined in Sec.   63.10042 and must be
                                used to the maximum extent possible.
                               Relative to the syngas not fired in the
                                combustion turbine of an IGCC EGU during
                                shutdown, you must either: (1) flare the
                                syngas, or (2) route the syngas to duct
                                burners, which may need to be installed,
                                and route the flue gas from the duct
                                burners to the heat recovery steam
                                generator.
                               You must comply with all applicable
                                emission limits at all times except
                                during startup periods and shutdown
                                periods at which time you must meet this
                                work practice. You must collect
                                monitoring data during shutdown periods,
                                as specified in Sec.   63.10020(a). You
                                must keep records during shutdown
                                periods, as provided in Sec.  Sec.
                                63.10032 and 63.10021(h). Any fraction
                                of an hour in which shutdown occurs
                                constitutes a full hour of shutdown. You
                                must provide reports concerning
                                activities and shutdown periods, as
                                specified in Sec.  Sec.   63.10011(g),
                                63.10021(i), and 63.10031.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 68794]]


0
17. Revise Table 9 to subpart UUUUU of part 63 to read as follows:

            Table 9 to Subpart UUUUU of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart UUUUU
     [As stated in Sec.   63.10040, you must comply with the applicable General Provisions according to the
                                                   following]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Citation                             Subject                     Applies to subpart UUUUU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.   63.1...........................  Applicability.................  Yes.
Sec.   63.2...........................  Definitions...................  Yes. Additional terms defined in Sec.
                                                                         63.10042.
Sec.   63.3...........................  Units and Abbreviations.......  Yes.
Sec.   63.4...........................  Prohibited Activities and       Yes.
                                         Circumvention.
Sec.   63.5...........................  Preconstruction Review and      Yes.
                                         Notification Requirements.
Sec.   63.6(a), (b)(1)-(5), (b)(7),     Compliance with Standards and   Yes.
 (c), (f)(2)-(3), (h)(2)-(9), (i), (j).  Maintenance Requirements.
Sec.   63.6(e)(1)(i)..................  General Duty to minimize        No. See Sec.   63.10000(b) for general
                                         emissions.                      duty requirement.
Sec.   63.6(e)(1)(ii).................  Requirement to correct          No.
                                         malfunctions ASAP.
Sec.   63.6(e)(3).....................  SSM Plan requirements.........  No.
Sec.   63.6(f)(1).....................  SSM exemption.................  No.
Sec.   63.6(h)(1).....................  SSM exemption.................  No.
Sec.   63.6(g)........................  Compliance with Standards and   Yes. See Sec.  Sec.   63.10011(g)(4) and
                                         Maintenance Requirements, Use   63.10021(h)(4) for additional
                                         of an alternative non-opacity   requirements.
                                         emission standard.
Sec.   63.7(e)(1).....................  Performance testing...........  No. See Sec.   63.10007.
Sec.   63.8...........................  Monitoring Requirements.......  Yes.
Sec.   63.8(c)(1)(i)..................  General duty to minimize        No. See Sec.   63.10000(b) for general
                                         emissions and CMS operation.    duty requirement.
Sec.   63.8(c)(1)(iii)................  Requirement to develop SSM      No.
                                         Plan for CMS.
Sec.   63.8(d)(3).....................  Written procedures for CMS....  Yes, except for last sentence, which
                                                                         refers to an SSM plan. SSM plans are
                                                                         not required.
Sec.   63.9...........................  Notification Requirements.....  Yes.
Sec.   63.10(a), (b)(1), (c), (d)(1)-   Recordkeeping and Reporting     Yes, except for the requirements to
 (2), (e), and (f).                      Requirements.                   submit written reports under Sec.
                                                                         63.10(e)(3)(v).
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(i).................  Recordkeeping of occurrence     No.
                                         and duration of startups and
                                         shutdowns.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(ii)................  Recordkeeping of malfunctions.  No. See Sec.   63.10001 for
                                                                         recordkeeping of (1) occurrence and
                                                                         duration and (2) actions taken during
                                                                         malfunction.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(iii)...............  Maintenance records...........  Yes.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(iv)................  Actions taken to minimize       No.
                                         emissions during SSM.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(v).................  Actions taken to minimize       No.
                                         emissions during SSM.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(vi)................  Recordkeeping for CMS           Yes.
                                         malfunctions.
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(vii)-(ix)..........  Other CMS requirements........  Yes.
Sec.   63.10(b)(3), and (d)(3)-(5)....  ..............................  No.
Sec.   63.10(c)(7)....................  Additional recordkeeping        Yes.
                                         requirements for CMS--
                                         identifying exceedances and
                                         excess emissions.
Sec.   63.10(c)(8)....................  Additional recordkeeping        Yes.
                                         requirements for CMS--
                                         identifying exceedances and
                                         excess emissions.
Sec.   63.10(c)(10)...................  Recording nature and cause of   No. See Sec.   63.10032(g) and (h) for
                                         malfunctions.                   malfunctions recordkeeping
                                                                         requirements.
Sec.   63.10(c)(11)...................  Recording corrective actions..  No. See Sec.   63.10032(g) and (h) for
                                                                         malfunctions recordkeeping
                                                                         requirements.
Sec.   63.10(c)(15)...................  Use of SSM Plan...............  No.
Sec.   63.10(d)(5)....................  SSM reports...................  No. See Sec.   63.10021(h) and (i) for
                                                                         malfunction reporting requirements.
Sec.   63.11..........................  Control Device Requirements...  No.
Sec.   63.12..........................  State Authority and Delegation  Yes.
Sec.  Sec.   63.13-63.16..............  Addresses, Incorporation by     Yes.
                                         Reference, Availability of
                                         Information, Performance
                                         Track Provisions.
Sec.  Sec.   63.1(a)(5), (a)(7)-(9),    Reserved......................  No.
 (b)(2), (c)(3)-(4), (d), 63.6(b)(6),
 (c)(3), (c)(4), (d), (e)(2),
 (e)(3)(ii), (h)(3), (h)(5)(iv),
 63.8(a)(3), 63.9(b)(3), (h)(4),
 63.10(c)(2)-(4), (c)(9).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 68795]]


0
18. Appendix A to subpart UUUUU is amended by adding sections 7.1.2.5, 
7.1.8.5, and 7.1.8.6, to read as follows:

Appendix A to Subpart UUUUU of Part 63--Hg Monitoring Provisions

* * * * *
    7. Recordkeeping and Reporting
* * * * *
    7.1.2 Operating Parameter Records. * * *
* * * * *
    7.1.2.5 If applicable, a flag to indicate that the hour is a 
startup or shutdown hour (as defined in Sec.  63.10042).
* * * * *
    7.1.8 Hg Emission Rate Records. * * *
* * * * *
    7.1.8.5 If applicable, a code to indicate that the default 
electrical load (as defined in Sec.  63.10042) was used to calculate 
the Hg emission rate.
    7.1.8.6 If applicable, a code to indicate that the diluent cap (as 
defined in Sec.  63.10042) was used to calculate the Hg emission rate.
* * * * *
0
19. Appendix B to subpart UUUUU is amended by revising section 9.3.1 
and adding sections 10.1.2.5, 10.1.7.5, and 10.1.7.6 to read as 
follows:

Appendix B to Subpart UUUUU of Part 63---HCl and HF Monitoring 
Provisions

* * * * *
    9. Data Reduction and Calculations
* * * * *
    9.3.1 For heat input-based emission rates, select an appropriate 
emission rate equation from among Equations 19-1 through 19-9 in EPA 
Method 19 in Appendix A-7 to part 60 of this chapter, to calculate the 
HCl or HF emission rate in lb/MMBtu. Multiply the HCl concentration 
value (ppm) by 9.43 x 10<SUP>-8</SUP> to convert it to lb/scf, for use 
in the applicable Method 19 equation. For HF, the conversion constant 
from ppm to lb/scf is 5.18 x 10<SUP>-8</SUP>. The appropriate diluent 
cap value from section 6.2.1.2 of Appendix A to this subpart may be 
used to calculate the HCl or HF emission rate (lb/MMBtu) during startup 
or shutdown hours.
* * * * *
    10. Recordkeeping Requirements
* * * * *
    10.1.2 Operating Parameter Records. * * *
* * * * *
    10.1.2.5 If applicable, a flag to indicate that the hour is a 
startup or shutdown hour (as defined in Sec.  63.10042).
* * * * *
    10.1.7 HCl and HF Emission Rate Records. * * *
* * * * *
    10.1.7.5 If applicable, a code to indicate that the default 
electrical load (as defined in Sec.  63.10042) was used to calculate 
the HCl or HF emission rate.
    10.1.7.6 If applicable, a code to indicate that the diluent cap (as 
defined in Sec.  63.10042) was used to calculate the HCl or HF emission 
rate.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-27125 Filed 11-18-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


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