National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Organic Liquids Distribution (Non-Gasoline), 42898-42925 [06-6419]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 145 (Friday, July 28, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 42898-42925]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-6419]



[[Page 42897]]

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

Part II





Environmental Protection Agency





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



40 CFR Part 63



National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Organic 
Liquids Distribution (Non-Gasoline); Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 145 / Friday, July 28, 2006 / Rules 
and Regulations

[[Page 42898]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0138; FRL-8202-4]
RIN 2060-AM77


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Organic 
Liquids Distribution (Non-Gasoline)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

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

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

SUMMARY: EPA is promulgating amendments to the national emission 
standards for hazardous air pollutants for organic liquids distribution 
(non-gasoline) (OLD NESHAP), which EPA promulgated on February 3, 2004. 
After promulgation of the final OLD NESHAP, the Administrator received 
petitions for administrative reconsideration of the promulgated rule, 
and several petitions for judicial review of the final rule were filed 
in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 
Circuit. On November 14, 2005, pursuant to a settlement agreement 
between some of the parties to the litigation, EPA published a notice 
of proposed amendments to address some of the concerns raised in the 
petitions and requested comments on the proposed amendments. In this 
action, EPA is promulgating those amendments, adding additional vapor 
balancing options, and making technical corrections to the final rule.

DATES: The final rule amendments are effective on July 28, 2006. The 
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the final 
rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of July 28, 
2006.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0138. All documents in the docket are listed either 
on the www.regulations.gov Web site or in the legacy docket, A-98-13. 
Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly 
available, e.g., confidential business information or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically through 
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation Docket, 
EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B-102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 
DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the 
Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the 
Air and Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742.
    At this time, the EPA/DC's Public Reading Room is closed until 
further notice due to flooding. Fax numbers for Docket offices in the 
EPA/DC are temporarily unavailable. EPA visitors are required to show 
photographic identification and sign the EPA visitor log. After 
processing through the X-ray and magnetometer machines, visitors will 
be given an EPA/DC badge that must be visible at all times.
    Informational updates will be provided via the EPA Web site at 
https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm as they are available.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Brenda Shine, U.S. EPA, Office of 
Air Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs 
Division, Coatings and Chemicals Group (E143-01), Research Triangle 
Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-3608; fax number: (919) 
541-0246; e-mail address: shine.brenda@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated 
by this action include:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 NAICS*
           Category               code    Examples of regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry.....................     325211  Operations at major sources
                                  325192   that transfer organic liquids
                                  325188   into or out of the plant
                                   32411   site, including: Liquid
                                   49311   storage terminals, crude oil
                                   49319   pipeline stations, petroleum
                                   48611   refineries, chemical
                                   42269   manufacturing facilities, and
                                   42271   other manufacturing
                                           facilities with collocated
                                           OLD operations.
Federal Government...........  .........  Federal agency facilities that
                                           operate any of the types of
                                           entities listed under the
                                           ``industry'' category in this
                                           table.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* North American Industry Classification System/Considered to be the
  primary industrial codes for the plant sites with OLD operations.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this 
action. To determine whether your facility is regulated by this action, 
you should examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart EEEE. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of 
this action to a particular entity, consult the individual described in 
the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, 
an electronic copy of the final rule is also available on the WWW 
through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature, a 
copy of the final rule will be posted on the TTN policy and guidance 
page for newly proposed or promulgated rules at the following address: 
https://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information and 
technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control.
    Judicial Review. Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act 
(CAA), judicial review of the final rule amendments to the OLD NESHAP 
is available by filing a petition for review in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by September 26, 2006. 
Only those objections that were raised with reasonably specificity 
during the period for public comment may be raised during judicial 
review. Under section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements that are 
the subject of the final rule amendments may not be challenged later in 
civil or criminal proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these 
requirements.
    Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA further provides that ``[o]nly an 
objection to a rule or procedure which was raised with reasonable 
specificity

[[Page 42899]]

during the period for public comment (including any public hearing) may 
be raised during judicial review.'' This section also provides a 
mechanism for us to convene a proceeding for reconsideration, ``[i]f 
the person raising an objection can demonstrate to the EPA that it was 
impracticable to raise such objection within [the period for public 
comment] or if the grounds for such objection arose after the period 
for public comment (but within the time specified for judicial review) 
and if such objection is of central relevance to the outcome of the 
rule.'' Any person seeking to make such a demonstration to us should 
submit a Petition for Reconsideration to the Office of the 
Administrator, U.S. EPA, Room 3000, Ariel Rios Building, 1200 
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, with a copy to both the 
person(s) listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section, and the Associate General Counsel for the Air and Radiation 
Law Office, Office of General Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), U.S. EPA, 1200 
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004.
    Organization of this document: The information presented in this 
preamble is organized as follows:

I. What Is the Statutory Authority for the Final Rule?
II. Background
III. What Revisions Were Made as a Result of Comments Received on 
the Proposed Amendments?
IV. What Are the Responses to Significant Comments?
    A. Compliance Date Extension for All Storage Tanks
    B. Vapor Balancing
    C. Recordkeeping and Reporting for Emissions Sources That Do Not 
Require Control
    D. Technical Corrections
V. 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: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Congressional Review Act

I. What Is the Statutory Authority for the Final Rule?

    Section 112 of the CAA requires EPA to list categories and 
subcategories of major sources and area sources of hazardous air 
pollutants (HAP) and to establish NESHAP for the listed source 
categories and subcategories. OLD was listed on July 16, 1992 (57 FR 
31576). Major sources of HAP are those that have the potential to emit 
at least 10 tons per year (tpy) of any one HAP or 25 tpy of any 
combination of HAP.

II. Background

    On February 3, 2004 (69 FR 5063), EPA promulgated the OLD NESHAP 
(40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE) pursuant to section 112 of the CAA. In 
response to several petitions for administrative reconsideration of the 
OLD NESHAP and several petitions for judicial review filed with the 
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and 
pursuant to a settlement agreement between some of the parties to the 
litigation, EPA proposed amendments (November 14, 2005, 70 FR 69210) to 
subpart EEEE. EPA received comments from four entities. The final 
notice presents EPA's responses to those comments and promulgates 
amendments to subpart EEEE in response to the petitions and public 
comments.
    As noted in the November 14, 2005, Federal Register notice, EPA 
will be taking separate action to address an administrative petition 
for reconsideration and a petition for judicial review concerning 
wastewater sources that were not addressed in the settlement agreement 
that gave rise to the November 14, 2005, proposal.

III. What Revisions Were Made as a Result of Comments Received on the 
Proposed Amendments?

    Based on consideration of the comments received on the proposed 
amendments, EPA is revising the OLD rule provisions addressing vapor 
balancing for transfer racks by providing an additional, equivalent 
control option that allows routing of displaced HAP vapors to a storage 
tank with a common header. In addition, EPA is adding an option to 
allow vapor balancing back to the transport vehicle for storage tanks 
when they are being filled with organic liquids. EPA is withdrawing the 
proposed amendment that would have allowed vapor balancing transfer 
rack emissions to a process unit because this option is already 
available through other language. EPA is making additional changes, 
which are either technical corrections or clarifications.

IV. What Are the Responses to Significant Comments?

    EPA received four public comment letters on the proposed 
amendments. Most of the comments from three of the commenters were 
supportive of the proposed amendments, and EPA thanks the commenters 
for that support. The following summarizes the comments that sought 
changes to the proposed amendments and EPA's response to those 
comments.

A. Compliance Date Extension for All Storage Tanks

    Comment: One commenter noted that 40 CFR 63.2342(b)(2) allows 
owners and operators of storage tanks with floating roofs up to 10 
years or after the next degassing and cleaning activities to comply 
with the regulations for such storage tanks. The commenter requested 
that this compliance provision be extended to all storage tanks, 
because, in their opinion, the emissions produced by emptying and 
degassing a tank in order to perform the required alterations would 
exceed the cumulative reduction in emissions occurring in the years 
following alteration of the tank.
    Response: EPA notes that this comment does not pertain to the 
proposed amendments to subpart EEEE in the November 14, 2005, Federal 
Register notice. Nevertheless, EPA is responding to this request 
because it is important to clarify this issue. This provision (40 CFR 
63.2342(b)(2)) is only applicable to storage tanks with floating roofs 
and is not applicable to other types of storage tanks (i.e., fixed roof 
storage tanks). The compliance date provisions for floating roof tanks 
are consistent with similar rules such as the Hazardous Organic NESHAP 
(HON). The rationale for allowing extended compliance time for floating 
roof tanks (up to 10 years) that must upgrade fittings to comply with 
this rule was that the incremental reductions associated with upgrading 
controls generally would not exceed the emissions generated as a result 
of emptying and degassing. However, this is not the case for fixed roof 
tanks that are essentially uncontrolled. Further, the commenter did not 
provide substantive information regarding emission potentials and 
offsetting cleaning and degassing emission potentials for fixed roof 
tanks. Thus, the technical basis for the compliance date provision is 
only applicable to storage tanks with floating roofs and not to storage 
tanks with fixed roofs. Therefore, EPA is not changing this provision 
as requested by the commenter.

B. Vapor Balancing

    Comment: Two commenters requested that 40 CFR 63.2346(b)(3)(i) and 
(ii) be revised to allow organic HAP vapors

[[Page 42900]]

displaced during loading to be vented to another storage tank connected 
by common header in addition to the tank from which the organic HAP 
vapor originated or to a process unit, as currently allowed. The 
commenters stated that this would afford the same flexibility afforded 
in the HON and the Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP.
    Response: EPA agrees that the alternative proposed by the 
commenters is both appropriate and applicable to the OLD source 
category. The option provides owners and operators flexibility in 
meeting the requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE, without 
sacrificing the level of emission reductions being achieved. Further, 
making this change would provide consistency between similar emission 
sources being controlled under similar rules. Therefore, EPA has 
revised the rule to incorporate this option for vapor balancing for 
transfer racks.
    In addition, other rules (e.g., see 40 CFR 63.119(g) of the HON) 
allow an owner or operator to route emissions from the filing of 
storage tanks back to the transport vehicle from which the organic 
liquid originates. EPA has determined that, like vapor balancing 
through a common header, the inclusion of this vapor balancing option 
for storage tanks when they are being filled provides both consistency 
between the OLD rule and other similar subparts and flexibility to 
owners and operators without sacrificing emission reduction. Further, 
because some of the transport vehicles to which vapors are returned are 
refilled offsite, EPA has included requirements for such offsite 
facilities. Therefore, EPA has added this provision, along with the 
necessary requirements for initial and continuous compliance and for 
keeping records.
    Finally, EPA is withdrawing the proposed amendment that would have 
allowed vapor balancing transfer rack emissions back to a process unit. 
In the final rule, transfer racks may be routed back to a process (see 
40 CFR 63.2346(b)(2)). As part of the proposed amendments (see 40 CFR 
63.2346(b)(3)(i) and 40 CFR 63.2346(b)(3)(ii)), vapor balancing these 
emissions back to a process unit was proposed. Upon further 
consideration, both options essentially describe one single practice, 
and therefore, EPA recognizes that it is not necessary for the final 
rule to contain both options; that 40 CFR 63.2346(b)(2) of the final 
rule is sufficient. Therefore, EPA is withdrawing the proposed vapor 
balancing of transfer racks back to a process unit. No changes have 
been made concerning the use of vapor balancing transfer rack emissions 
back to the storage tank from which the liquid originated.
    We also would like to address the provisions of 40 CFR 63.2378(d), 
which allow emissions bypasses of fuel gas systems or the process for 
up to 240 hours per year. These provisions allow bypassing that is 
necessary for valid safety or operational reasons but are only 
applicable if emissions are routinely physically vented to fuel gas 
systems or the process. This means that the owner or operator can not 
use the language of 40 CFR 63.2378(d) to exempt a transfer rack that is 
used for less than 240 hours per year from control requirements.

C. Recordkeeping and Reporting for Emissions Sources That Do Not 
Require Control

    Comment: One commenter requested that the recordkeeping 
requirements proposed in 40 CFR 63.2343(a) for tanks under 5,000 
gallons capacity and for transfer racks that only unload organic 
liquids be eliminated in their entirety. The commenter stated that such 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements for these sources impose 
unnecessary administrative requirements on facilities. The commenter 
fails to see the benefit in keeping records for tanks that physically 
cannot change in size or for unloading racks that only unload certain 
materials.
    Response: Addressing storage tanks first, EPA points out that 
owners and operators of facilities subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
EEEE will have to make a determination as to which storage tanks are 
storing organic liquids subject to subpart EEEE and which are not. If a 
storage tank is storing an organic liquid subject to subpart EEEE, the 
tank is subject to subpart EEEE. For storage tanks subject to subpart 
EEEE, the owner or operator would then identify the capacity of each 
tank in order to identify those that are less than 5,000 gallons in 
capacity and which do not require control. Proposed 40 CFR 63.2343(a) 
only applies to those tanks that are storing an organic liquid subject 
to subpart EEEE and with capacities of less than 5,000 gallons. This 
applicability is stated clearly in proposed 40 CFR 63.2343(a) (emphasis 
added):


    (a) For each storage tank subject to this subpart having a 
capacity of less than 18.9 cubic meters (5,000 gallons) and for each 
transfer rack subject to this subpart that only unloads organic 
liquids (i.e., no organic liquids are loaded at any of the transfer 
racks), you must keep documentation that verifies that each storage 
tank and transfer rack identified in paragraph (a) of this section 
is not required to be controlled.

    Proposed 40 CFR 63.2343(a) requires only that the owner or operator 
keep a record of the size determination; that is, by virtue of having a 
capacity of less than 5,000 gallons, the storage tank is not required 
to be controlled. The proposed paragraph does not apply to: (1) Storage 
tanks storing a liquid that is not an organic liquid and (2) storage 
tanks storing an organic liquid that is not subject to 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart EEEE.
    As correctly pointed out by the commenter, storage tanks do not 
change in size. Therefore, there would be no further effort required on 
the part of the owner or operator to document that the storage tank is 
not subject to control; that is, the original determination is 
sufficient.
    Proposed 40 CFR 63.2343(a) also required that the documentation by 
kept up-to-date:

    The documentation must be kept up-to-date (i.e., all such 
emission sources at a facility are identified in the documentation 
regardless of when the documentation was last compiled) and must be 
in a form suitable and readily available for expeditious inspection 
and review according to Sec.  63.10(b)(1), including records stored 
in electronic form in a separate location.

    EPA points out that in explaining what is meant by ``up-to-date,'' 
the phrase ``all such emission sources at a facility'' is used. Within 
the context of the entire paragraph, this phrase unambiguously refers 
back to those storage tanks for which the documentation under 40 CFR 
63.2343(a)(1) is being requested; that is, storage tanks subject to 40 
CFR part 63, subpart EEEE, which are storage tanks storing organic 
liquids subject to subpart EEEE. EPA does not believe it necessary to 
revise the regulatory text to further clarify the phrase ``all such 
emission sources at a facility.'' This phrase does not apply to either 
storage tanks storing liquids that are not organic liquids or to 
storage tanks storing organic liquids that are not subject to subpart 
EEEE. To better identify the type of documentation that is acceptable, 
EPA has revised 40 CFR 63.2343(a) to allow the use of piping and 
instrumentation diagrams (P&ID) to identify tanks (and transfer racks) 
subject to 40 CFR 63.2343(a).
    EPA reemphasizes that proposed 40 CFR 63.2343(a) only applies to 
storage tanks storing an organic liquid subject to 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart EEEE. If a facility has storage tanks of less than 5,000 gallon 
capacity, but those storage tanks do not store organic liquids (as 
defined in subpart EEEE), then there are no recordkeeping requirements 
for those tanks under 40 CFR 63.2343(a)(1) or

[[Page 42901]]

under any other part of subpart EEEE. Furthermore, there are no 
recordkeeping requirements under subpart EEEE for storage tanks of any 
size that either do not store and organic liquid or for storage tanks 
storing organic liquids that are not subject to subpart EEEE.
    EPA further points out that 40 CFR 63.10(b)(3) of subpart A (the 
General Provisions) does not impose any recordkeeping requirements 
under the OLD maximum achievable control technology (MACT) for storage 
tanks that are not storing organic liquids and, therefore, not part of 
the OLD source category. The determination of applicability of 40 CFR 
63.10(b)(3) applies to stationary sources that are part of the source 
category, but that are not subject to the relevant standard, in this 
case 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE, based on either the source's 
potential to emit or a specific exclusion in the subpart. In the case 
of the commenter, their OLD operation is located at a major source of 
HAP and there are no exclusions in subpart EEEE applicable to it; 
therefore, their OLD operation is an affected source subject to subpart 
EEEE. Once this determination is made, there is no applicability of 40 
CFR 63.10(b)(3) to the OLD affected source.
    For other storage tanks located at their plant site that do not 
store organic liquids and, therefore, are not part of the OLD affected 
source, 40 CFR 63.10(b)(3) imposes no recordkeeping requirements, for 
the purposes of the OLD rule, on those storage tanks or the source to 
which they belong.
    EPA clarified this in the preamble to the March 23, 2001, proposed 
amendments to the General Provisions at 66 FR 16330. We state

    The current General Provisions include a requirement at 
63.10(b)(3) for a source both to determine applicability and to keep 
a record of their determination if the source determines that it is 
not an affected source for a relevant standard. [A]n unintended 
interpretation of the General Provisions could be to require owners 
and operators of any source, including facilities not in the source 
category being regulated, to perform applicability determinations 
each time any NESHAP are promulgated. It was not our intent that the 
General Provisions require owners and operators to make a 
determination that they are not subject to every NESHAP that is 
issued.

    For transfer racks, a situation similar to storage tanks exists. 
Only transfer racks loading or unloading organic liquids that are 
subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE are affected; loading racks 
that load or unload only non-organic liquids (or organic liquids not 
subject to subpart EEEE) are not affected. For those racks that only 
unload organic liquids subject to subpart EEEE, owners and operators 
must make the initial determination that the rack only unloads such 
organic liquids, and then must keep a record of that determination. As 
long as such racks do not begin to load organic liquids subject to 
subpart EEEE, no further effort, beyond keeping the record readily 
available and up-to-date, is required on the part of the owner or 
operator to document that the transfer rack only unloads organic 
liquids subject to subpart EEEE.
    Finally, EPA believes that maintaining these basic determinations 
in the form of a record, both for storage tanks with capacities of less 
than 5,000 gallons and for transfer racks that only unload organic 
liquids, will facilitate the time and effort an inspector would expend 
during an inspection of a facility and the time and effort the source 
would expend recreating these determinations each time they were asked.
    For these reasons, EPA has not revised the proposed rule language 
associated with these storage tanks and transfer racks, except for the 
allowance of P&ID to identify such storage tanks and transfer racks.
    Comment: One commenter requested that the recordkeeping and 
reporting requirements proposed in 40 CFR 63.2343 for storage tanks 
with capacities equal to or greater than 5,000 gallons that do not 
require control be eliminated. The commenter stated that such 
requirements impose an administrative burden with no environmental 
benefit. The commenter suggested that the more appropriate way to 
address these tanks is to require the owner or operator of such tanks 
to notify the State permitting authority at the point in time when such 
tanks trigger control requirements under Table 2 of 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart EEEE. The commenter recommended that EPA apply the same 
approach used in the Engine Testing MACT (40 CFR 63.9290). In the 
Engine Testing MACT, a source that is exclusively used for testing 
internal combustion engines of less than 25 horsepower is required only 
to submit an initial notification, meeting the requirements in the 
General Provisions. The initial notification for these sources also 
must state that the source has no additional requirements, including a 
brief explanation of the basis of the exclusion. No other reporting, 
recordkeeping, or notification requirements, including submission of 
startup, shutdown, and malfunction plans and compliance demonstrations, 
apply to sources that do not have to comply with emission limitations. 
According to the commenter, EPA should apply this same approach to 
sources that are not subject to controls under subpart EEEE.
    Response: As noted in the previous response, the requirements in 
proposed 40 CFR 63.2343(b) only apply to storage tanks storing organic 
liquids subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE. Further, an owner or 
operator would have to make an initial determination as to whether 
these larger storage tanks contain organic liquids with vapor pressures 
that trigger the control requirements. As long as the liquid in the 
tank did not change, no further action is required on the part of the 
owner or operator, beyond keeping the record readily available and up-
to-date. If the owner or operator changes the liquids stored in such 
tanks, however, the owner or operator is required to make a 
determination as to whether or not the vapor pressure of the new liquid 
being stored is sufficient to require control and maintain a record of 
that determination, even if control is still not required.
    EPA continues to believe that keeping a record of such information 
is important to allow an inspector to determine compliance with the OLD 
rule. Therefore, EPA has not revised this requirement in the final 
rule.

D. Technical Corrections and Clarifying Changes

    EPA is making the following technical corrections and 
clarifications to the final rule:
    1. The cross-reference to 40 CFR 63.2382(b) found in 40 CFR 
63.2370(c) is incorrect. The correct cross-reference is 40 CFR 
63.2382(d).
    2. Item 1.b in Table 5 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE references 
the emission limit of ``at least 95 weight percent.'' This limit is 
applicable to storage tanks only. The applicable limit for transfer 
racks (both low throughput and high throughput racks) is ``at least 98 
weight percent.'' EPA has revised the final rule to reflect 
accordingly.
    3. In table 12 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE, 40 CFR 63.6(h)(1) 
through (7) are indicated as being not applicable to subpart EEEE, 
while 40 CFR 63.6(h)(8) and CFR 63.6(h)(9) are indicated as being 
applicable. 40 CFR 63.6(h) applies to opacity and visible emission 
standards. Upon closer examination of this apparent inconsistency, EPA 
has determined that all of 40 CFR 63.6(h) is not applicable, except to 
the extent that Method 22 observations are required as part of a flare 
compliance assessment. Therefore, EPA has revised the applicability of 
40 CFR 63.6(h) to read as follows:

[[Page 42902]]

    ``No; except only as it applies to flares for which Method 22 
observations are required as part of a flare compliance assessment.''
    4. We are deleting methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) from Table 1 because 
MEK has been delisted by the Agency as a HAP.
    5. We are correcting the cross-reference in 40 CFR 63.2346(a) for 
storage tanks meeting the tank capacity and liquid vapor pressure 
criteria for control in Table 2, item 6. The final rule referenced 
compliance with paragraph (a)(1) when it should have referenced 
compliance with either paragraphs (a)(1) or (a)(2).
    6. We are revising the phrasing in 40 CFR 63.2354(a)(3) to clarify 
that performance evaluations for continuous monitoring systems (CMS) 
are only currently required for continuous emission monitoring systems. 
The requirements of 40 CFR 63.8 only apply if there are promulgated 
performance specifications for CMS, including continuous parameter 
monitoring systems. Currently, there are no performance specifications 
for the continuous parameter monitoring systems that are identified in 
40 CFR part 63, subpart SS, which this subpart references. However, 
performance specifications for parameter monitoring systems are 
expected to be proposed in the future. When developing these 
performance specifications, the Agency will consider their application 
to OLD and other similar rules. For consistency, we have also clarified 
the applicability of CMS provisions contained in the General 
Provisions, 40 CFR 63.8(c)(6)-(8), (d), and (f).
    7. We have added a new paragraph, 40 CFR 63.2396(e)(2), to clarify 
the relationship between the recordkeeping and reporting requirements 
of this subpart and the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for 
equipment leak components associated with unloading racks under other 
subparts. The new paragraph clarifies that such equipment leak 
components must be in compliance with this subpart EEEE. However, if 
the recordkeeping and reporting requirements of the other 40 CFR part 
63 subpart are equivalent to those required by this subpart EEEE, the 
owner or operator may elect to continue to comply with the 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements under which they are currently 
being controlled and be considered in compliance with this subpart 
EEEE. This new paragraph parallels the similar relationship in the 
final rule provided for monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting for 
control devices.
    8. We have revised the definition of ``annual average true vapor 
pressure'' to clarify that the vapor pressure is to be based on organic 
HAP that are listed in Table 1 to this subpart EEEE.
    9. We have corrected an incorrect cross-reference in the second 
column of Item 8 in Table 3 of this subpart EEEE. The incorrect cross-
reference, 40 CFR 63.2366(c), does not exist. The correct cross-
reference is 40 CFR 63.2366(b).
    10. We corrected the last column of item 1.b in Table 5 and the 
third column of items 1 and 2 of Table 6 of this subpart EEEE by adding 
the phrase ``for nonflare combustion devices'' to the option of 20 
parts per million by volume exhaust concentration. This phrase was 
inadvertently omitted and makes these items consistent with item 
1.a.i.(5)(A)(ii) in Table 5 of this subpart EEEE.
    11. We are making the description in item 2 in Table 11 of this 
subpart EEEE consistent with the General Provisions' language that 
requires an immediate notification when an exceedance of an applicable 
emission standard occurs during a startup, shutdown, or malfunction 
episode. The language in the rule as promulgated did not reference the 
exceedance of an applicable emission standard for determining when an 
immediate notification was required.
    12. We are correcting in Table 12 of this subpart EEEE how 40 CFR 
63.9(j) applies to this subpart EEEE. The types of changes that 40 CFR 
63.9(j) requires to be reported are covered in subpart EEEE in 40 CFR 
63.2386(c) and (d). In these paragraphs, these changes would be 
submitted with the next compliance report. Thus, the requirement to 
submit these changes within 15 days after the change is not applicable 
to this subpart EEEE. The change in Table 12 reflects this.
    13. We are revising Sec.  63.2350(c) to be consistent with 40 CFR 
63.6(e)(3), which requires the development of a startup, shutdown, and 
malfunction plan. The revised language, therefore, drops the phrase 
``and implement.'' An owner or operator is still required, under 40 CFR 
63.6(e)(1), to minimize emissions during a period of startup, shutdown, 
or malfunction; thus there is no change in the stringency of the final 
rule.

V. 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 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review and 
the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order defines 
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a 
rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
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, OMB has notified 
EPA that it considers this a ``significant regulatory action'' within 
the meaning of the Executive Order. EPA has submitted this action to 
OMB for review. Changes made in response to OMB suggestions or 
recommendations will be documented in the public record.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden. 
The final rule required owners and operators to list sources not 
subject to control in the first and subsequent compliance reports and 
to keep appropriate documentation. The final rule applied these 
requirements across-the-board for all emission sources not requiring 
control and, in general, was not specific as to what recordkeeping is 
required. Under the final rule amendments, we clarify how these 
provisions would apply to those emission sources for which control 
would never be required and to those emission sources for which control 
could be required, but is not currently required. In addition, we 
identify the specific circumstances under which listing in subsequent 
compliance reports would be required for sources for which control is 
not required rather than requiring all previously identified sources to 
be re-listed. Further, we narrow the applicability of certain sections 
of the General Provisions for sources for which control is not required 
because the proposed amendments make such application of those sections 
in the General Provisions unnecessary. Thus, in sum, the final rule 
amendments are

[[Page 42903]]

not adding new information collection burden. However, OMB has 
previously approved the information collection requirements contained 
in the existing regulations at 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and 
has assigned OMB control number 2060-0539, EPA Information Collection 
Request (ICR) number 1963.02. A copy of the OMB approved ICR may be 
obtained from Susan Auby, Collection Strategies Division; U.S. EPA 
(2822T); 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460 or by 
calling (202) 566-1672.
    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 in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    EPA has determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis in connection with the final rule amendments.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of the final rule amendments 
on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as 
defined by the Small Business Administration's regulations at 13 CFR 
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of 
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a 
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is 
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated 
and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of the final rule amendments 
on small entities, EPA has concluded that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
In determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any 
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the 
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify 
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant 
economic impact of the proposed rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603 
and 604. Thus, an agency may conclude that a rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or otherwise has a positive 
economic effect on all of the small entities subject to the rule.
    The final rule amendments will not impose any new requirements on 
small entities, and will reduce some of the burden established under 
the promulgated rule. The final rule amendments will relieve regulatory 
burden by, for example, exempting all emission sources in the affected 
source not requiring control under the OLD NESHAP from notification, 
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements, except as otherwise 
specified for all affected small entities; excluding from the affected 
source storage tanks, transfer racks, transport vehicles, containers, 
and equipment leak components when used in special operations and to 
conduct maintenance activities; and allowing owners or operators of 
existing sources to request a compliance extension of up to 1 year if 
the additional time is necessary for the installation of controls. We 
have therefore concluded that today's final rule will relieve 
regulatory burden for all affected small entities.

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 to State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt 
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under 
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must 
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling 
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely 
input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant 
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and 
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory 
requirements.
    EPA has determined that the final rule amendments do 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 1 year. Thus, the final rule amendments are not 
subject to the requirements of section 202 and 205 of the UMRA. In 
addition, the final rule amendments contain no regulatory requirements 
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments because 
they contain no requirements that apply to such governments or impose 
obligations upon them. Therefore, the final rule amendments are not 
subject to the requirements of 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'' is defined in the Executive Order to include 
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on 
the relationship between the national government and the States, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels 
of government.''
    The final rule amendments do not have federalism implications. They 
will not have new substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and

[[Page 42904]]

the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among 
the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 
13132. They correct typographical errors, clarify provisions, or 
eliminate unnecessary recordkeeping and reporting requirements for 
emission sources for which there are no control requirements. These 
changes do not modify existing or create new responsibilities among EPA 
Regional Offices, States, or local enforcement agencies. Thus, 
Executive Order 13132 does not apply to the final rule amendments.

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

    Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA 
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely 
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies 
that have tribal implications.'' The final rule amendments do not have 
tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. They will 
not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the 
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. 
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to the final rule 
amendments.

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

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental 
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or 
safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that 
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has 
the potential to influence the regulation. The final rule amendments 
are not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is based on 
technology performance and not on health or safety risks.

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

    The final rule amendments are not a ``significant energy action'' 
as defined in Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations 
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 
28355, May 22, 2001) because they are not likely to have a significant 
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Further, 
we have concluded that this rule is not likely to have any adverse 
energy effects.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    As noted in the proposed rule, Section 12(d) of the National 
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) of 1995, Public Law 
104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary 
consensus standards (VCS) in its regulatory activities unless to do so 
would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. VCS 
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, 
sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or 
adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, 
through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available 
and applicable VCS.
    The final rule amendments involve a technical standard. EPA has 
decided to use ASTM D6420-99 (reapproved 2004), Standard Test Method 
for Determination of Gaseous Organic Compounds by Direct Interface Gas 
Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry, as an alternative to Method 18. This 
method allows the use of ASTM D6420-99 (Reapproved 2004) as an 
alternative to Method 18 to determine compliance with the organic HAP 
or total organic compounds emission limit under certain circumstances.

J. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, et seq., as added by 
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, 
generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency 
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy 
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller 
General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing the 
final rule amendments and other required information to the United 
States Senate, the United States House of Representatives, and the 
Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the 
final rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect 
until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This 
action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The final 
rule will be effective on July 28, 2006.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

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

    Dated: July 18, 2006.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.

0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 
of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

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


0
2. Section 63.14 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(28) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.14  Incorporations by reference.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (28) ASTM D6420-99 (Reapproved 2004), Standard Test Method for 
Determination of Gaseous Organic Compounds by Direct Interface Gas 
Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry, IBR approved for Sec. Sec.  
63.2354(b)(3)(i), 63.2354(b)(3)(ii), 63.2354(b)(3)(ii)(A), and 
63.2354(b)(3)(ii)(B).
* * * * *

Subpart EEEE--[Amended]

0
3. Section 63.2338 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (b)(3) and (b)(4);
0
b. Adding a new paragraph (b)(5);
0
c. Revising paragraph (c)(1);
0
d. Removing paragraph (c)(2) and redesignating paragraphs (c)(3) and 
(c)(4) as (c)(2) and (c)(3), respectively; and
0
e. Revising newly designated paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.2338  What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *

[[Page 42905]]

    (3) All equipment leak components in organic liquids service that 
are associated with:
    (i) Storage tanks storing organic liquids;
    (ii) Transfer racks loading or unloading organic liquids;
    (iii) Pipelines that transfer organic liquids directly between two 
storage tanks that are subject to this subpart;
    (iv) Pipelines that transfer organic liquids directly between a 
storage tank subject to this subpart and a transfer rack subject to 
this subpart; and
    (v) Pipelines that transfer organic liquids directly between two 
transfer racks that are subject to this subpart.
    (4) All transport vehicles while they are loading or unloading 
organic liquids at transfer racks subject to this subpart.
    (5) All containers while they are loading or unloading organic 
liquids at transfer racks subject to this subpart.
    (c) * * *
    (1) Storage tanks, transfer racks, transport vehicles, containers, 
and equipment leak components that are part of an affected source under 
another 40 CFR part 63 national emission standards for hazardous air 
pollutants (NESHAP).
    (2) Non-permanent storage tanks, transfer racks, transport 
vehicles, containers, and equipment leak components when used in 
special situation distribution loading and unloading operations (such 
as maintenance or upset liquids management).
    (3) Storage tanks, transfer racks, transport vehicles, containers, 
and equipment leak components when used to conduct maintenance 
activities, such as stormwater management, liquid removal from tanks 
for inspections and maintenance, or changeovers to a different liquid 
stored in a storage tank.
* * * * *

0
4. Section 63.2342 is amended by:
0
a. Revising paragraph (a) introductory text;
0
b. Adding paragraph (a)(3);
0
c. Revising paragraph (b)(1);
0
d. Adding paragraph (b)(3); and
0
e. Revising paragraph (d) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.2342  When do I have to comply with this subpart?

    (a) If you have a new or reconstructed affected source, you must 
comply with this subpart according to the schedule identified in 
paragraph (a)(1), (a)(2), or (a)(3) of this section, as applicable.
* * * * *
    (3) If, after startup of a new affected source, the total actual 
annual facility-level organic liquid loading volume at that source 
exceeds the criteria for control in Table 2 to this subpart, items 9 
and 10, the owner or operator must comply with the transfer rack 
requirements specified in Sec.  63.2346(b) immediately; that is, be in 
compliance the first day of the period following the end of the 3-year 
period triggering the control criteria.
    (b)(1) If you have an existing affected source, you must comply 
with the emission limitations, operating limits, and work practice 
standards for existing affected sources no later than February 5, 2007, 
except as provided in paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) of this section.
* * * * *
    (3)(i) If an addition or change other than reconstruction as 
defined in Sec.  63.2 is made to an existing affected facility that 
causes the total actual annual facility-level organic liquid loading 
volume to exceed the criteria for control in Table 2 to this subpart, 
items 7 and 8, the owner or operator must comply with the transfer rack 
requirements specified in Sec.  63.2346(b) immediately; that is, be in 
compliance the first day of the period following the end of the 3-year 
period triggering the control criteria.
    (ii) If the owner or operator believes that compliance with the 
transfer rack emission limits cannot be achieved immediately, as 
specified in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section, the owner or operator 
may submit a request for a compliance extension, as specified in 
paragraphs (b)(3)(ii)(A) through (I) of this section. Subject to 
paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B) of this section, until an extension of 
compliance has been granted by the Administrator (or a State with an 
approved permit program) under this paragraph (b)(3)(ii), the owner or 
operator of the transfer rack subject to the requirements of this 
section shall comply with all applicable requirements of this subpart. 
Advice on requesting an extension of compliance may be obtained from 
the Administrator (or the State with an approved permit program).
    (A) Submittal. The owner or operator shall submit a request for a 
compliance extension to the Administrator (or a State, when the State 
has an approved 40 CFR part 70 permit program and the source is 
required to obtain a 40 CFR part 70 permit under that program, or a 
State, when the State has been delegated the authority to implement and 
enforce the emission standard for that source) seeking an extension 
allowing the source up to 1 additional year to comply with the transfer 
rack standard, if such additional period is necessary for the 
installation of controls. The owner or operator of the affected source 
who has requested an extension of compliance under this paragraph 
(b)(3)(ii)(A) and who is otherwise required to obtain a title V permit 
shall apply for such permit, or apply to have the source's title V 
permit revised to incorporate the conditions of the extension of 
compliance. The conditions of an extension of compliance granted under 
this paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(A) will be incorporated into the affected 
source's title V permit according to the provisions of 40 CFR part 70 
or Federal title V regulations in this chapter (42 U.S.C. 7661), 
whichever are applicable.
    (B) When to submit. (1) Any request submitted under paragraph 
(b)(3)(ii)(A) of this section must be submitted in writing to the 
appropriate authority no later than 120 days prior to the affected 
source's compliance date (as specified in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this 
section), except as provided for in paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B)(2) of this 
section. Nonfrivolous requests submitted under this paragraph 
(b)(3)(ii)(B)(1) will stay the applicability of the rule as to the 
emission points in question until such time as the request is granted 
or denied. A denial will be effective as of the date of denial.
    (2) An owner or operator may submit a compliance extension request 
after the date specified in paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B)(1) of this section 
provided the need for the compliance extension arose after that date, 
and before the otherwise applicable compliance date and the need arose 
due to circumstances beyond reasonable control of the owner or 
operator. This request must include, in addition to the information 
required in paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C) of this section, a statement of the 
reasons additional time is needed and the date when the owner or 
operator first learned of the problems. Nonfrivolous requests submitted 
under this paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B)(2) will stay the applicability of 
the rule as to the emission points in question until such time as the 
request is granted or denied. A denial will be effective as of the 
original compliance date.
    (C) Information required. The request for a compliance extension 
under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(A) of this section shall include the 
following information:
    (1) The name and address of the owner or operator and the address 
of the existing source if it differs from the address of the owner or 
operator;
    (2) The name, address, and telephone number of a contact person for 
further information;
    (3) An identification of the organic liquid distribution operation 
and of the

[[Page 42906]]

specific equipment for which additional compliance time is required;
    (4) A description of the controls to be installed to comply with 
the standard;
    (5) Justification for the length of time being requested; and
    (6) A compliance schedule, including the date by which each step 
toward compliance will be reached. At a minimum, the list of dates 
shall include:
    (i) The date by which on-site construction, installation of 
emission control equipment, or a process change is planned to be 
initiated;
    (ii) The date by which on-site construction, installation of 
emission control equipment, or a process change is to be completed; and
    (iii) The date by which final compliance is to be achieved.
    (D) Approval of request for extension of compliance. Based on the 
information provided in any request made under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C) 
of this section, or other information, the Administrator (or the State 
with an approved permit program) may grant an extension of compliance 
with the transfer rack emission standard, as specified in paragraph 
(b)(3)(ii) of this section. The extension will be in writing and will--
    (1) Identify each affected source covered by the extension;
    (2) Specify the termination date of the extension;
    (3) Specify the dates by which steps toward compliance are to be 
taken, if appropriate;
    (4) Specify other applicable requirements to which the compliance 
extension applies (e.g., performance tests);
    (5) Specify the contents of the progress reports to be submitted 
and the dates by which such reports are to be submitted, if required 
pursuant to paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(E) of this section.
    (6) Under paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section, specify any 
additional conditions that the Administrator (or the State) deems 
necessary to assure installation of the necessary controls and 
protection of the health of persons during the extension period.
    (E) Progress reports. The owner or operator of an existing source 
that has been granted an extension of compliance under paragraph 
(b)(3)(ii)(D) of this section may be required to submit to the 
Administrator (or the State with an approved permit program) progress 
reports indicating whether the steps toward compliance outlined in the 
compliance schedule have been reached.
    (F) Notification of approval or intention to deny.
    (1) The Administrator (or the State with an approved permit 
program) will notify the owner or operator in writing of approval or 
intention to deny approval of a request for an extension of compliance 
within 30 calendar days after receipt of sufficient information to 
evaluate a request submitted under paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this 
section. The Administrator (or the State) will notify the owner or 
operator in writing of the status of his/her application; that is, 
whether the application contains sufficient information to make a 
determination, within 30 calendar days after receipt of the original 
application and within 30 calendar days after receipt of any 
supplementary information that is submitted. The 30-day approval or 
denial period will begin after the owner or operator has been notified 
in writing that his/her application is complete. Failure by the 
Administrator to act within 30 calendar days to approve or disapprove a 
request submitted under paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section does not 
constitute automatic approval of the request.
    (2) When notifying the owner or operator that his/her application 
is not complete, the Administrator will specify the information needed 
to complete the application and provide notice of opportunity for the 
applicant to present, in writing, within 30 calendar days after he/she 
is notified of the incomplete application, additional information or 
arguments to the Administrator to enable further action on the 
application.
    (3) Before denying any request for an extension of compliance, the 
Administrator (or the State with an approved permit program) will 
notify the owner or operator in writing of the Administrator's (or the 
State's) intention to issue the denial, together with:
    (i) Notice of the information and findings on which the intended 
denial is based; and
    (ii) Notice of opportunity for the owner or operator to present in 
writing, within 15 calendar days after he/she is notified of the 
intended denial, additional information or arguments to the 
Administrator (or the State) before further action on the request.
    (4) The Administrator's final determination to deny any request for 
an extension will be in writing and will set forth the specific grounds 
on which the denial is based. The final determination will be made 
within 30 calendar days after presentation of additional information or 
argument (if the application is complete), or within 30 calendar days 
after the final date specified for the presentation if no presentation 
is made.
    (G) Termination of extension of compliance. The Administrator (or 
the State with an approved permit program) may terminate an extension 
of compliance at an earlier date than specified if any specification 
under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(D)(3) or paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(D)(4) of this 
section is not met. Upon a determination to terminate, the 
Administrator will notify, in writing, the owner or operator of the 
Administrator's determination to terminate, together with:
    (1) Notice of the reason for termination; and
    (2) Notice of opportunity for the owner or operator to present in 
writing, within 15 calendar days after he/she is notified of the 
determination to terminate, additional information or arguments to the 
Administrator before further action on the termination.
    (3) A final determination to terminate an extension of compliance 
will be in writing and will set forth the specific grounds on which the 
termination is based. The final determina