National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters, 62264-62275 [05-21531]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 209 (Monday, October 31, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 62264-62275]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21531]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[OAR-2002-0056; FRL-7990-2]
RIN 2060-AN32


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 
Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of reconsideration of final rule; 
proposed amendments.

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

SUMMARY: On September 13, 2004, EPA promulgated national emission 
standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for industrial, 
commercial, and institutional boilers and process heaters. In this 
action, EPA is proposing a limited number of amendments to the NESHAP. 
In response to a petition for reconsideration, EPA is proposing and

[[Page 62265]]

requesting comment on an amendment allowing for consolidated testing of 
commonly vented boilers under the emission averaging provision. In 
addition, EPA is proposing amendments and technical corrections to the 
final rule to clarify some applicability and implementation issues 
raised by stakeholders subject to the final rule.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before December 15, 
2005.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts EPA requesting to speak at a 
public hearing by November 10, 2005, a public hearing will be held on 
November 15, 2005. For further information on the public hearing and 
requests to speak, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. 
OAR-2002-0058 (Legacy Docket ID No. A-96-47) by one of the following 
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Agency Web site: https://www.epa.gov/docket. EDOCKET, EPA's 
electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred method 
for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting 
comments.
     E-mail: a-and-rdocket@epa.gov.
     Fax: (202) 566-1741.
     Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and Information. Center, 
U.S. EPA, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, 
DC 20460.
     Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation Docket and Information 
Center, U.S. EPA, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 
DC. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours 
of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information.
    Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. OAR-2022-0058 
(Legacy Docket ID No. A-96-47). The EPA's policy is that all comments 
received will be included in the public docket without change and may 
be made available online at https://www/epa.gov/edocket, including any 
personal information provided, unless the comment includes information 
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit 
information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through 
EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the Federal 
regulations.gov websites are ``anonymous access'' systems, which means 
that EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you 
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment 
directly to EPA without going through EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your 
e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of 
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on 
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that 
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your 
comment and with any disk or CD ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic 
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of 
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held on 
November 15, 2005 at the EPA facility, Research Triangle Park, NC, or 
an alternative site nearby. Persons interested in attending the hearing 
or wishing to present oral testimony should notify Ms. Pamela Garrett 
at least 2 days in advance of the public hearing (see FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble). The public hearing will 
provide interested parties the opportunity to present data, views, or 
arguments concerning this notice.
    Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for today's 
notice, including both Docket ID No. OAR-2002-0058 and Legacy Docket ID 
No. A-96-47. The official public docket consists of the documents 
specifically referenced in today's notice, any public comments 
received, and other information related to the notice. All items may 
not be listed under both docket numbers, so interested parties should 
inspect both docket numbers to ensure that they have received all 
materials relevant to today's notice. Although listed in the index, 
some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other 
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet 
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly 
available docket materials are available either electronically in 
EDOCKET or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information 
Center, U.S. EPA, Room B102, 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 
Pubic Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the 
Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general and technical information, 
contact Mr. James Eddinger, Combustion Group, Emission Standards 
Division, Mailcode: C439-01, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 
27711; telephone number (919) 541-5426; fax number: (919) 541-5450; e-
mail address: eddinger.jim@epa.gov. For questions about the public 
hearing, contact Ms. Pamela Garrett, Combustion Group, Emission 
Standards Division, Mailcode: C439-01, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle 
Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-7966; e-mail address: 
garrett.pamela@epa.gov.

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

I. General Information
    A. Does this notice apply to me?
    B. How do I submit CBI?
    C. How do I obtain a copy of this document and other related 
information?
II. Background
III. Today's Action
IV. Reconsideration of Emissions Averaging Provision
V. Proposed Clarifying Amendments and Technical Corrections
    A. What clarifications are proposed to the definitions?
    B. What are the proposed corrections?
    C. What are the impacts associated with the amendments?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultations and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

I. General Information

A. Does this notice apply to me?

    Categories and entities potentially affected by today's notice 
include:

[[Page 62266]]



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                               Examples of potentially regulated
                 Category                    SIC  code \a\   NAICS  code \b\               entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Any industry using a boiler or process                   24              321  Manufacturers of lumber and wood
 heater as defined in the final rule.                                          products.
                                                         26              322  Pulp and paper mills.
                                                         28              325  Chemical manufacturers.
                                                         29              324  Petroleum refineries, and
                                                                               manufacturers of coal products.
                                                         30    316, 326, 339  Manufacturers of rubber and
                                                                               miscellaneous plastic products.
                                                         33              331  Steel works.
                                                         34              332  Electroplating, plating,
                                                                               polishing, anodizing, and
                                                                               coloring.
                                                         37              336  Manufacturers of motor vehicle
                                                                               parts and accessories.
                                                         49              221  Electric, gas, and sanitary
                                                                               services.
                                                         80              622  Health services.
                                                         82              611  Educational services.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Standard Industrial Classification.
\b\ North American Industrial Classification System.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by today's 
notice. To determine whether your facility is affected by today's 
notice, you should examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 63.7485 
of the final rule. If you have questions regarding the applicability of 
today's notice to a particular entity, consult Mr. Jim Eddinger listed 
in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

B. How do I submit CBI?

    Do not submit this information to EPA through EDOCKET, 
regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the 
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI in a disk or CD ROM that 
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then 
identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific 
information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to the one complete 
version of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy 
of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI 
must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so 
marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set 
forth in 40 CFR part 2.

C. How do I obtain a copy of this document and other related 
information?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of 
today's notice also will be available on the World Wide Web (WWW) 
through EPA's Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following the 
Administrator's signature, a copy of this notice will be posted on the 
TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed rules at https://www/
epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information and technology exchange 
in various areas of air pollution control.

II. Background

    On September 13, 2004 (69 FR 55218), we promulgated the NESHAP for 
industrial, commercial, and institutional boilers and process heaters 
as subpart DDDDD of 40 CFR part 63. In accordance with section 112(d) 
of the Clean Air Act (CAA), the NESHAP contains technology-based 
emissions standards reflecting the maximum achievable control 
technology (MACT) and health-based compliance alternative for certain 
threshold pollutants. We proposed these standards for industrial, 
commercial, and institutional boilers and process heaters on January 
13, 2003 (68 FR 1660).
    In the preamble for the proposed rule, we discussed our 
consideration of a bubbling compliance alternative and requested 
comment on incorporating a bubbling compliance alternative (i.e., 
emission averaging) into the final rule as part of EPA's general policy 
of encouraging the use of flexible compliance approaches where they can 
be properly monitored and enforced. (See 68 FR 1686.) Industry trade 
associations, owners/operators of boilers and process heaters, State 
regulatory agencies, local government agencies, and environmental 
groups submitted comments on the emissions averaging approach. We 
received a total of 40 public comment letters regarding the emissions 
averaging approach in the proposed rule during the comment period. We 
summarized major public comments on the proposed emissions averaging 
approach, along with our responses to those comments, in the preamble 
to the final rule (69 FR 55238) and in the comment response memorandum 
``Response to Public Comments on Proposed Industrial, Commercial, and 
Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters NESHAP (Revised) (RTC 
Memorandum) that was placed in the docket for the final rule.
    In the final rule, we adopted an emissions averaging provision for 
existing large solid fuel boilers. The procedures that affected sources 
must use to demonstrate compliance through emissions averaging were 
promulgated in 40 CFR 63.7522. (See 69 FR 55257.) For each existing 
large solid fuel boiler in the averaging group, the emissions are 
capped at the emission level being achieved on the effective date of 
the final rule (November 12, 2004). Under emissions averaging, 
compliance must be demonstrated on a 12-month rolling average basis, 
determined at the end of every calendar month. If a facility uses this 
option, it must also develop and submit an implementation plan to the 
applicable regulatory authority for review and approval no later than 
180 days before the date that the facility intends to demonstrate 
compliance.
    Following promulgation of the final rule, the Administrator 
received petitions for reconsideration pursuant to section 307(d)(7)(B) 
of the CAA from General Electric (GE), the Natural Resources Defense 
Council (NRDC), and Environmental Integrity Project (EIP).\1\

[[Page 62267]]

Under this section, the Administrator is to initiate reconsideration 
proceedings if the petitioner can show that it was impracticable to 
raise an objection to a rule within the public comment period or that 
the grounds for the objection arose after the public comment period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In addition to the petitions for reconsideration, two 
petitions for judicial review of the final rule were filed with the 
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia by NRDC, Sierra 
Club, and EIP (No. 04-1385, D.C. Cir.) and American Municipal 
Power--Ohio and the Ohio cities of Dover, Hamilton, Orrville, 
Painesville, Shelby, and St. Marys (No. 04-1386, D.C. Cir.). The two 
cases have been consolidated. Eleven additional parties have filed 
petitions to intervene: American Home Furnishings Alliance, Council 
of Industrial Boiler Owners, American Forest and Paper Association, 
American Chemistry Council, National Petrochemical and Refiners 
Association, American Petroleum Institute, National Oilseed 
Processors Association, Coke Oven Environmental Task Force, Utility 
Air Regulatory Group, and Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers are 
intervening with regard to the health-based compliance alternatives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    GE requested that EPA reconsider portions of the emissions 
averaging provision that it believes could not have been practicably 
addressed during the public comment period. In the alternative, GE 
requested clarification that the final rule already allows for 
consolidated testing of commonly vented boilers.
    By a letter dated April 27, 2005, we informed GE that we intended 
to grant their petition for reconsideration. We indicated in that 
letter that we would respond to the petition by publishing this notice 
of proposed rulemaking.

III. Today's Action

    Today, we are granting reconsideration of the issue raised in the 
GE petition for reconsideration. We agree that it was impracticable for 
GE to raise its concern about implementation of the emissions averaging 
provision until after the public comment period when the final 
regulatory text was promulgated. Although we believe we provided 
adequate notice and opportunity to comment on the emissions averaging 
alternative, the specific regulatory text in 40 CFR 63.7522 was not 
included in the notice of proposed rulemaking. Thus, we believe it is 
appropriate to grant reconsideration to provide the public with the 
opportunity to comment on how the emissions averaging alternative can 
be applied to sources where boilers and process heaters are vented to 
common stacks. As a result, we are requesting comment on this issue and 
a proposed amendment to 40 CFR 63.7522 that would clarify the emissions 
averaging provision and allow consolidated testing of commonly vented 
boilers.
    In a separate notice, we have granted reconsideration of several of 
the issues raised in the NRDC and EIP petition for reconsideration. 
(See 70 FR 36907, June 27, 2005.) In that notice, we requested comment 
on provisions in appendix A of subpart DDDDD and the health-based 
compliance alternative for total selected metals reflected in 40 CFR 
63.7507(b).
    Also, today we are proposing amendments to the final rule to 
address several issues that were raised related to applicability and 
implementation of the requirements in subpart DDDDD of 40 CFR part 63. 
The proposed amendments to the final rule address these issues, correct 
other inconsistencies that were discovered following promulgation, and 
clarify some common applicability questions.

IV. Reconsideration of Emissions Averaging Provision

    Through today's notice, we request comments on how the emissions 
averaging compliance alternative should be implemented when boilers are 
vented to common stack and on the proposed amendment to 40 CFR 63.7522 
addressing consolidated testing of commonly vented existing solid fuel 
boilers. Stakeholders who would like for us to reconsider comments 
relevant to this issue that they submitted to us previously should 
identify the relevant docket entry numbers and page numbers of their 
comments to facilitate expeditious review during the reconsideration 
process.

1. Background

    In the notice of proposed rulemaking, we described approaches that 
we might use to implement an emissions averaging compliance 
alternative. (See 68 FR 1686.) We discussed an emissions averaging 
option that would allow owners and operators to set emissions limits 
for each existing boiler in the same subcategory such that if these 
limits are met, the total emissions from all existing boilers in the 
subcategory would be less than or equal to the proposed emissions limit 
for the subcategory. In addition, we also discussed that the emissions 
averaging option would not be applicable to new sources and could only 
be used between boilers in the same subcategory. We solicited comments 
on the emissions averaging option and whether EPA should include the 
emissions averaging option in the final rule.
    In the final rule, we included an emissions averaging provision 
because we agreed with commenters that emissions averaging represents 
an equivalent, more flexible, and less costly alternative to 
controlling certain emission points to MACT levels. We also recognized 
that we must ensure that any emissions averaging option can be 
implemented and enforced, will be clear to sources, and most 
importantly, will achieve no less emissions reductions than unit by 
unit implementation of the MACT requirements.
    The emissions averaging provision in the final rule requires each 
facility that intends to utilize emissions averaging to submit an 
implementation plan for emissions averaging to the applicable 
regulatory authority for review and approval. In this implementation 
plan, the facility must include the identification of: (1) All units in 
the averaging group; (2) the control technology installed; (3) the 
process parameter that will be monitored; (4) the specific control 
technology or pollution prevention measure to be used; (5) the test 
plan for the measurement of particulate matter (or selected total 
metals), hydrogen chloride, or mercury emissions; and (6) the operating 
parameters to be monitored for each control device. The regulatory 
authority will not approve emission averaging plans containing 
averaging between emissions of different types of pollutants, averaging 
between sources in different subcategories, or averaging that includes 
new sources or unaffected sources.
    In the final rule, we established procedures for demonstrating 
compliance by emissions averaging and codified them in 40 CFR 63.7522. 
The preamble to the final rule also contained a summary of our response 
to significant comments. (See 69 FR 55238.)
    GE's concerns regarding the emissions averaging provision relate to 
the manner in which testing must be conducted to demonstrate 
compliance. They believe the final rule could be read to impose 
unreasonable limitations on the use of emissions averaging because the 
equations used to demonstrate compliance employ a variable defined as 
the emission rate for each boiler. GE is requesting that we reconsider 
that the final rule be amended to allow the source to conduct one test 
on a group of boilers that vents through a common stack rather than to 
require individual tests on each boiler. In the alternative, GE also 
requested clarification that the rule already allows for consolidated 
testing of commonly vented boilers.

2. Proposed Action and Request for Comment

    We agree that the current language in the emissions averaging 
options requires testing of each individual boiler in the averaging 
group. However, our intent with regard to the emissions averaging 
option in the final rule was to provide an equivalent, more flexible, 
and less costly compliance alternative. Since testing emissions from a 
common stack for a group of boilers would be equivalent to the average 
emissions calculated from emissions tests on each individual boiler, we 
are proposing to allow testing of emissions at the common stack under 
specified situations. Specifically, we are

[[Page 62268]]

proposing to allow testing of a common stack only for the situations 
where each of the units vented to the common stack are in the existing 
solid fuel subcategory. This is because the emissions averaging 
provision in 40 CFR 63.7522 is only applicable to existing large solid 
fuel boilers. Therefore, testing of a common stack in these situations 
will result in demonstrating the average emissions from this particular 
averaging group of boilers, just as if each boiler was tested 
individually and their emissions averaged.
    Allowing the testing of a common stack for only these specific 
situations also satisfies the criteria discussed in the preamble to the 
final rule (69 FR 55239) that EPA has generally imposed on the scope 
and nature of emissions averaging programs. These criteria include: (1) 
No averaging between different types of pollutants, (2) no averaging 
between sources that are not part of the same major source, (3) no 
averaging between sources within the same major source that are not 
subject to the same NESHAP, and (4) no averaging between existing 
sources and new sources. The proposed amendment fully satisfies each of 
these criteria.
    GE is seeking clarification on two different common stack 
situations. In one situation, the exhaust from three existing large 
solid fuel boilers are combined and vented through a common emissions 
control system to a common stack. In the other situation, the exhaust 
from two existing large solid fuel boilers are each individually 
controlled prior to being vented to a common stack.
    In the proposed regulatory provisions set forth below, we propose 
to treat a group of boilers that vents through a common emissions 
control system to a common stack as a single existing solid fuel boiler 
for purposes of subpart DDDDD. The common control situation is more of 
an applicability issue. This common control issue has been addressed in 
past rulemakings (e.g., Standard of Performance for Primary Aluminum 
Reduction Plants, 40 CFR 60.190) where the affected source was defined 
as an uncontrolled unit, unit which is controlled individually, or a 
group of units ducted to a common control system. A group of similar 
units ducted through a common control system would be determined to be 
a single controlled source for the purpose of demonstrating compliance. 
Thus, we are proposing this amendment to address and clarify 
applicability and implementation issues.
    However, we propose a slightly different approach for averaging 
groups that vent to a common stack through more than one emissions 
control system. These distinct approaches are necessary to ensure that 
a source with more than one emissions control system can demonstrate 
continuous compliance at each emissions control system.
    Where a group of boilers vents to a common stack through more than 
one emission control system, continuous compliance will be demonstrated 
according to the methods specified in table 8 to subpart DDDDD. If each 
of the boilers venting to the common stack have an applicable opacity 
operating limit, then a single continuous opacity monitoring system 
(COMS) may be located in the common stack instead of each duct to the 
common stack. If any of the boilers venting to the common stack do not 
have an applicable opacity operating limit, then the appropriate 
operating limit in tables 2 through 4 to subpart DDDDD that applies to 
each boiler must be met.
    Testing of the common stack must be conducted when each boiler is 
operated under representative testing conditions as specified in the 
National Stack Testing Guidance issued by EPA on February 2, 2004.
    In addition, we are proposing that the common stack situations 
described above may be treated as a separate single emission point for 
purpose of including in a larger emissions averaging group with other 
existing large solid fuel boilers located at the facility.
    We are not requesting comment on other aspects of the emissions 
averaging provision.

V. Proposed Clarifying Amendments and Technical Corrections

    We identified minor drafting errors and inadvertent omissions after 
promulgation of the industrial boiler and process heater NESHAP. Thus, 
in addition to reconsidering the issue discussed above, we are 
proposing to make the following definition clarifications and 
corrections to 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDD.

A. What clarifications are proposed to the definitions?

    We are proposing to insert the word ``other'' in the definitions in 
40 CFR 63.7575 for ``small gaseous fuel subcategory'' and ``small 
liquid fuel subcategory,'' in order to make these definitions 
consistent with the definition for ``small solid fuel subcategory.'' 
This omission has caused confusion in determining the applicability of 
firetube boilers with heat input capacities greater than 10 million 
British thermal units (Btu) per hour.
    In addition, we are proposing to amend the definitions in 40 CFR 
63.7575 for ``large gaseous fuel subcategory,'' ``large liquid fuel 
subcategory,'' and ``large solid fuel subcategory'' to make them 
consistent with the definitions in 40 CFR 63.7575 for the various 
``limited use'' subcategories. We are proposing to replace the phrase 
``has an annual capacity factor of greater than 10 percent'' with the 
phrase ``does not have a federally enforceable annual average capacity 
factor of equal to or less than 10 percent'' to clarify that only large 
units having a permit limitation on their annual average capacity 
factor of 10 percent or less are considered in the limited use 
subcategories.
    We are also proposing to amend the definitions of ``firetube 
boiler'' and ``watertube boiler'' in 40 CFR 63.7575 to address boilers 
designed with both firetubes and watertubes, commonly referred to as 
``hybrid boilers.'' EPA is aware of three ``hybrid boiler'' designs: 
(1) Watertube boilers that incorporate a secondary firetube section to 
extract additional heat from the combustion gases; (2) firetube boilers 
designed with watertubes that function to improve the operation and 
efficiency of the firetube boiler, not to increase steam generating 
capacity; and (3) boilers designed with both firetubes and watertubes, 
in which both the firetubes and watertubes function for the purpose of 
steam generation.
    We are proposing to classify watertube boilers that incorporate 
firetubes for additional heat recovery as watertube boilers for the 
purpose of the final rule since the unit combustion zone incorporates a 
watertube design. As discussed in the proposal (68 FR 1671), it is the 
design of the boiler's combustion zone that will influence the 
formation of organic hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emissions and was 
one of the bases for creating the subcategories.
    We are proposing to treat firetube boilers that are designed with 
watertubes that function for purposes other than for steam generation, 
for example to reduce maintenance, enhance efficiency, reduce 
emissions, or increase fuel flexibility as firetube boilers for the 
purpose of the final rule since the unit combustion zone incorporates a 
firetube design. Again, it is the design of the boiler's combustion 
zone that will influence the formation of organic HAP emissions and was 
one of the bases for creating the subcategories.
    EPA is aware that there may be other hybrid designs that are not 
specifically

[[Page 62269]]

addressed by the amended definitions we are proposing today. 
Applicability determinations for designs other than those described 
above should be addressed on a case-by-case basis.
    We are also proposing to add in 40 CFR 63.7575 a definition for the 
term ``equivalent,'' as this term is used in table 6 to subpart DDDDD, 
to address questions concerning what types of test methods are 
considered equivalent. In addition, there is some confusion regarding 
how the term ``equivalent,'' as used in table 6 to subpart DDDDD, is 
different from the terms ``alternative analytical method'' used in 40 
CFR 63.7521 and ``alternative test method,'' as defined in 40 CFR 63.2 
of the MACT General Provisions. This has raised the question of whether 
the definitions of intermediate, major, and minor changes to a test 
method in 40 CFR 63.90, apply in determining delegable authorities. The 
answer is that EPA intended for the determination of ``equivalent'' for 
table 6 to subpart DDDDD purposes, to be a category I authority, 
potentially delegable to the State. However, EPA neglected to clearly 
convey that message or provide a clear definition of ``equivalent'' for 
table 6 to subpart DDDDD purposes to assure national consistency. 
Because there are a large number of fuel types it is not practical to 
identify and list all acceptable (equivalent) combinations of methods 
and fuels in table 6 to subpart DDDDD. We do believe, however, that if 
we make mandatory the use of a voluntary consensus standard (VCS) or 
EPA method that states it is intended to at least match the fuel matrix 
(solid, liquid, or gas) central to the definition of equivalent (for 
table 6 to subpart DDDDD), then this can be a category I delegable 
authority. A negative finding of equivalent would then invoke the 
definitions of minor, intermediate, or major changes to a test method. 
Following this logic, we have developed a definition of ``equivalent'' 
to determine if an alternate fuel analysis procedure is equivalent for 
table 6 to subpart DDDDD purposes. An alternative is any deviation or 
modification from the published VCS or EPA method as written. These 
must be specifically noted and the need or reason for the alternative 
explained. In general, alternatives that are necessary or improve the 
data quality will be given priority review while those of convenience 
only will be reviewed as time permits. Because of the potential for a 
large number of sample analysis plans containing equivalent and 
alternative methods and procedures, we encourage the applicant to 
clearly denote alternative requests from equivalent requests and to 
provide a complete rationale in order to expedite review.

B. What are the proposed corrections?

    A list of boilers and process heaters that are not subject to 
subpart DDDDD of 40 CFR part 63 are contained in 40 CFR 63.791. As 
stated in the proposal preamble, our intention was to exempt from the 
final rule any units that are already or will be subject to regulation 
for HAP under another standard. (See 69 FR 1663.) In terms of electric 
utility steam generating units, regulations for HAP were only under 
development at proposal and promulgation of subpart DDDDD of 40 CFR 
part 63 and, therefore, we were unable to cite the exemption for 
electric utility steam generating units to a specific regulation. The 
exemption cited in 40 CFR 63.7491(c) for electric utility steam 
generating units is the definition of electric utility steam generating 
units contained in section 112(a)(8) of the CAA. On March 29, 2005 (70 
FR 15995), EPA revised the regulatory finding that it issued in 
December 2000, removing electric utility steam generating units from 
the CAA section 112 source category list. EPA instead established 
standards of performance for mercury from new and existing electric 
utility steam generating units under the authority of section 111 of 
the CAA. These standards of performance (subparts Da and HHHH of 40 CFR 
part 60) regulating mercury from electric utility steam generating 
units were promulgated on May 18, 2005 in the Clean Air Mercury Rule. 
(See 70 FR 28606.) After we promulgated that rule, it was brought to 
our attention that the scope of the exemption in subpart DDDDD of 40 
CFR part 63 for electric utility steam generating units was unclear. 
Confusion has resulted because subparts Da and HHHH employ different 
definitions to determine applicability, consistent with the historical 
applicability and definition determinations under CAA section 111 and 
Acid Raid Programs. (See 70 FR at 28609.) Thus, to clarify 
applicability of the final rule, we are proposing to modify 40 CFR 
63.7491(c) to exclude ``an electric utility steam generating unit 
(including a unit covered by 40 CFR part 60, subpart Da) and a Mercury 
(Hg) Budget unit covered by 40 CFR part 60, subpart HHHH.'' The term 
``electric utility steam generating unit'' is defined in 40 CFR 63.7575 
of subpart DDDDD in accordance with the statutory definition in section 
1121(a)(8) of the CAA.
    In 40 CFR 63.7522, we inadvertently omitted the equation for 
determining continuous compliance with the emission limits when using 
emissions averaging. Under the emissions averaging provision, 
continuous compliance is based on a 12-month rolling average. We 
corrected this omission by adding equation 4A to 40 CFR 63.7522(f).
    In 40 CFR 63.7525, we inadvertently omitted the requirement for 
installing and operation of an oxygen monitor. According to the work 
practice standard for carbon monoxide (CO) in table 1 to subpart DDDDD, 
a new affected source must correct the CO data to a certain percent 
oxygen. However, 40 CFR 7525(a) never explicitly states that an oxygen 
monitor is required. We received inquiries on whether an oxygen monitor 
is required to be installed if no oxygen monitor is currently in place. 
Since the CO standard is only applicable to new units, we assumed that 
all new units above 100 million Btu per hour heat input would also be 
subject to the new source performance standard (subpart Db of 40 CFR 
part 60) for industrial boilers which requires an oxygen monitor as 
part of its monitoring requirement. Thus, we amended 40 CFR 63.7525 to 
clarify that a corresponding oxygen monitor is required when a CO 
monitor is required.
    As suggested by the American Society for Testing and Materials 
(ASTM), several of the listed ASTM test methods in table 6 to subpart 
DDDDD are being amended with updated ASTM test methods.

C. What are the Impacts Associated With the Amendments?

    The proposed amendments contained in this action are corrections 
that are intended to clarify, but not change, the coverage of the final 
rule. The amendments will not affect the estimated emissions reductions 
or the control costs for the final rule. The clarifications and 
corrections should make it easier for owners and operators and for 
local and State authorities to understand and implement the 
requirements.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), EPA 
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and, 
therefore, subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order 
defines a ``significant regulatory

[[Page 62270]]

action'' as one that is likely to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or 
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlement, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of 
recipients thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been 
determined that today's proposed amendments do not constitute a 
``significant regulatory action'' because they do not meet any of the 
above criteria. Consequently, this action was not submitted to OMB for 
review under Executive Order 12866.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in the final rule were 
submitted for approval to OMB under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. (Information Collection Request 
No. 2028.01 and OMB Control Number 2060-0551). The information 
collection requirements are not enforceable until OMB approves them.
    Today's notice of reconsideration imposes no new information 
collection requirements on the industry. Because there is no additional 
burden on the industry as a result of the notice, the ICR has not been 
revised.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources 
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or 
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time 
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize 
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and 
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to 
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; 
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; 
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; 
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    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 not-for-profit 
enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impact of today's notice of 
reconsideration on small entities, a small entity is defined as: (1) A 
small business having no more than 500 to 750 employees, depending on 
the business' NAICS code; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is 
a government of a city, country, town, school district or special 
district with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small 
organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and that is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's notice of 
reconsideration on small entities, we certify that the notice will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. EPA has determined that none of the small entities will 
experience a significant impact because the notice imposes no 
additional regulatory requirements on owners or operators of affected 
sources. We continue to be interested in the potential impacts of the 
proposed rule on small entities and welcome comments on issues related 
to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or by the private section, of $100 million or more in 
any 1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written 
statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to 
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives 
and adopt the least costly, most cost-effective, or least-burdensome 
alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of 
section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable 
law. Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other 
than the least-costly, most cost-effective, or least-burdensome 
alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final rule an 
explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before EPA 
establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, it 
must have developed, under section 203 of the UMRA, a small government 
agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected 
small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to 
have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA's regulatory 
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and 
informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with 
the regulatory requirements.
    EPA has determined that today's notice of reconsideration does not 
contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 
million or more for State, local, and tribal governments, in the 
aggregate, or the private sector in any one year. Although the final 
rule had annualized costs estimated to range from $690 to $860 million 
(depending on the number of facilities eventually demonstrating 
eligibility for the health-based compliance alternatives), today's 
notice does not add new requirements that would increase this cost. 
Thus, today's notice of reconsideration is not subject to the 
requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. In addition, EPA has 
determined that today's notice does not significantly or uniquely 
affect small governments because it contains no requirements that apply 
to such governments or impose obligations upon them. Therefore, today's 
notice of reconsideration is not subject to section 203 of the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) requires EPA 
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely 
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have 
federalism implications'' are defined in the Executive Order to

[[Page 62271]]

include regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government.''
    Today's notice of reconsideration 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. 
The requirements discussed in today's notice will not supersede State 
regulations that are more stringent. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does 
not apply to today's notice of reconsideration.

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

    Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000) requires EPA 
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely 
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies 
that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal 
implications'' are defined in the Executive Order to include 
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more 
Indian tribes, 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.''
    Today's notice of reconsideration does not have tribal 
implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on tribal 
governments, on the relationship between the Federal government and 
Indian tribes, or 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, Executive Order 13175 does not apply 
to today's notice of reconsideration.

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

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant,'' as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental 
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect of children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, EPA must evaluate the environmental health or safety 
effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the planned 
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably 
feasible alternatives considered by EPA.
    Today's notice of reconsideration is not subject to the Executive 
Order because EPA does not have reasons to feel that the environmental 
health or safety risks associated with the emissions addressed by this 
notice present a disproportionate risk to children. This demonstration 
is based on the fact that the noncancer human health values we used in 
our analysis at promulgation (e.g., reference concentrations) are 
determined to be protective of sensitive subpopulations, including 
children. Also, while the cancer human health values do not always 
expressly account for cancer effects in children, the cancer risks 
posed by facilities that meet the eligibility criteria for the health-
based compliance alternatives will be sufficiently low so as not be a 
concern for anyone in the population, including children. The public is 
invited to submit or identify peer-reviewed studies and data, of which 
the agency may not be aware, that assessed results of early life 
exposure to [the product, substance or other vector proposed for 
regulation.]

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

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions 
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use'' (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

    As noted in the final rule, section 12(d) of the National 
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. No. 
104-113; 15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 
standards in their regulatory and procurement activities unless to do 
so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impracticable. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards 
(e.g., material specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, 
business practices) developed or adopted by one or more voluntary 
consensus bodies. The NTTAA requires EPA to provide Congress, through 
the OMB, with explanations when EPA decides not to use available and 
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    Today's amendments involve technical standards. EPA cites the 
following standards in the proposed rulemaking: (1) American Society 
for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D2013-04, ``Standard Practice for 
Preparing Coal Samples for Analysis,'' (2) ASTM D2234-D2234M-03E01, 
``Standard Practice for Collection of a Gross Sample of Coal,'' (3) 
ASTM D6721-01, ``Standard Test Method for Determination of Chlorine in 
Coal by Oxidative Hydroylsis Microcoulometry,'' (4) ASTM D3173-03, 
``Standard Test Method for Moisture in the Analysis Sample of Coal and 
Coke,'' (5) ASTM D4606-03, ``Standard Test Method for Determination of 
Arsenic and Selenium in Coal by the Hydride Generation/Atomic 
Absorption Method,'' (6) ASTM D6357-04, ``Standard Test Methods for 
Determination of Trace Elements in Coal, Coke, and Combustion Residues 
from Coal Utilization Processes by Inductively Coupled Plasma Atomic 
Emission Spectrometry, Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry, 
and Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrometry,'' (7) ASTM D6722-
01, ``Standard Test Method for Total Mercury in Coal and Coal 
Combustion Residues by the Direct Combustion Analysis,'' and (8) ASTM 
D5865-04, ``Standard Test Method for Gross Clorific Value of Coal and 
Coke.''
    During the development of the final rule, EPA searched for 
voluntary consensus standards that might be applicable. The search 
identified three voluntary consensus standards that were considered 
practical alternatives to the specified EPA test methods. As assessment 
of these and other voluntary consensus standards is presented in the 
preamble to the final rule. (See 69 FR 55251, September 13, 2004.)
    Table 6 to subpart DDDDD of 40 CFR part 63 list the fuel analysis 
methods included in the final rule. Under 40 CFR 63.7(f) in subpart A 
of the General Provisions, a source may apply to EPA for permission to 
use alternative test methods or alternative monitoring requirements in 
place of any required testing methods, performance specifications, or 
procedures.

List of Subject in 40 CFR Part 63

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


[[Page 62272]]


    Dated: October 21, 2005.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter 1, of the 
code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart A--[Amended]

    2. Section 63.14 is amended by adding paragraphs (b)(55) through 
(62) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.14  Incorporation by reference.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (55) ASTM D2013-04, Standard Practice for Preparing Coal Samples 
for Analysis, IBR approved for Table 6 to subpart DDDDD of this part.
    (56) ASTM D2234-D2234M-03E01, Standard Practice for Collection of a 
Gross Sample of Coal, IBR approved for Table 6 to subpart DDDDD of this 
part.
    (57) ASTM D6721-01, Standard Test Method for Determination of 
Chlorine in Coal by Oxidative Hydrolysis Microcoulometry, IBR approved 
for Table 6 to subpart DDDDD of this part.
    (58) ASTM D3173-03, Standard Test Method for Moisture in the 
Analysis Sample of Coal and Coke, IBR approved for Table 6 to subpart 
DDDDD of this part.
    (59) ASTM D4606-03, Standard Test Method for Determination of 
Arsenic and Selenium in Coal by the Hydride Generation/Atomic 
Absorption Method, IBR approved for Table 6 to subpart DDDDD of this 
part.
    (60) ASTM D6357-04, Standard Test Methods for Determination of 
Trace Elements in Coal, Coke, and Combustion Residues from Coal 
Utilization Processes by Inductively Coupled Plasma Atomic Emission 
Spectrometry, Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry, and 
Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrometry, IBR approved for Table 
6 to subpart DDDDD of this part.
    (61) ASTM D6722-01, Standard Test Method for Total Mercury in Coal 
and Coal Combustion Residues by the Direct Combustion Analysis, IBR 
approved for Table 6 to subpart DDDDD of this part.
    (62) ASTM D5865-04, Standard Test Method for Gross Calorific Value 
of Coal and Coke, IBR approved for Table 6 to subpart DDDDD of this 
part.
* * * * *

Subpart DDDDD--[Amended]

    3. Section 63.7491 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.7491  Are any boilers or process heaters not subject to this 
subpart?

* * * * *
    (c) An electric utility steam generating unit (including a unit 
covered by 40 CFR part 60, subpart Da) and a Hg Budget unit covered by 
40 CFR part 60, subpart HHHH.
* * * * *
    4. Section 63.7522 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) 
and by adding paragraphs (f)(3) and (h) through (k) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.7522  Can I use emission averaging to comply with this 
subpart?

* * * * *
    (b) Separate stack requirements. For a group of two or more 
existing large solid fuel boilers that each vent to a separate stack, 
you may average particulate matter or TSM, HCl and mercury emissions to 
demonstrate compliance with the limits in Table 1 of this subpart if 
you satisfy the requirements in paragraphs (c), (d), (e), (f), and (g) 
of this section.
    (c) For each existing large solid fuel boiler in the averaging 
group, the emission rate achieved during the initial compliance test 
for the HAP being averaged must not exceed the emission level that was 
being achieved on November 12, 2004 or the control technology employed 
during the initial compliance test must not be less effective for the 
HAP being averaged than the control technology employed on November 12, 
2004.
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (3) Until 12 monthly emission rates have been accumulated, 
calculate and report only the monthly averages. Then, for each 
subsequent calendar month, use Equation 4A of this section to calculate 
the 12-month rolling average as a weighted average of the emission rate 
for the current month and the emission rates for the previous 11 
months.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP31OC05.000

Where:

Eavg = 12-month rolling average emission rate, (pounds per 
million Btu heat input)
ERi = Monthly emission rate, for month ``i'', (pounds per 
million Btu heat input)
* * * * *
    (h) Common stack requirements. For a group of two or more existing 
large solid fuel boilers, each of which vents through a single common 
stack that does not receive emissions from units in other subcategories 
or nonaffected units, you may average particulate matter or TSM, HCl 
and mercury to demonstrate compliance with the limits in Table 1 of 
this subpart if you satisfy the requirements in paragraphs (i) or (j) 
of this section.
    (i) For a group of two or more existing large solid fuel boilers, 
each of which vents through a common emissions control system to a 
common stack you may treat such averaging group as a single existing 
solid fuel boiler for purposes of subpart DDDDD and comply with the 
requirements of this subpart as if the group were a single boiler.
    (j) For all other groups of boilers subject to paragraph (h) of 
this section, the owner or operator shall:
    (1) Conduct performance tests according to procedures specified in 
Sec.  63.7520 in the common stack; and
    (2) Conduct monitoring, as appropriate, according to requirements 
specified in Sec.  63.7525 in the common stack; and
    (3) Meet the applicable operating limit specified in Sec.  63.7540 
and table 8 for each emissions control system.
    (k) Combination requirements. The common stack of a group of two or 
more boilers subject to paragraph (h) may be treated as a separate 
stack for purposes of paragraph (b) of this section and included in an 
emissions averaging group subject to paragraph (b) of this section.
    5. Section 63.7525 of subpart DDDDD is amended by revising 
paragraphs (a) introductory text and (a)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.7525  What are my monitoring, installation, operation, and 
maintenance requirements?

    (a) If you have an applicable work practice standard for carbon 
monoxide, and your boiler or process heater is in any of the large 
subcategories and has a heat input capacity of 100 MMBtu per hour or 
greater, you must install, operate, and maintain a continuous emission 
monitoring system (CEMS) for carbon monoxide and oxygen according to 
the procedures in paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this section by the 
compliance date specified in Sec.  63.7495. The carbon monoxide and 
oxygen shall be monitored at the same location at the outlet of the 
boiler or process heater.
    (1) Each CEMS must be installed, operated, and maintained according 
to the applicable procedures under Performance Specification (PS) 3 or 
4A

[[Page 62273]]

of 40 CFR part 60, appendix B, and according to the site-specific 
monitoring plan developed according to Sec.  63.7505(d).
* * * * *
    6. Section 63.7575 of subpart DDDDD is amended as follows:
    a. By adding a new definition in alphabetical order for 
``Equivalent''.
    b. By revising the definitions for ``Firetube boiler'', ``Large 
gaseous fuel subcategory'', ``Large liquid fuel subcategory'', ``Large 
solid fuel subcategory'', ``Small gaseous fuel subcategory'', ``Small 
liquid fuel subcategory'' and ``Watertube boiler''.


Sec.  63.7575  What definitions apply to this subpart?

* * * * *
    Equivalent means the following only when this term is used in Table 
6 to subpart DDDDD:
    (1) An equivalent sample collection procedure means a published 
voluntary consensus standard or practice (VCS) or EPA method that 
includes collection of a minimum of three composite fuel samples, with 
each composite consisting of a minimum of three increments collected at 
approximately equal intervals over the test period.
    (2) An equivalent sample compositing procedure means a published 
VCS or EPA method to systematically mix and obtain a representative 
subsample (part) of the composite sample.
    (3) An equivalent sample preparation procedure means a published 
VCS or EPA method that: Clearly states that the standard, practice or 
method is appropriate for the pollutant and the fuel matrix or; is 
cited as an appropriate sample preparation standard, practice or method 
for the pollutant in the chosen VCS or EPA determinative or analytical 
method.
    (4) An equivalent procedure for determining heat content means a 
published VCS or EPA method to obtain gross calorific (or higher 
heating) value.
    (5) An equivalent procedure for determining fuel moisture content 
means a published VCS or EPA method to obtain moisture content. If the 
sample analysis plan calls for determining metals (especially the 
mercury, selenium, or arsenic) using an aliquot of the dried sample, 
then the drying temperature must be modified to prevent vaporizing 
these metals. On the other hand, if metals analysis is done on an ``as 
received'' basis, a separate aliquot can be dried to determine moisture 
content and the metals concentration mathematically adjusted to a dry 
basis.
    (6) An equivalent pollutant (mercury, TSM, or total chlorine) 
determinative or analytical procedure means a published VCS or EPA 
method that clearly states that the standard, practice or method is 
appropriate for the pollutant and the fuel matrix and has a published 
detection limit equal or lower than the methods listed in Table 6 to 
subpart DDDDD for the same purpose.
* * * * *
    Firetube boiler means a boiler in which hot gases of combustion 
pass through the tubes and water contacts the outside surfaces of the 
tubes. Firetube boilers that incorporate watertubes into their design 
for purposes other than for steam generation, for example, to reduce 
maintenance, enhance efficiency, reduce emissions, or increase fuel 
flexibility are considered to be firetube boilers.
* * * * *
    Large gaseous fuel subcategory includes any watertube boiler or 
process heater that burns gaseous fuels not combined with any solid 
fuels, burns liquid fuel only during periods of gas curtailment or gas 
supply emergencies, has a rated capacity of greater than 10 MMBtu per 
hour heat input, and does not have a federally enforceable annual 
average capacity factor of equal to or less than 10 percent.
    Large liquid fuel subcategory includes any watertube boiler or 
process heater that does not burn any solid fuel and burns any liquid 
fuel either alone or in combination with gaseous fuels, has a rated 
capacity of greater than 10 MMBtu per hour heat input, and does not 
have a federally enforceable annual average capacity factor of equal to 
or less than 10 percent. Large gaseous fuel boilers and process heaters 
that burn liquid fuel during periods of gas curtailment or gas supply 
emergencies are not included in this definition.
    Large solid fuel subcategory includes any watertube boiler or 
process heater that burns any amount of solid fuel either alone or in 
combination with liquid or gaseous fuels, has a rated capacity of 
greater than 10 MMBtu per hour heat input, and does not have a 
federally enforceable annual average capacity factor of equal to or 
less than 10 percent.
* * * * *
    Small gaseous fuel subcategory includes any firetube boiler that 
burns gaseous fuels not combined with any solid fuels and burns liquid 
fuel only during periods of gas curtailment or gas supply emergencies, 
and any other boiler or process heater that burns gaseous fuels not 
combined with any solid fuels, burns liquid fuel only during periods of 
gas curtailment or gas supply emergencies, and has a rated capacity of 
less than or equal to 10 MMBtu per hour heat input.
    Small liquid fuel subcategory includes any firetube boiler that 
does not burn any solid fuel and burns any liquid fuel either alone or 
in combination with gaseous fuels, and any other boiler or process 
heater that does not burn any solid fuel and burns any liquid fuel 
either alone or in combination with gaseous fuels, and has a rated 
capacity of less than or equal to 10 MMBtu per