Applicability Determination Index (ADI) Data System Recent Posting: Agency Applicability Determinations, Alternative Monitoring Decisions, and Regulatory Interpretations Pertaining to Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, and the Stratospheric Ozone Protection Program, 17697-17708 [2016-07185]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2016 / Notices asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES in person or online via a webinar on lessons learned after the release of the June 2015 Recommendations for Public Water Systems to Manage Cyanotoxins in Drinking Water. The agency plans to use this information to inform development of additional tools to support states and/or utilities. The EPA seeks to engage with stakeholders on information the agency can provide to support states and public water systems in addressing cyanotoxin public health concerns in drinking water. DATES: The public meeting will be held on April 29, 2016, from 9:15 a.m. to 12:30 p.m., Central Standard Time. Registration and check-in begins at 8:45 a.m. Persons wishing to attend the meeting in person or online via webinar must register by April 28, 2016, as described in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. ADDRESSES: The public meeting will be held at 77 West Jackson Blvd., Chicago, Illinois, Lake Michigan conference room on the 12th floor. All attendees must show government-issued photo identification (e.g., a driver’s license) when signing in. Please arrive at least 15 minutes early to allow time to clear security. This meeting will also be simultaneously broadcast as a webinar, available on the Internet. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Members of the public who wish to receive further information about the public meeting or have questions about this notice should contact Hannah Holsinger at (202) 564–0403 or holsinger.hannah@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information a. How may I participate in this meeting/webinar? Persons wishing to attend the meeting in person or online via the webinar must register in advance no later than 5:00 p.m., Eastern Daylight Savings Time, on April 28, 2016. To register, go online to: https:// www.eventbrite.com/e/us-epa-publicmeeting-managing-cyanotoxins-indrinking-water-tickets22748127261?utm_term=eventurl_text. Teleconferencing will be available for individuals participating via the webinar. The number of seats and webinar connections available for the meeting is limited and will be available on a first-come, first-served basis. Early registration is encouraged to ensure proper accommodations. The EPA will do its best to include all those interested in either meeting in person or via the webinar. b. How can I get a copy of the meeting/webinar materials? Prior to the public meeting, a link to the meeting VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 Mar 29, 2016 Jkt 238001 17697 materials will be sent by email to the registered attendees; copies will also be available for attendees at the meeting. For persons unable to attend the meeting, please contact Katie Foreman at foreman.katherine@epa.gov to request meeting materials. c. Special Accommodations: Individuals with disabilities who wish to attend the meeting in person can request special accommodations by contacting Hannah Holsinger at holsinger.hannah@epa.gov no later than April 22, 2016. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY II. Background AGENCY: Cyanobacteria are naturally occurring organisms similar to algae. These organisms can occur in fresh water and may rapidly multiply causing ‘‘blooms’’ under favorable conditions. Conditions that enhance bloom formation and persistence include light intensity and duration, nutrient availability (such as nitrogen and phosphorus), water temperature, pH and water column stability. Some blooms produce cyanotoxins such as microcystin, cylindrospermopsin and anatoxin-a, which can be a health concern. For additional background information on cyanotoxins in drinking water, please go to: http://www2.epa.gov/sites/ production/files/2014-08/documents/ cyanobacteria_factsheet.pdf. The EPA released health advisories in June 2015 for two cyanotoxins: Microcystin and cylindrospermopsin. In June 2015, the EPA also released recommendations for public water systems on managing risks from cyanotoxins in drinking water. For additional background information on the health advisories and recommendations, please go to: http:// www.epa.gov/nutrient-policy-data/ guidelines-and-recommendations. The EPA’s goal for this meeting is to obtain information on state, utility and public experiences in managing risks from cyanotoxins in drinking water. The EPA is seeking to get input on lessons learned after the release of the June 2015 recommendations document, Recommendations for Public Water Systems to Manage Cyanotoxins in Drinking Water. The EPA plans to use this information to develop additional tools or make modifications to the current recommendations document. Dated: March 24, 2016. Rebecca Clark, Acting Director, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water. [FR Doc. 2016–07173 Filed 3–29–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 [FRL–9944–39–OA] Applicability Determination Index (ADI) Data System Recent Posting: Agency Applicability Determinations, Alternative Monitoring Decisions, and Regulatory Interpretations Pertaining to Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, and the Stratospheric Ozone Protection Program Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of availability. SUMMARY: This notice announces applicability determinations, alternative monitoring decisions, and regulatory interpretations that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has made under the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS); the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP); and/or the Stratospheric Ozone Protection Program. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: An electronic copy of each complete document posted on the Applicability Determination Index (ADI) data system is available on the Internet through the Resources and Guidance Documents for Compliance Assistance page of the Clean Air Act Compliance Monitoring Web site under ‘‘Air’’ at: https:// www2.epa.gov/compliance/resourcesand-guidance-documents-complianceassistance. The letters and memoranda on the ADI may be located by date, office of issuance, subpart, citation, control number, or by string word searches. For questions about the ADI or this notice, contact Maria Malave at EPA by phone at: (202) 564–7027, or by email at: malave.maria@epa.gov. For technical questions about individual applicability determinations, monitoring decisions or regulatory interpretations, refer to the contact person identified in the individual documents, or in the absence of a contact person, refer to the author of the document. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The General Provisions of the NSPS in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 60 and the General Provisions of the NESHAP in 40 CFR part 61 provide that a source owner or operator may request a determination of whether certain intended actions constitute the commencement of construction, E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM 30MRN1 17698 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2016 / Notices reconstruction, or modification. EPA’s written responses to these inquiries are commonly referred to as applicability determinations. See 40 CFR 60.5 and 61.06. Although the NESHAP part 63 regulations [which include Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards and/or Generally Available Control Technology (GACT) standards] and Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) contain no specific regulatory provision providing that sources may request applicability determinations, EPA also responds to written inquiries regarding applicability for the part 63 and Section 111(d) programs. The NSPS and NESHAP also allow sources to seek permission to use monitoring or recordkeeping that is different from the promulgated requirements. See 40 CFR 60.13(i), 61.14(g), 63.8(b)(1), 63.8(f), and 63.10(f). EPA’s written responses to these inquiries are commonly referred to as alternative monitoring decisions. Furthermore, EPA responds to written inquiries about the broad range of NSPS and NESHAP regulatory requirements as they pertain to a whole source category. These inquiries may pertain, for example, to the type of sources to which the regulation applies, or to the testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, or reporting requirements contained in the regulation. EPA’s written responses to these inquiries are commonly referred to as regulatory interpretations. EPA currently compiles EPA-issued NSPS and NESHAP applicability determinations, alternative monitoring decisions, and regulatory interpretations, and posts them to the ADI on a regular basis. In addition, the ADI contains EPA-issued responses to requests pursuant to the stratospheric ozone regulations, contained in 40 CFR part 82. The ADI is a data system on the Internet with over three thousand EPA letters and memoranda pertaining to the applicability, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements of the NSPS, NESHAP, and stratospheric ozone regulations. Users can search for letters and memoranda by date, office of issuance, subpart, citation, control number, or by string word searches. Today’s notice comprises a summary of 66 such documents added to the ADI on March 22, 2016. This notice lists the subject and header of each letter and memorandum, as well as a brief abstract of the letter or memorandum. Complete copies of these documents may be obtained from the ADI on the Internet through the Resources and Guidance Documents for Compliance Assistance page of the Clean Air Act Compliance Monitoring Web site under ‘‘Air’’ at: https://www2.epa.gov/compliance/ resources-and-guidance-documentscompliance-assistance. Summary of Headers and Abstracts The following table identifies the control number for each document posted on the ADI data system on March 22, 2016; the applicable category; the section(s) and/or subpart(s) of 40 CFR part 60, 61, or 63 (as applicable) addressed in the document; and the title of the document, which provides a brief description of the subject matter. We have also included an abstract of each document identified with its control number after the table. These abstracts are provided solely to alert the public to possible items of interest and are not intended as substitutes for the full text of the documents. This notice does not change the status of any document with respect to whether it is ‘‘of nationwide scope or effect’’ for purposes of CAA section 307(b)(1) For example, this notice does not convert an applicability determination for a particular source into a nationwide rule. Neither does it purport to make a previously non-binding document binding. ADI D ETERMINATIONS UPLOADED ON MARCH 22, 2016 Categories Subparts Title 1500021 ....................... 1500022 ....................... 1500023 ....................... NSPS .......................... NSPS .......................... NSPS .......................... J .................................. J .................................. EEEE .......................... 1500024 ....................... NSPS .......................... DD .............................. 1500025 ....................... 1500026 ....................... 1500027 ....................... NSPS .......................... NSPS .......................... NSPS .......................... AAAA .......................... Y ................................. A, DD .......................... 1500028 1500029 1500030 1500031 1500033 1500034 1500035 1500036 1500038 1500039 1500049 1500051 asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Control No. NSPS NSPS NSPS NSPS NSPS NSPS NSPS NSPS NSPS NSPS NSPS NSPS .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... A, JJJJ ........................ A, JJJJ ........................ CCCC, EEEE ............. Dc ............................... KKKK .......................... Ec ............................... CCCC ......................... GG .............................. A, JJJJ ........................ Cb, Eb ........................ KKKK .......................... J, Ja ............................ 1500054 ....................... 1500056 ....................... NSPS .......................... NSPS .......................... NNN ............................ OOO ........................... 1500057 ....................... 1500058 ....................... NSPS .......................... NSPS .......................... Ce, Ec ........................ J .................................. 1500059 ....................... NSPS .......................... IIII ............................... 1500060 ....................... MACT, NESHAP, NSPS. IIII, ZZZZ .................... Change to Alternative Sulfur Mon itoring Plan for Flare System. Alternative to Hydrogen Sulfide Monitoring for Flare System. Applicability Determination for a Rur al Institutional Waste Incinerator. Regulatory Interpretation for Grain Elevators with Expanded Capacity. Applicability Determination for a Sma ll Municipal Waste Combustor. NSPS Source Test Plan Approval. Performance Test Waivers for New Des ign and Identical Units at Grain Elevators. Test Waiver for Identical Biogas-fue led Generators. 30-Day Advance Test Notice Waiver fo r Generators. Applicability Determination for Incinerator Burning MSW or RDF. Applicability Determination for Bo iler De-rating. Request for Performance Test Waiver a t Combustion Turbine. Alternative Monitoring of Waste Co mbusted. Applicability Determination for Incine rator Burning MSW or RDF. Monitoring at Turbines During Non-O perational Periods. 30-Day Advance Test Notice Waiver fo r Generators. Carbon Feed Rate Monitoring Waiver Re quest. Performance Test Waiver for Identical Turbines. Alternative Monitoring Plan for Ta nk Degassing and Vapor Control Projects at Petroleum Refineries. Alternative Monitoring for an Absorb er on a Distillation Unit. Applicability Determination for Nonme tallic Mineral Processing Loading Station Enclosed in a Building. Alternative Monitoring for Wet Scrubb er at a Waste Incinerator. Alternative Monitoring for Wet G as Scrubber In Lieu of COMS at an FCCU. Emergency Generator Applicabilit y with Respect to Readiness Testing and Commissioning. Regulatory Interpretation of NSPS and NESHAP Emergency Internal Combustion Engine Provisions. ....................... ....................... ....................... ....................... ....................... ....................... ....................... ....................... ....................... ....................... ....................... ....................... VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 Mar 29, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM 30MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2016 / Notices 17699 ADI D ETERMINATIONS UPLOADED ON MARCH 22, 2016—Continued Categories Subparts Title 1500062 ....................... NSPS .......................... Ja ................................ 1500063 ....................... 1500064 ....................... 1500065 ....................... NSPS .......................... NSPS .......................... NSPS .......................... J .................................. OOOO ........................ JJJJ ............................ 1500066 ....................... 1500067 ....................... NSPS .......................... NSPS .......................... JJJJ ............................ IIII ............................... 1500068 ....................... NSPS .......................... J, Ja ............................ 1500069 ....................... NSPS .......................... JJJJ ............................ 1500071 ....................... NSPS .......................... JJJJ ............................ 1500072 ....................... NSPS .......................... J .................................. 1500073 ....................... MACT, NSPS ............. ZZZZ, JJJJ ................. 1500074 ....................... 1600004 ....................... A150001 ...................... C150001 ...................... NSPS .......................... NSPS .......................... Asbestos ..................... CFC ............................ Ec ............................... DD .............................. M ................................ C ................................. M150010 ...................... MACT, NESHAP, NSPS. MACT, NSPS ............. A, PPPPPP, KK ......... Alternative Monitoring of Hydroge n Sulfide and TRS in Sour Gas Routed to Flares. Alternative Monitoring Plan for Wet Gas Scrubber at a Refinery. Alternate Reporting Schedule for Gas Pl ant. Applicability Determination and Tes ting Waiver Request for Spark Ignition Engines. Alternative Testing for Spark Ignit ion Engines. Alternative Test Method Request for Compression Ignition Engines Switching to Biodiesel. Alternative Monitoring of Hydrogen Sulfide from Portable Thermal Oxidizers at Multiple Refineries. Alternative Test Method to Cutter A nalyzers for Emissions from an Internal Combustion Engine. Alternative Test Method for Non-met hane Organic Emissions from Stationary Spark Ignition Combustion Engines. Alternative Monitoring Plan for Hydrogen Sulfide Content of Refinery Fuel Gas. Alternative Test Method for Non-methane Organic Emissions from Stationary Spark Ignition Combustion Engines. Deadline for Initial Compliance Te sting of a Waste Incinerator. Clarification of the Definition of Permanent Storage Facilities. Standard Practice for Comprehensive Building Asbestos Surveys. Regulatory Interpretation of Evap orator Coil Leak Repair Requirement. Request for Opacity Test Waiver. M150011 ...................... M150012 M150013 M150015 M150016 ...................... ...................... ...................... ...................... MACT ......................... MACT, NESHAP ........ MACT, NESHAP ........ MACT, NESHAP ........ ZZZZ ........................... HHHHHH .................... A, PPPPPP ................ MMMMMM, YY .......... M150017 ...................... MACT, NESHAP ........ HHHHHH .................... M150023 ...................... MACT ......................... LLL ............................. M150024 ...................... MACT ......................... S ................................. M150025 ...................... MACT ......................... ZZZZ ........................... M150026 ...................... MACT, NSPS ............. ZZZZ, IIII .................... M150027 ...................... MACT ......................... ZZZZ ........................... M150028 ...................... MACT ......................... DDDD, DDDDD .......... M150029 ...................... MACT ......................... ZZZZ ........................... M150030 ...................... MACT ......................... DDDDD ...................... M150031 ...................... MACT ......................... JJJJJJ ......................... M150034 ...................... MACT ......................... ZZZZ ........................... M150036 ...................... Z150002 ...................... Z150004 ...................... asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Control No. A ................................. N ................................. ZZZZ, Db, IIII, JJJJ .... Z150005 ...................... MACT, NESHAP ........ NESHAP ..................... MACT, NESHAP, NSPS. MACT, NESHAP ........ Z150006 ...................... MACT, NESHAP ........ ZZZZ ........................... Z150009 ...................... MACT, NESHAP ........ ZZZZ ........................... Z150010 ...................... Z150011 ...................... MACT, NESHAP ........ MACT, NESHAP ........ ZZZZ ........................... ZZZZ ........................... VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 Mar 29, 2016 Jkt 238001 ZZZZ, IIII .................... ZZZZ ........................... PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4703 Applicability of Emergency and Certified Engi nes to NSPS and NESHAP. Applicability Determination for Nonroa d versus Stationary Engine. Applicability Determination for Vehicle Undercoating . Alternative Visible Emission Monitoring at a Lead Aci d Battery Plant. Applicability of Tire Reclamation Facility to Carbon Black Production NESHAP. Regulatory Interpretation of Applicability of Truck Bed Lining Operations to Area Source NESHAP for Paint Stripping and Miscellaneous Surface Coating. Alternative Monitoring for Particulat e Matter on a Common Stack at a Portland Cement Plant. Alternative Averaging Time for Inle t Flow Monitoring as a Surrogate for Methanol Destruction at a Pulp and Paper Facility. Alternative Load Level for Pressure Dr op Measurement at Internal Combustion Engines. Applicability Determination for Internal Comb ustion Engine to NSPS and NESHAP. Applicability Determination for Remote Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine. Applicability Determination for Rotary Gasifiers as Process Heaters to the Boiler MACT. Performance Test Waiver for Reciprocat ing Internal Combustion Engines. Applicability Determination for a Hybrid S uspension Grate Biomass Boiler under the Boiler MACT. Applicability Determination for Electr ic Generating Units under the Boiler Area Source NESHAP. Applicability Determination for Backup Power Generator under RICE NESHAP. 60-day Advance Test Notice Waiver. Applicability Determination for Manuf acture of Colored Art Glass. Applicability Determination for Offshore Gas Port Emission Units. Applicability Determination for Emergency Stati onary Internal Combustion Engines at an Institutional Facility. Regulatory Interpretation on Minimizing Engine Idle Time for Internal Combustion Engines. Regulatory Interpretation of Emergency Generato r Provisions under NESHAP Subpart ZZZZ. Regulatory Interpretation on Rule Applicability to Stationary Engines. Applicability Determination for Emergency Engin es to RICE NESHAP. Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM 30MRN1 17700 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2016 / Notices Abstracts Abstract for [1500021] Q: Will EPA approve a change to the previously approved March 22, 2011 alternative monitoring plan (AMP) for Shell Oil Products Puget Sound Refinery (PSR) in Anacortes, Washington? A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves Shell’s revision to the PSR 2011 AMP. For the monitoring of H2S, PSR is requesting to monitor as required by NSPS subpart J, rather than the alternative monitoring method that was specified in the 2011 AMP. PSR requests that certain portions of the approved AMP stay in place to maintain approval of an alternative means for demonstrating compliance for three interconnected flares. The conditions that must be satisfied to allow PSR to rely on the AMP instead of utilizing an H2S continuous monitoring system according to subpart J are stated in the EPA approval letter. asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Abstract for [1500022] Q: Will EPA approve an alternative monitoring plan (AMP) for the Shell Oil Anacortes, Washington facility to install, maintain, and operate a total sulfur continuous monitoring system (CMS) as an alternative to a hydrogen sulfide (H2S) CMS, and to use sulfur data collected at the east flare to represent the sulfur content at the north and south flares? A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves Shell’s AMP for utilizing a H2S CMS. The conditions to allow Shell to rely on the AMP instead of utilizing an H2S CMS are stated in the EPA is approval letter. Abstract for [1500023] Q: Will EPA grant approval of exempted status under 40 CFR 60.2887(h) of the NSPS subpart EEEE as a rural institutional waste incinerator for an incineration unit that Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve (the Park) in Alaska intends to purchase and install? A: Yes. EPA determines that the proposed incinerator meets the exclusion for rural institutional waste incinerators because the unit is located more than 50 miles from the boundary of the nearest Metropolitan Statistical Area, alternative disposal options are not available or are economically infeasible, and the Park has submitted this request prior to initial startup of the incinerator. Abstract for [1500024] Q: Are all on-site units at Kalama Export located in Kalama, Washington that were constructed after August 3, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 Mar 29, 2016 Jkt 238001 1978, subject to NSPS subpart DD for Grain Elevators when applicability is triggered due to expanded capacity? A: No. In its response to the Southwest Clean Air Agency in Vancouver, Washington, EPA explains that the rule applies to each individual affected facility at a grain elevator. Therefore, only the units that are constructed, modified, or reconstructed when and after the NSPS is triggered because of expanded capacity become subject to the rule. Abstract for [1500025] Q1: Does NSPS subpart AAAA for Small Municipal Waste Combustion (MWC) Units apply to gas combustion turbine that combust a small amount of non-condensable hydrocarbon gases, which is located at the Green Power facility in Pasco, Washington? A1: Yes. In a response to the Washington State Department of Ecology and the counsel to the source, EPA indicates that the NSPS subpart AAAA applies to the gas combustion turbine it is considered to be within the MWC unit boundaries and based on the capacity of the MWC. Based on the MWC definition at 40 CFR 60.1465, the catalytic pressure-less depolymerization process (CDP) begins the MWC since it is used to convert municipal solid waste into synthetic liquid petroleum fuel, which includes a small amount of non-condensable hydrocarbon gases. Since the noncondensable hydrocarbon gas generated by the CDP is combusted in the turbine, the compressor section and combustor section of the turbine at the facility are within the MWC boundaries. In addition, it is determine that the combustion capacity of the MWC, which would not include the capacity attributable to the flare since it is a control device, is within the applicable range of subpart AAAA. Furthermore, the Green Power operation does not combust landfill gases and the landfill gas exemption, therefore, is not applicable. Q2: Does NSPS subpart AAAA apply to the Green Power CDP if it operates in anaerobic environment, exposed only to inert gases, due to explosion hazard? A2: No. EPA determines that the Green Power CDP would not be subject to Subpart AAAA due to the absence of combustion if the plant is constructed such that there is no combustion of the synthetic fuel product. Q3: Does NSPS subpart AAAA apply to the Green Power proposed Algae Production Alternative whereby the non-condensable hydrocarbon gases produced in the reactor are routed to a biological treatment unit as a nutrient in PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 the production of algae which would subsequently be harvested and reintroduced as a feedstock for the CDP process? A3: No. EPA determines that in this scenario Subpart AAAA would not apply due to the absence of combustion. Abstract for [1500026] Q: Will EPA approve a source test plan submitted by Eielson Air Force Base in Alaska for a particulate matter source test on six bin vent filters for a new mechanical coal tipper subject to NSPS subpart Y? A: Yes. EPA approves the Eielson source test plan under subpart Y. Eielson has incorporated the guidance received by EPA regarding the proper location for a testing port installation to address issues with inadequate duct diameter sizing for that bin into the source test plan. Abstract for [1500027] Q1: Will EPA, in consideration of difficulty in applying existing methods to new technology, waive the Method 5 and a portion of the Method 9 readings for three ship loader bustle filters at EGT Development, LLC’s (EGT’s) Export Elevator facility at Port of Longview, Washington? A1: Yes. EPA grants EGT the waiver for the Method 5 reading required under the initial performance and for a portion of the required Method 9 readings for the three bustle filters for several reasons. There are technical difficulties that arise in performing the test methods with the new loading spout dust control system design. Specifically, technical issues arise with conducting the Method 5 test where the loading spout dust control system has been moved to the bottom of the ship loader spout, and with conducting a Method 9 opacity reading while the loading spout is within the hold of the ship loading grain. These technical issues combined with the anticipated significant margin of compliance, the testing of other units with identical filter media at the same facility, and the opacity readings that can be performed justifies the waiver approval. Q2: Will EPA approve a waiver of initial performance testing for certain Donaldson bin vent CPV design PowerCore Filters (CPV filters) that EGT plans to install at this facility when they are in a group of identical units? A2: Yes. EPA waives the initial Method 5 performance test for certain CPV filters as outlined in the EPA approval letter. NSPS emission test results with Duraplex filter media show maximum emissions are an order of magnitude lower than the E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM 30MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2016 / Notices manufacturer’s guarantee (0.002 grains/ dscf), and two orders of magnitude lower than the 0.01 grains/dscf NSPS limit. Furthermore, the local air permitting authority will be requiring additional testing on a reasonable schedule and there will be a rotation of testing within a group, so that a different unit within the group is tested each time for any future performance tests. This applies to a total of 14 NSPS test units, which represents a group of identical units where that group is unique, has a unique air volume and aspirates a conveyor or facility with a unique conveying capacity. Abstract for [1500028] Q: Will EPA waive the requirement for Cargill Environmental Finance (Cargill) to performance test at two biogas-fueled generators under NSPS subpart JJJJ based on the test results of an identical (third) biogas-fueled generator at the Dry Creek Dairy in Hanson, Idaho? A: Yes. EPA waives the Cargill performance test for the three generators that are located at the same facility, produced by the same manufacture, have the same model number, rated capacity, operating specifications, and are maintained in a similar manner. There is a substantial margin of compliance documented by the prior performance test results that were submitted. Abstract for [1500029] Q: Will EPA waive the requirement of 40 CFR 60.8(d) to provide notification 30 days in advance of a performance test for recently installed biogas-fueled generators at Big Sky West in Gooding, Idaho due to winter weather conditions and the pending holidays? A: Yes. EPA waives the requirement to provide notification 30 days in advance of a performance test pursuant to the provisions at 40 CFR 60.19(f)(3) to implement it early in December due to weather conditions and the pending Holidays. EPA requests that you provide the exact testing date, a copy of the full testing protocol, and the results of the test once completed to the regulatory agencies. asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Abstract for [1500030] Q: Does EPA determine that Shell Offshore’s incineration unit located on the Discoverer Drill vessel, operated in the Chukchi Sea is exempted from the requirements of 40 CFR part 60 subpart CCCC for Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units pursuant to the exemption provided in 40 CFR 60.2020(c)(2)? VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 Mar 29, 2016 Jkt 238001 A: Yes. Based on the information provided, EPA determines that Shell’s incinerator qualifies for the exemption in 40 CFR 60.2020(c)(2) for units under a certain capacity that burn greater than 30 percent municipal solid waste or refuse-derived fuel, provided that Shell keeps the records required to demonstrate that it continues to qualify for the exemption on an ongoing basis. Abstract for [1500031] Q: Does EPA determine that physical changes made to two boilers subject to NSPS subpart Dc owned and operated by Yakama Forest Products (YFP) at the Large Log Complex have de-rated the boilers’ heat input capacity? A: Yes. Based on the test data submitted following the physical changes of replacing the burners on each boiler, EPA determines that boilers No. 3 and 4 have been permanently derated to a heat input capacity below 30 MM BTU/hr. YFP must ensure that oil pressure at the burners meets the conditions of this determination to remain consistent with the conditions during the source test that was the basis for this determination. Abstract for [1500033] Q: Will EPA approve Northwest Pipeline’s request for an extension of the deadline to conduct a performance test required by 40 CFR 60.4340(a) in NSPS subpart KKKK for a turbine located at the Chehalis Compressor Station? A: No. EPA determines that an applicable basis for waiving the testing requirement has not been identified. According to 40 CFR 60.4340(a), testing can be performed once every two years when emissions are less than 75 percent of the emission limit. Therefore, Northwest Pipeline must perform annual performance tests in accordance with § 60.4400. Abstract for [1500034] Q: Will EPA approve an alternative monitoring procedure (AMP)for monitoring the amount of waste combusted in the Northstar incinerator to demonstrate that the incinerator qualifies for the co-fired combustor exemption under 40 CFR part 60 subpart Ec for Hospital Medical Infectious Waste (HMIW) Incinerators located at BP Exploration Alaska’s (BPXA’s) Northstar Development Facility in the Beaufort Sea? A: No. EPA denies the AMP because use of the proposed method to weigh only the HMIW incinerated, instead of weighing both the HMIW and the nonHMIW, will not assure compliance with BPXA’s claim that the incinerator meets PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 17701 the exemption for co-fired combustors under 40 CFR part 60 subpart Ec, as well as the exemption for ‘‘municipal waste combustion units’’ in 40 CFR 62.14525(c)(2). Abstract for [1500035] Q: Does EPA determine that Andarko’s incineration unit located at various drilling locations within the Gubik and Chandler Prospects in Alaska is exempted from the requirements of 40 CFR part 60 subpart CCCC pursuant to the provisions at 40 CFR 60.2020(c)(2)? A: Yes. Based on the information provided, EPA determines that Andarko’s incinerator qualifies for the exemption in 40 CFR 60.2020(c)(2) for units under a certain capacity that burn greater than 30 percent municipal solid waste or refuse-derived fuel. Andarko must keep the records required to demonstrate that it continues to qualify for the exemption on an ongoing basis. Abstract for [1500036] Q: Is fuel sampling required for two turbines owned by Black Hills Corporation that monitor under NSPS subpart GG custom fuel monitoring schedules for semi-annual periods in which the turbines have not operated for the entire semi-annual period? The turbines are located at the Glenns Ferry Cogeneration Partners and Rupert Cogeneration Partners facilities in Idaho. A: No. EPA determines that fuel sampling required by a custom fuel monitoring schedule is not required for semi-annual periods in which the turbine has not operated for the entire semi-annual period. Sampling must be done upon re-startup. Abstract for [1500038] Q: Will EPA waive the requirement in 40 CFR 60.8(d) for Cargill to provide a notification 30 days in advance of a performance test for the recently installed biogas-fueled generators at Dry Creek Dairy in Hansen, Idaho? A: Yes. EPA waives the requirement to provide notification 30 days in advance of a performance test pursuant to the provisions at 40 CFR 60.19(f)(3). The source identified a date on which testing would be conducted. Abstract for [1500039] Q: Will EPA grant a waiver to Covanta Marion, Incorporated (CMI) in Brooks, Oregon, for the municipal waste combustor (MWC) unit load level limitations, under 40 CFR 60.53b(b)(2), for the two weeks preceding, and during the annual dioxin/furan and mercury performance tests for the purpose of evaluating system performance? E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM 30MRN1 17702 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2016 / Notices A: Yes. For the purpose of evaluating system performance, EPA waives the MWC load limit for the two week period preceding, and during the annual dioxin/furan and mercury performance test. Abstract for [1500049] Q: Will EPA provide a waiver pursuant to 40 CFR 60.8(b)(4) from the initial and subsequent performance testing requirement under NSPS subpart KKKK for three identical Solar Saturn T–1301 turbines operating under the same conditions on the same platform in the Cook Inlet at XTO Energy’s Kenai, Alaska facility? A: Yes. EPA grants the request to expand the November 9, 2011 waiver to Solar Saturn T–1301 turbine, serial number SDR–105092 under the condition that a different turbine will be tested each year on a three year rotation. If any tests exceeds 50 percent of the NOx emission limits, all turbines will be required to conduct performance tests. asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Abstract for [1500051] Q: Can EPA approve an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for Envent Corporation to conduct monitoring of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) emissions, in lieu of installing a continuous emission monitoring system when performing tank degassing and other similar operations controlled by portable, temporary thermal oxidizers, at refineries in Region 6 States that are subject to NSPS subparts J or Ja? A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves the AMP based on the description of the process, the vent gas streams, the design of the vent gas controls, and the H2S monitoring data furnished. EPA specifies the proposed operating parameter limits and data which the refineries must furnish as part of the conditional approval. The approved AMP applies only to similar degassing operations conducted by ENVENT at refineries in EPA Region 6. Abstract for [1500054] Q: Is the alternative monitoring plan (AMP) submitted to the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) for the distillation unit in Source B–99A–2 at the Eastman Chemical Company (Eastman) facility in Kingsport, Tennessee acceptable? A: Yes. Based upon the information provided in the AMP by Eastman, EPA determines that the AMP is acceptable since the proposed monitoring parameters (water flow rate, propionic acid flow rate, and propionic acid inlet temperature) will provide adequate assurance of compliance. We agree that three of the parameters that the VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 Mar 29, 2016 Jkt 238001 company would be required to monitor under NSPS subpart NNN (propionic acid specific gravity, water specific gravity, and water temperature) will not be useful indicators of absorber performance for the source in question. For ongoing compliance demonstration, EPA also provides guidance on how to define excess emissions in terms of the alternative monitoring parameters. Abstract for [1500056] Q1: Does a silo or frame structure enclosing a railcar loading station at three separate Hi-Crush Proppant nonmetallic mineral processing plants located in Augusta, Independence, and Blair, Wisconsin meet the definition of a ‘‘building’’ under NSPS subpart OOO? A1: Yes. Based on Hi-Crush’s representation that the enclosed railcar loading stations are housed in structures with roofs, EPA concludes that these structures would meet the definition of ‘‘building’’ in NSPS subpart OOO. Q2: Would the openings of those buildings be considered a ‘‘vent’’? A2: No. The building openings have no mechanically induced air flow for the purpose of exhausting from a building. Q3: Since these railcar loading stations are contained in a building, would the applicable particulate matter standard only be that fugitive emissions from the building openings must not exceed 7 percent opacity? A3: Yes. One emission limit option for an enclosed railcar loading station that is itself enclosed in a building is to restrict fugitive emissions from the building openings (except for vents as defined in 40 CFR 60.671) to 7 percent opacity, per section 60.672(e)(1). Abstract for [1500057] Q: Does EPA approve a waiver from the 40 part 60 subpart Ec requirement to monitor the minimum pressure drop across a wet scrubber that control emissions of acid gases (i.e., HCl) and is part of the emission control system for the Stericycle hospital/medical/ infectious waste incineration (HMIWI) unit in Apopka, Florida? The Stericycle HMIWI unit is equipped with a dry scrubber followed by a fabric filter and a wet scrubber and with a selective noncatalytic reduction system. All other applicable parameter monitoring requirements are proposed to be met by the facility. A: Yes. EPA approves the waiver request since the removal of acid gases is not dependent on the monitoring of wet scrubber minimum pressure drop and all other applicable monitoring parameters for the control system will be met. Monitoring of the other wet PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 scrubber monitoring parameters identified in Table 3 of subpart Ec (i.e., the minimum scrubber liquor flow rate and the minimum scrubber liquor pH) will indicate if the scrubber is working properly. Further, compliance with the PM emission limit is achieved without the use of the wet scrubber based on information. Abstract for [1500058] Q: May an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) be conditionally approved for parametric monitoring in lieu of a continuous opacity monitoring system (COMS) for a Wet Gas Scrubber (WGS) on a Fluidized Catalytic Cracking Unit (FCCU) subject to NSPS subpart J, at the Phillips 66 Company Alliance Refinery in Belle Chasse, Louisiana? A: Yes. Based on the information provided, EPA approves the AMP for the proposed operating parameters conditioned on the source conducting a performance test that demonstrates compliance and that establishes the operating parameter limits (OPLs) for the WGS. EPA approves the two proposed operating parameters, including the 1) minimum Liquid-toGas (L/G) Ratio on a 3-hour rolling average basis; and, 2) minimum slurry liquid circulation pump discharge pressure on a 3-hour rolling average basis. The OPLs are to be recalculated based on the average of three runs, provided the average PM emissions for the three runs meet the PM emissions limit of the rule in pounds per kilopounds of coke processed. Abstract for [1500059] Q: Is Capitol One National Association required to petition the Administrator under 40 CFR 60.4211(e) for approval to exceed the 100 hour readiness testing limit for emergency generators testing for commissioning purposes under subpart IIII for internal compression engines during the initial onsite commissioning process of its Data Center in Chester, Virginia? A: No. A petition is not necessary or appropriate. When a new greenfield source is under construction, subpart IIII allows emergency generators to be used as needed to complete the construction process, so long as Capitol One abides by the 100 hours limitation when the Data Center is in commercial operation. Abstract for [1500060] Q: Portland General Electric Company (PGE) seeks verification that the emergency diesel-fired emergency generators at its Carver Readiness Center in Clackamas, Oregon, run for 50 of 100 hours total use to supply power, E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM 30MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2016 / Notices allowed under NSPS subpart IIII and NESHAP subpart ZZZZ, can be part of its Dispatchable Standby Generation (DSG) program. A: 40 CFR 60.4211 and 63.6640 authorize limited non-emergency use of diesel engines that are classified and regulated as emergency engines. EPA determines that the language in 40 CFR 63.6640 of subpart ZZZZ regarding emergency engines dispatched under a financial arrangement with another entity was not intended to prohibit utilities from dispatching engines that they own and operate under the 50-hour non-emergency operation option provided. Abstract for [1500062] Q: Does EPA approve revisions to the Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for monitoring hydrogen sulfide (H2S) concentration and determining the total reduced sulfur (TRS) concentration in the sour gas routed to flares at the Lion Oil Company El Dorado (Lion Oil), Arkansas Refinery, which are subject to NSPS subpart Ja? A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves Lion Oil’s revised AMP, which supersedes previous approvals to expand use of the approved AMP for determining TRS under NSPS subpart Ja, and that includes additional operating parameters, clarifications on sampling locations, and test protocol specifications. asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Abstract for [1500063] Q: Does EPA approve a revision to an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) that has been conditionally approved for the wet gas scrubber (WGS) on a Fluidized Catalytic Cracking Unit (FCCU) at Marathon Petroleum’s refinery in Texas City, Texas subject to NSPS Part 60 subpart J, be resubmitted for approval of a revision based on an additional operation mode at reduced charge rate? A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves the revision to the EPA-approved AMP based on the additional information provided by Marathon to add an additional mode of operation. The condition for approval requires Marathon to conduct performance testing to demonstrate compliance and to establish the operating parameter limits (OPLs) for the WGS at the additional FCCU reduced charge rate, as established in the EPA response letter. Abstract for [1500064] Q: Does EPA approve alternate semiannual reporting periods under section 60.5420(b) of NSPS subpart OOOO to run from April 1 through September 30, and from October 1 VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 Mar 29, 2016 Jkt 238001 through March 31, at the Atlas Pipeline Driver Gas Plant in Midland, Texas? A: Yes. EPA approves the proposed alternate reporting schedule to align the periodic reporting time period requirements of NSPS subpart 0000 since it does not extend the reporting period that would be covered by the next semiannual report, as allowed under section 60.5420(b). The alternate reporting schedule does not extend the reporting period that would be covered by the next semiannual. Abstract for [1500065] Q1: Are the five City of Rock Island Public Works Department 880 HP spark ignition natural gas fired engines (plus one offline spare) at their wastewater treatment plant in Wisconsin considered emergency engines under NSPS subpart JJJJ? A1: No. Since the engines would be operated approximately 16 times per year for 270 hours, EPA determines that the engines do not meet the definition of emergency stationary internal combustion engines. Therefore, the engines are subject to subpart JJJJ. Q2: Can a waiver from performance testing be granted for the engines? A2: No. EPA cannot grant a waiver of performance testing for these engines, but due to the potential difficulties in testing, EPA encourages the City to request alternative testing if necessary. Abstract for [1500066] Q: May EPA approve an alternative to stack testing under NSPS subpart JJJJ for nine identical non-certified Riverview bio-gas fueled generators located on three farms (Riverview Dairy, West River Dairy, and District 45 Dairy) in Minnesota? A: No. EPA does not approve any of the five alternative options proposed by Riverview for its generators, which included: (1) exemption from ongoing testing for engines that meet the standard, (2) retroactive certification by the manufacturer, (3) self-certification through testing, (4) provide certification to manufacturers that have met the standards, and (5) test one engine and apply results to all nine. However, EPA does provide two alternatives, Modified Option 1A and 1B that could be used to demonstrate compliance. Modified Option 1A is annual testing for NO, NOX, CO and O2 using a portable analyzer. Modified Option 1B is to test each dairy’s engine sets at least once every three years, rotating annually on a three-year cycle. Abstract for [1500067] Q: May an alternative test method be approved for Hawaiian Electric PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 17703 Company’s four new compression ignition engines subject to NSPS subpart IIII at the Honolulu International Airport in Oahu that were certified on diesel but will be operated on biodiesel? A: Yes. EPA determines that operation of the engines on biodiesel would not void the certification if all of the following conditions are met: the biodiesel meets the requirements of 40 CFR 60.4207(b), the manufacturer’s warranty includes the use of the biodiesel, and the biodiesel meets ASTM D6751. The engines must also be installed, configured, operated and maintained per the manufacturer’s instructions. Abstract for [1500068] Q: Does EPA approve an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for Evergreen Industrial Services (EIS) to conduct monitoring of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) emissions in lieu of installing a continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS), to monitor emissions controlled by portable and temporary thermal oxidizers units (TOUs) during tank degassing and other similar operations at refineries in Region 6 that are subject to NSPS subparts J or Ja? A: Yes. Based on the description of the process, the vent gas streams, the design of the vent gas controls, and the H2S monitoring data furnished, EPA conditionally approves the AMP when EIA is conducting degassing operations at refineries in Region 6 since it is impractical to use a H2S CEMS in a portable TOUs. The EPA response letter list the operating conditions for degassing operations and data which the refineries must furnish to EIS as part of the conditional approval. Abstract for [1500069] Q: May Derenzo & Associates in Livonia, Michigan use a TECO Model 55C analyzer in lieu of Method 18 that will be used with Method 25A to determine nonmethane organic compounds emitted from an internal combustion engine subject to NSPS subpart JJJJ? A: Yes. EPA approves the request to use TECO Model 55C as an alternative to Method 18 for measuring methane since it should produce results similar to the ‘‘cutter’’ analyzers already allowed by the regulation. Abstract for [1500071] Q: Does EPA approve the use by TRC Companies located in Lowell, Massachusetts of a TECO Model 55C analyzer to measure non-methane organic compounds (NMOC) from engines subject to NSPS subpart JJJJ? E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM 30MRN1 17704 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2016 / Notices asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES A: Yes. EPA approve TRC Companies request for use of the TECO Model 55C analyzer in lieu of Method 18 to measure NMOC from subpart JJJJ engines, and the analyzer may be used by other engines subject to NSPS subpart JJJJ. EPA will announce this as broadly applicable to all stationary spark ignition combustion engines on our Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ emc/trnethods.html#CatB). meter will be maintained in the electronic process data storage system. Additional records shall be kept to note when the FGRS is operating in either of two different scenarios. Quarterly reporting must be submitted, except more frequently under certain circumstances, as outlined in the conditional EPA approval letter. Abstract for [1500072] Q1: Does EPA conditionally approve a revision to a previously approved Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) to allow for an automatic sampling system, and an associated flow meter for collecting and recording hydrogen sulfide (H2S) content, to be included for the West Operations Ground Flare (Multi Jet Flare), which is part of a Flare Gas Recovery System (FGRS) subject to NSPS subpart Ja, at the Motiva Enterprises Norco Refinery in Norco, Louisiana? A1: Yes. EPA conditionally approves the AMP revision based on how the automatic sampling system functions regarding the configuration and operation of the FGRS. The H2S concentration of the combined refinery fuel gas stream routed to the FGRS and the Multi Jet Flare was less than 1 part per million. This satisfied EPA’s condition for approval that the H2S content shall be inherently low. Additionally, the automatic sampling device samples the blended fuel gas stream before it is sent to the Multi Jet Flare, and there are no crossover points between the FGRS and other fuel gas streams. This satisfied EPA’s condition for approval that no crossover points shall exist in the fuel gas vent stream going to the Multi Jet Flare. Based on review by EPA Headquarters, Motiva also was authorized to use an alternate test method for testing and analysis, which removed the previous requirement to measure and record refinery fuel gas H2S concentrations using the Length of Stain Tube method. EPA’s ‘‘Conditions for Approval of the Alternative Monitoring Plan for Miscellaneous Refinery Fuel Gas Streams, dated December 7, 1999, are incorporated by reference, except for the monitoring provisions in Steps 1 through 7, as described in the EPA response letter. Q2: What recordkeeping and report requirements are included in the conditional approval? A2: Motiva shall maintain the H2S concentration data from the sampling system and the alternate test method in the laboratory information management system. The gas flow data from the flow Q: May Derenzo & Associates in Livonia, Michigan use the TECO Model 55I analyzer (which is a newer version of the previously approved Model 55C) in lieu of Method 18 and Method 25A to determine non-methane organic compounds (NMOC) emitted from RICE subject to NSPS subpart JJJJ or NESHAP subpart ZZZZ? A: Yes. EPA approves the alternative testing request for NSPS subpart JJJJ, provided that the facility follows all applicable requirements in Method 25A for sample heating, appropriate test procedures, calibration and standardization. Since NESHAP subpart ZZZZ does not require the measurement of NMOC that part of the request is not considered. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 Mar 29, 2016 Jkt 238001 Abstract for [1500073] Abstract for [1500074] Q: Can EPA confirm the proposed deadline for completing the initial performance test under 40 CFR part 60 subpart Ec for the University of Texas Medical Branch’s medical infectious waste incinerator in Galveston, Texas? A: Yes. EPA confirms that the initial compliance performance test should be completed within 60 days of achieving maximum production rate, and not later than 180 days after initial startup as required under section 60.8 of the General Provisions. Abstract for [A150001] Q: Does the use of the PreConstruction Survey, as described in ASTM E2356–14 ‘‘Standard Practice for Comprehensive Building Asbestos Surveys,’’ demonstrate compliance with the ‘‘thorough inspection’’ requirement at 40 CFR 61.145(a)? A: Yes. If an owner/operator follows the steps described in Sections 1 through 5 and Section 8 in ASTM E2356–14 ‘‘Standard Practice for Comprehensive Building Asbestos Surveys’’, it would provide a thorough inspection of the facility. However, EPA would not accept the Limited Asbestos Screen (i.e., Practice E2308) described in Section 1.5 as a substitute for the Comprehensive Building Asbestos Survey, and would not consider the Limited Asbestos Screen as a thorough inspection. PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Abstract for [C150001] Q: Do regulations related to ozone depleting substances under 40 CFR part 82 prohibit the use of Leak Stop to repair leaks in residential air conditioning systems that contain chlorofluorocarbons? A: No. The use of aerosol chemical products such as Leak Stop are not prohibited as long as there is no ‘‘knowing venting’’ or ‘‘knowing release’’ of an ozone depleting substance taking place. We do not currently have any information about the propellant used by the Leak Stop product. However, if it is propelled by a Class I or II ozone depleting substance, then it is banned under the non-essential products exclusion found at 40 CFR 82.60. Abstract for [M150010] Q: Will EPA approve a waiver of the initial performance test according to the provisions of 40 CFR 60.8(b)(4) and 63.7(h) for a new chemset chamber subject to the NESHAP for Lead Acid Battery Manufacturing, 40 CFR part 63 subpart PPPPPP, and the NSPS for Lead Acid Battery Manufacturing, 40 CFR part 60 subpart KK, at the Johnson Controls Battery Group Inc.’s (JCBGI’’s) facility in Canby, Oregon? A: No. EPA is denying the requested waiver because the new unit is not identical to the previously installed units and could have a different capacity. While emissions are expected to be low, the initial performance test is valuable to verify the installations of new equipment. Abstract for [M150011] Q: Will EPA approve a National Security Exemption (NSE)for the Department of Defense to waive the performance testing requirements for twelve stationary diesel fired engines constructed between 2003 and 2009, all of which are subject to the National Emissions Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) at 40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ, while five engines are also subject to the New Source Performance Standard for Compression Ignition RICE at 40 CFR part 60, subpart IIII, which are located at Fort Greely, Alaska? A: No. An NSE exemption is not necessary because 40 CFR part 63 subpart ZZZZ does not require performance testing for emergency engines; according, an exemption from performance testing is not necessary for these twelve engines if they meet the definition of ‘‘emergency stationary RICE’’ under subpart XXXX. In addition, E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM 30MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2016 / Notices subpart IIII does not require performance testing for manufacturedcertified engines; accordingly, an exemption from performance testing under subpart IIII is not necessary for the five manufactured-certified engines located at Fort Greely. Abstract for [M150012] Q: Does EPA determine that the operation of an emergency generator owned and operated by the Union Pacific Railroad’s rail yard facility in Lane County, Oregon is classified as a stationary source under NESHAP subpart ZZZZ? A: No. EPA determines that the engine used to provide power restoration for emergencies at railroad tunnels in Oregon is a portable diesel generator. Because the engine has not provided power, or operated for emergency use, or any other purpose other than testing at the location where it has been stored for more than 12 months, it does not meet the definition of stationary engine for that location under subpart ZZZZ. asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Abstract for [M150013] Q1: Does EPA determine that 40 CFR part 63 subpart HHHHHH, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Paint Stripping and Miscellaneous Surface Coating Operations at Area Sources, apply to the process of spray applying vehicle undercoating? A1: Yes. EPA determines the process of spray applying vehicle undercoating is subject to NESHAP subpart HHHHHH. The undercoating would be considered a coating under the NESHAP definitions and would not be a sealant. It is generally spray-applied using a hand-held device that creates an atomized mist of coating and deposits the coating on a sub straight, just as are other automotive coatings. Q2: Does EPA determine that the exemption for facilities that do not spray-apply target HAP-containing coatings is available to part of a facility? A2: No. EPA determines that a facility that is not exempt must satisfy the rule requirements for all of their sprayapplied coating operations. If the facility spray-applies no target HAP, then it may request exemption from the rule. Abstract for [M150015] Q: Will EPA approve an alternative to the visible emissions monitoring requirement of 40 CFR 63.11423(b) of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Lead Acid Battery Manufacturing Area Sources, subpart PPPPPP, for Johnson Controls Battery Group Incorporated’s VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 Mar 29, 2016 Jkt 238001 facility in Canby, Oregon to shut down equipment per permit conditions if any visible emissions are observed rather than continuing to operate and conduct a Method 9 test? A: Yes. EPA approves this minor change in monitoring methodology pursuant to 40 CFR 63.8(b)(i) because it will be more stringent than that which is required according to 40 CFR 63.11423(b) by the NESHAP standard. Abstract for [M150016] Q: Does 40 CFR part 63 subpart MMMMMM for Area Source Carbon Black Production apply to Reklaim Technologies’ tire reclamation facility at the Port of Morrow near Boardman, Oregon? A: No. Based on the information provided by Reklaim, EPA determines that the process at Reklaim’s facility is materially different from the ‘‘carbon black production’’ process that is subject to subpart MMMMMM. The process involves heating shredded tires in an oxygen starved environment to recover carbon black, oil and steel from the tires. As such the process does not fall within the definition of ‘‘carbon black production’’ and is not subject to subpart MMMMMM. Abstract for [M150017] Q: The Olympic Region Clean Air Agency (ORCAA) in Port Angeles, Washington asked if 40 CFR part 63 subpart HHHHHH for Paint Stripping and Miscellaneous Surface Coating Operations apply to the process of spray-applied truck bed lining. A: EPA determines that operations that spray-apply coatings to truck bed liners, including color coatings, are subject to subpart HHHHHH, based on the definitions of coatings and sprayapplied coating operations in 40 CFR 63.11180. Although the definition of ‘‘truck bed liner coating’’ does exclude color coats, that definition is not referred in 40 CFR 63.11170, the applicability section for subpart HHHHHH. The lining operation is generally spray-applied using a handheld device that creates an atomized mist of coating and deposits the coating on a substrate, just as are other automotive coatings. Abstract for [M150023] Q: Does EPA approve Holcim’s particulate matter (PM) alternative continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) plan for the common stack venting exhaust emissions from different sources at their Portland cement plant in Florence, Colorado, subject to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 17705 From the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry, subpart LLL? A: Yes. Pursuant to 40 CFR 63.8(f)(2) and 63.1350(o)(4), EPA conditionally approves the use of one PM CPMS on the common stack whereby a sitespecific operating limit is established that corresponds to the results of performance testing demonstrating compliance with the kiln and clinker cooler emission limits. The conditions for approval are specified in the EPA response letter. Abstract for [M150024] Q: Does EPA approve an alternative monitoring plan that uses a longer averaging time for inlet flow monitoring as a surrogate parameter for monitoring methanol destruction in the Aeration Stabilization Basin (ASB) subject to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) from the Pulp and Paper Industry, subpart S, at the Clearwater Paper Corporation, Cypress Bend Mill located in McGehee, Arkansas? A: Yes. Based on the monitoring data provided by the company and performance test results, EPA approves the AMP request. EPA agrees that a daily flow is not representative of the actual hydraulic retention time in the ASB, whereas a nine-day rolling average inlet flow established per 40 CFR 63.453(n)(4) provides an actual representation of the treatment system retention time. Abstract for [M150025] Q: Does EPA approve an alternative monitoring request to conduct monthly pressure differential measurements across the catalyst at load conditions within plus or minus 10 percent of the baseline load established during the initial engine performance tests outlined in QEP Field Services Company’s (QEP) Consent Decree, rather than the plus or minus 10 percent of 100 percent load as required in 40 CFR part 63 subpart ZZZZ for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines located at Chapita, Coyote Wash, Island and Wonsits Valley Compressor Stations? A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves the AMP request pursuant to § 63.8(t)(2) based on the performance testing negotiated as part of the QEP Consent Decree. EPA believes that it is technically appropriate to conduct the monthly pressure drop readings at plus or minus 10 percent of the load at an affected facility engine when the initial performance test that was conducted is showing compliance with the MACT ZZZZ. The conditions for approval are described in the EPA response letter. E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM 30MRN1 17706 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2016 / Notices Abstract for [M150026] Q: Do NSPS subpart IIII and NESHAP subpart ZZZZ apply to the engine of a mobile power generator in Springdale, Arkansas that is designed to supply electrical power on a temporary basis, at various locations within the Kawneer Springdale Plant, and does not remain at any location greater than 12 months? A: No. EPA determines that NSPS subpart IIII and NESHAP subpart ZZZZ do not apply since this engine is considered a nonroad mobile source. The mobile generator is a wheeled unit and its engine meets the criteria for a nonroad engine that it be by itself or in or on a piece of equipment that is portable or transportable. Furthermore, it will not remain in a single location for longer than 12 consecutive months. Abstract for [M150027] Q1: Is the stationary gas compression reciprocating internal combustion engine (RICE) at the Dimension Energy Company Coquille Bay, Louisiana facility a remote affected source under 40 CFR part 63 subpart ZZZZ? A1: Yes. After reviewing the description of the RICE and its operations, EPA determines that it is an existing area source which meets the definition of a remote stationary RICE under 40 CFR 63.6675. Q2: What are the continuing compliance requirements for a remote stationary RICE? A2: The operator must: Perform prescribed preventative maintenance at certain intervals; maintain the RICE according to the manufacturer’s instructions; minimize startup time or develop a maintenance plan using good air pollution prevention practices; and, maintain records to demonstrate that applicable requirements have been completed. asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Abstract for [M150028] Q: Does EPA agree that the Callidus Closed Loop Gasification System (CCLGS) at the Del-Tin Fiber plant in El Dorado, Arkansas is exempt from the Boiler MACT, subpart DDDDD under the exemption at 40 CFR 63.7491(h) because it is subject to and complying with the Plywood MACT, subpart DDDD? A: No. The EPA determines that both the Boiler MACT and the Plywood MACT apply to specific components of the CCLGS based on a review of the design and operation information available for the Del-Tin Fiber facility, so the exemption at 40 CFR 63.7491(h) does not apply. The rotary gasifiers and secondary combustion chamber (SCC) are considered affected sources, VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 Mar 29, 2016 Jkt 238001 specifically defined as ‘‘process heaters’’ under the Boiler MACT when combustion gases are not used to directly heat process material. The portion of combustion gases that directly flow through the dryer units are considered affected sources under the Plywood MACT (§ 63.2232(b) and § 63.2292) and are thereby exempted from the Boiler MACT requirements (§ 63.7491(1)). However, any combustion gases from the rotary gasifiers and the SCC that bypass the dryer units and are used for indirect heat transfer to process material or to heat transfer material for use in a process unit are subject to the Boiler MACT (§ 63.7575). Abstract for [M150029] Q: Does EPA agree to accept data from a prior performance test in lieu of a new performance test to demonstrate initial compliance with 40 CFR part 63 subpart ZZZZ for six natural gas fueled spark plug ignition engines at the ExxonMobil Chemical facility in Baton Rouge, Louisiana? A: Yes. EPA accepts a previous performance testing for six engines conducted in lieu of implementing an initial test. The testing was done using the same methods specified in subpart ZZZZ, and was conducted within two years of the performance test deadline. Additionally, the equipment was not modified following the April 2012 testing. Abstract for [M150030] Q: Does EPA agree that the RockTenn Hodge Mill Boiler in Hodge, Louisiana is a biomass hybrid suspension grate boiler under 40 CFR part 63 subpart DDDDD? A: Yes. EPA agrees that the boiler is subject to NESHAP subpart DDDDD since the description provided meets the definition of a hybrid suspension grate boiler found in the rule. Since natural gas and tire derived fuel (TDF) are also used, the facility must keep records to demonstrate the annual average moisture content is at or above 40 percent. The facility must use natural gas for startup, shutdown, and flame stabilization, and use TDF when excessively firing wet biomass fuel. Abstract for [M150031] Q: Are three Electric Utility Generating Units (EUGUs) located at the Lafayette Utilities System (LUS) Doc Bonin Electric Generating Station in Lafayette, Louisiana considered to be affected sources with gas-fired boilers that are not subject to Boiler Area Source MACT, subpart JJJJJJ? PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 A: EPA determines that the boilers are not affected sources subject to the Boiler Area Source MACT if all conditions at 40 CFR 63.11237 are met. Gas-fired boilers are excluded from subpart JJJJJJ per 40 CFR 63.11195(e). A permit limitation is necessary to verify applicability requirements are met for each EUGU for burning fuel oil only during natural gas curtailment, and to not exceed testing hours with fuel oil during any calendar year. Abstract for [M150032] Q1: Does EPA approve an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for three Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) subject to NESHAP subpart ZZZZ at the Occidental Permian Terrill Gas Treating Facility for testing at less than 100 percent maximum load? A1: Yes. EPA approves Occidental Permian proposed AMP for a lower engine load be set as a maximum load for compliance demonstration. Specifically, we approve performance testing at the alternate lower maximum engine load with monitoring required at plus or minus 10 percent. The three RICE cannot operate at 100 percent load due to site-specific operations at the facility, and therefore cannot be tested at 100 percent plus or minus 10 percent operational capacity, as specified at 40 CFR 63.6620(b)(2). If operations change such that the maximum load of the engines exceeds the alternative lower maximum load, the AMP approval will be terminated, and retesting will be required to demonstrate compliance with NESHAP subpart ZZZZ at the higher engine load. Abstract for [M150034] Q: Does EPA agree that the backup power generator at the Freddie MAC facility in Carrollton, Texas is classified as an existing commercial emergency stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine (RICE) that is not subject to 40 CFR part 63 subpart ZZZZ? A: Yes. EPA determines that the Freddie MAC facility is an area source with a commercial NAICS code, and the backup power generator meets the exemption provided at 40 CFR 63.6585(f)(2) applicable to emergency stationary RICE operated at an area source. This RICE, used solely for backup power generation, have not exceeded 50 hours for any activities during any one year period within the past two year period. Abstract for [M150036] Q: Will EPA provide a waiver to CertainTeed Corporation of the 60-day requirement under 40 CFR 63.9(c) to notify EPA in advance of the initial E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM 30MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2016 / Notices performance test at the GS Roofing facility in Portland, Oregon? A: Yes. EPA is granting a waiver of the 60-day requirement for a notification prior to the initial performance test pursuant to 40 CFR 63.9(i) of the 40 CFR 63.9(c) requirement to enable testing during facility’s highest volume period with the maximum ambient temperature, which is will occur in less than 60 days. This would enable the estimation of what the emissions are during a worst case scenario to test the limits of our system. asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Abstract for [Z150002] Q: Does 40 CFR part 61 subpart N apply to the Bullseye Glass Company’s manufacture of colored art glass in its Portland, Oregon facility? A: Yes. NESHAP subpart N applies to the company’s manufacture of colored art glass. According to 40 CFR 61.160(a), 40 CFR part 61 subpart N does not apply to pot furnaces but rather to each glass melting furnace that uses commercial arsenic as a raw material. However, based on information provided by Bullseye Glass including descriptions, photos and diagrams, EPA determines that the vessels used by Bullseye do not meet the definition of pot furnaces because they are not sealed off from the furnace atmosphere so that there is potential for emissions to escape with the furnace exhaust. Abstract for [Z150004] Q: Are boilers/engines/marine equipment on a liquefied natural gas carrier (LNGC) at the proposed Aguirre Gasport located approximately 3 miles offshore of the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority subject to NSPS and NESHAP standards when the LNGC will be converted into a Floating Storage and Regasification Unit (FSRU) to be permanently moored at the GasPort? A: Yes. Based on the information provided, EPA determines that the FSRU is a stationary source because it utilizes boilers as the main propulsion devices instead of reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE) and it will be permanently moored, except when there is a need to take the unit to safer water due to and special circumstances. Therefore, the affected equipment on the FSRU, except for non-reciprocating internal combustion engine (RICE), is subject to NSPS and NESHAP standards. All non-reciprocating RICE equipment on the FSRU is not a stationary sources because it falls under the definition of nonroad engines as they will be used on self-propelled equipment. Therefore, the NSPS and NESHAP do not apply to the nonroad RICE. However, the nonroad RICE must VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 Mar 29, 2016 Jkt 238001 comply with the applicable nonroad engine standards in 40 CFR parts 89, 94, 1039, 1042, 1043, 1045, 1048, 1054, 1065, and 1068, if applicable. Specific questions on the requirements and applicability of a particular NSPS and NESHAP rules can be discussed separately on a case-by-case basis as the need arises. Abstract for [Z150005] Q: Are the 39 emergency stationary reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE) at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) area source facility subject to RICE NESHAP requirements? A: No. EPA determines that the 39 emergency RICE at LANL are not subject to the RICE NESHAP because they are located at an area source that is classified as an ‘‘institutional’’ facility. The RICE rule excludes existing stationary emergency engines located at residential, commercial, or institutional facilities that are area sources of HAP. Note that the engines must meet the definition of ‘‘Emergency stationary RICE’’ in 40 CFR 63.6675. Abstract for [Z150006] Q: Northern Natural Gas based in Omaha, Nebraska asked that, under 40 CFR 63.6625(h), part 63 NESHAP subpart ZZZZ for spark ignition reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE) regarding minimizing engine idle time, if an engine does not complete start up within the thirty minute time limit, are there any restrictions on initiating another startup of the engine and/or the time frame to complete the subsequent startup? A: No. An engine does not need to be shut off if it does not complete startup within thirty minutes. However, any further activity after thirty minutes is considered part of normal operation. Multiple startups should be counted as separate events with a thirty minute time limit per event. If startups occur consecutively with short durations in between, they could be considered as one startup since startups are part of a single occasion where the engine is working up to normal operations. Abstract for [Z150009] Q1: May emergency Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) that currently do not qualify for the exclusion in 40 CFR 63.6585(f)(2) because they are contractually obligated to be available for more than 15 hours for the purposes specified at 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and (iii) and (f)(4)(ii), later qualify for exclusion once those contracts expire, provided that the other conditions of 40 CFR 63.6585(f)(2) are met? PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 17707 A1: If an emergency stationary RICE does not meet the conditions for the exclusion in 40 CFR 63.6585(f)(2) as of the compliance date, then it is subject to subpart ZZZZ at the date of compliance. However, if the engine’s status subsequently changes to meet the conditions of 40 CFR 63.6585(f)(2) after the compliance date, the engine would no longer be subject to subpart ZZZZ. Q2: Can emergency RICE located at area sources continue to participate in peak shaving programs for up to 50 hours per year until May 3, 2014 without losing their emergency engine status? A2: An emergency stationary RICE located at an area source of HAP emissions can be used for peak shaving for up to 50 hours per year until May 3, 2014 if the engine is operated as part of a peak shaving (load management program) with the local distribution system operator and the power is provided only to the facility itself or to support the local distribution system. This is the case whether or not the engine will be retrofitted to comply with the subpart ZZZZ standards for nonemergency engines. Q3: Do 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(i) and (ii) address separate and distinct nonemergency situations, and does the ‘‘local reliability’’ exception set forth in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(ii) have no sunset provision? A3: Yes. 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(i) and (ii) are separate and distinct situations and there is no sunset provision for the operation specified in § 63.6640(f)(4)(ii). An emergency stationary RICE at an area source of HAP emissions can continue to operate for up to 50 hours per calendar year for the purpose specified in § 63.6640(f)(4)(ii) beyond May 3, 2014. Q4: How does EPA interpret 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(ii)(A), which requires that to qualify for the 50 hour exemption, the emergency RICE must be dispatched by the local balancing or local transmission and distribution system operator? A4: If the local transmission and distribution system operator informs the facility that they will be cutting their power, which, in turn, causes the facility to engage its emergency stationary RICE, the engine would be considered dispatched by the local transmission and distribution system operator. Abstract for [Z150010] Q1: What date is used under NESHAP subpart ZZZZ to determine if engines located at Allison Transmission Indianapolis facility in Indiana, are ‘‘existing’’ or ‘‘new’’? E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM 30MRN1 17708 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 61 / Wednesday, March 30, 2016 / Notices A1: The rule uses the date that the engine commenced construction to determine if the engine is existing or new. The General Provisions to 40 CFR part 63 define both ‘‘construction’’ and ‘‘commenced’’ and those definitions are applied to the subpart. Q2: Does NESHAP subpart ZZZZ apply to an engine that has been rebuilt, specifically where the engine core is reused, but components such as pistons, rings and bearings are reconditioned or replaced? A2: A rebuilt engine would need to be evaluated to determine if reconstruction had occurred. The General Provisions to part 63 defines ‘‘reconstruction.’’ asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Abstract for [Z150011] Q: Are the emergency engines located at the NASA Langley Research Facility in Hampton, VA subject to NESHAP subpart ZZZZ for Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines? A: No. EPA determines that the emergency engines are located at a facility that is an area source and classified as an ‘‘institutional’’ facility. Therefore, under 40 CFR 63.6590(b)(3), emergency engines at the facility are exempt from requirements under NESHAP subpart ZZZZ. Abstract for [1600004] Q: Does EPA accept the industry coalition request to rescind a November 21, 2007, letter to the National Grain and Feed Association in which EPA stated that temporary storage facilities meet the definition of ‘‘permanent storage capacity’’ under 40 CFR part 60, subpart DD, NSPS for Grain Elevators (Subpart DD), and required it be included when determining applicability of Subpart DD for a particular facility? A: Yes. The EPA is proposing revisions to Subpart DD and has also decided to re-evaluate the rationale for the November 21, 2007 letter. While the definition of ‘‘permanent storage capacity’’ in Subpart DD is broad, we are now aware that temporary storage facilities (TSFs) generally handle the grain less time throughout the year than other types of permanent storage facilities and may require different treatment. Also, while not dispositive as to the applicability of the rule to these units, we note that TSFs did not exist during the development of Subpart DD, and their processes and handling techniques were not specifically considered during the rulemaking process. For these reasons, EPA rescinds the November 21, 2007 letter. As a result, TSFs do not meet the definition of ‘‘permanent storage capacity’’ under Subpart DD and should not be included VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:06 Mar 29, 2016 Jkt 238001 when determining applicability under Subpart DD for a particular facility. Dated: February 25, 2016. Betsy Smidinger, Acting Director, Office of Compliance. [FR Doc. 2016–07185 Filed 3–29–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION [OMB 3060–1213] Information Collection Being Reviewed by the Federal Communications Commission Under Delegated Authority AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION: Notice and request for comments. SUMMARY: As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork burdens, and as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501– 3520), the Federal Communications Commission (Commission) invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the following information collection. Comments are requested concerning: Whether the collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information shall have practical utility; the accuracy of the Commission’s burden estimate; ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information collected; ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on the respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology; and ways to further reduce the information collection burden on small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees. The Commission may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid control number. No person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does not display a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. DATES: Written PRA comments should be submitted on or before May 31, 2016. ADDRESSES: Direct all PRA comments to Cathy Williams, FCC, via email PRA@ fcc.gov and to Cathy.Williams@fcc.gov. Include in the comments the Title as shown in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section below. PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information about the information collection, contact Cathy Williams at (202) 418–2918. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: OMB Control Number: 3060–1213. Title: Application to Participate in a Reverse Incentive Auction, FCC Form 177. Form Number: FCC Form 177. Type of Review: Extension of a currently approved collection. Respondents: Business or other forprofit entities, not-for-profit institutions, and state, local or tribal governments. Estimated Number of Respondents and Responses: 600 respondents and 600 responses. Estimated Time per Response: 90 minutes. Frequency of Response: One-time reporting requirement. Obligation to Respond: Required to obtain or retain benefits. Statutory authority for the currently approved information collection is contained in sections 154(i) and 309(j)(5) of the Communications Act, as amended, 47 U.S.C. 4(i), 309(j)(5), and sections 1.2204 and 73.3700(h)(4)(i), (h)(4)(ii), and (h)(6) of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.2204, 73.3700(h)(4)(i), (h)(4)(ii), and (h)(6). Estimated Total Annual Burden: 900 hours. Total Annual Costs: None. Nature and Extent of Confidentiality: Certain information collected on FCC Form 177 will be treated as confidential for various periods of time during the course of the broadcast incentive auction (BIA) pursuant to 47 U.S.C. 1452(a)(3) and section 1.2206(b) of the Commission’s rules, 47 CFR 1.2206(b). To the extent necessary, respondents may request confidential treatment of information collected on FCC Form 177 that is not already being treated as confidential pursuant to section 0.459 of the Commission’s rules. See 47 CFR 0.459. Privacy Act Impact Assessment: No impact(s). Needs and Uses: A request for approval of this information collection will be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) after this 60-day comment period in order to obtain the full three year clearance from OMB. On February 22, 2012, the President signed the Spectrum Act, which, among other things, authorized the Commission to conduct incentive auctions, and directed that the Commission use this innovative tool for an incentive auction of broadcast television spectrum to help meet the Nation’s growing spectrum needs. See E:\FR\FM\30MRN1.SGM 30MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 61 (Wednesday, March 30, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17697-17708]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-07185]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9944-39-OA]


Applicability Determination Index (ADI) Data System Recent 
Posting: Agency Applicability Determinations, Alternative Monitoring 
Decisions, and Regulatory Interpretations Pertaining to Standards of 
Performance for New Stationary Sources, National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants, and the Stratospheric Ozone Protection 
Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces applicability determinations, 
alternative monitoring decisions, and regulatory interpretations that 
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has made under the New Source 
Performance Standards (NSPS); the National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP); and/or the Stratospheric Ozone 
Protection Program.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: An electronic copy of each complete 
document posted on the Applicability Determination Index (ADI) data 
system is available on the Internet through the Resources and Guidance 
Documents for Compliance Assistance page of the Clean Air Act 
Compliance Monitoring Web site under ``Air'' at: https://www2.epa.gov/compliance/resources-and-guidance-documents-compliance-assistance. The 
letters and memoranda on the ADI may be located by date, office of 
issuance, subpart, citation, control number, or by string word 
searches. For questions about the ADI or this notice, contact Maria 
Malave at EPA by phone at: (202) 564-7027, or by email at: 
malave.maria@epa.gov. For technical questions about individual 
applicability determinations, monitoring decisions or regulatory 
interpretations, refer to the contact person identified in the 
individual documents, or in the absence of a contact person, refer to 
the author of the document.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background

    The General Provisions of the NSPS in 40 Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) part 60 and the General Provisions of the NESHAP in 
40 CFR part 61 provide that a source owner or operator may request a 
determination of whether certain intended actions constitute the 
commencement of construction,

[[Page 17698]]

reconstruction, or modification. EPA's written responses to these 
inquiries are commonly referred to as applicability determinations. See 
40 CFR 60.5 and 61.06. Although the NESHAP part 63 regulations [which 
include Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards and/or 
Generally Available Control Technology (GACT) standards] and Section 
111(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) contain no specific regulatory 
provision providing that sources may request applicability 
determinations, EPA also responds to written inquiries regarding 
applicability for the part 63 and Section 111(d) programs. The NSPS and 
NESHAP also allow sources to seek permission to use monitoring or 
recordkeeping that is different from the promulgated requirements. See 
40 CFR 60.13(i), 61.14(g), 63.8(b)(1), 63.8(f), and 63.10(f). EPA's 
written responses to these inquiries are commonly referred to as 
alternative monitoring decisions. Furthermore, EPA responds to written 
inquiries about the broad range of NSPS and NESHAP regulatory 
requirements as they pertain to a whole source category. These 
inquiries may pertain, for example, to the type of sources to which the 
regulation applies, or to the testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, or 
reporting requirements contained in the regulation. EPA's written 
responses to these inquiries are commonly referred to as regulatory 
interpretations.
    EPA currently compiles EPA-issued NSPS and NESHAP applicability 
determinations, alternative monitoring decisions, and regulatory 
interpretations, and posts them to the ADI on a regular basis. In 
addition, the ADI contains EPA-issued responses to requests pursuant to 
the stratospheric ozone regulations, contained in 40 CFR part 82. The 
ADI is a data system on the Internet with over three thousand EPA 
letters and memoranda pertaining to the applicability, monitoring, 
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements of the NSPS, NESHAP, and 
stratospheric ozone regulations. Users can search for letters and 
memoranda by date, office of issuance, subpart, citation, control 
number, or by string word searches.
    Today's notice comprises a summary of 66 such documents added to 
the ADI on March 22, 2016. This notice lists the subject and header of 
each letter and memorandum, as well as a brief abstract of the letter 
or memorandum. Complete copies of these documents may be obtained from 
the ADI on the Internet through the Resources and Guidance Documents 
for Compliance Assistance page of the Clean Air Act Compliance 
Monitoring Web site under ``Air'' at: https://www2.epa.gov/compliance/resources-and-guidance-documents-compliance-assistance.

Summary of Headers and Abstracts

    The following table identifies the control number for each document 
posted on the ADI data system on March 22, 2016; the applicable 
category; the section(s) and/or subpart(s) of 40 CFR part 60, 61, or 63 
(as applicable) addressed in the document; and the title of the 
document, which provides a brief description of the subject matter.
    We have also included an abstract of each document identified with 
its control number after the table. These abstracts are provided solely 
to alert the public to possible items of interest and are not intended 
as substitutes for the full text of the documents. This notice does not 
change the status of any document with respect to whether it is ``of 
nationwide scope or effect'' for purposes of CAA section 307(b)(1) For 
example, this notice does not convert an applicability determination 
for a particular source into a nationwide rule. Neither does it purport 
to make a previously non-binding document binding.

                                  ADI Determinations Uploaded on March 22, 2016
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Control No.                  Categories             Subparts                      Title
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1500021..........................  NSPS................  J..................  Change to Alternative Sulfur
                                                                               Monitoring Plan for Flare System.
1500022..........................  NSPS................  J..................  Alternative to Hydrogen Sulfide
                                                                               Monitoring for Flare System.
1500023..........................  NSPS................  EEEE...............  Applicability Determination for a
                                                                               Rural Institutional Waste
                                                                               Incinerator.
1500024..........................  NSPS................  DD.................  Regulatory Interpretation for
                                                                               Grain Elevators with Expanded
                                                                               Capacity.
1500025..........................  NSPS................  AAAA...............  Applicability Determination for a
                                                                               Small Municipal Waste Combustor.
1500026..........................  NSPS................  Y..................  NSPS Source Test Plan Approval.
1500027..........................  NSPS................  A, DD..............  Performance Test Waivers for New
                                                                               Design and Identical Units at
                                                                               Grain Elevators.
1500028..........................  NSPS................  A, JJJJ............  Test Waiver for Identical Biogas-
                                                                               fueled Generators.
1500029..........................  NSPS................  A, JJJJ............  30-Day Advance Test Notice Waiver
                                                                               for Generators.
1500030..........................  NSPS................  CCCC, EEEE.........  Applicability Determination for
                                                                               Incinerator Burning MSW or RDF.
1500031..........................  NSPS................  Dc.................  Applicability Determination for
                                                                               Boiler De-rating.
1500033..........................  NSPS................  KKKK...............  Request for Performance Test
                                                                               Waiver at Combustion Turbine.
1500034..........................  NSPS................  Ec.................  Alternative Monitoring of Waste
                                                                               Combusted.
1500035..........................  NSPS................  CCCC...............  Applicability Determination for
                                                                               Incinerator Burning MSW or RDF.
1500036..........................  NSPS................  GG.................  Monitoring at Turbines During Non-
                                                                               Operational Periods.
1500038..........................  NSPS................  A, JJJJ............  30-Day Advance Test Notice Waiver
                                                                               for Generators.
1500039..........................  NSPS................  Cb, Eb.............  Carbon Feed Rate Monitoring Waiver
                                                                               Request.
1500049..........................  NSPS................  KKKK...............  Performance Test Waiver for
                                                                               Identical Turbines.
1500051..........................  NSPS................  J, Ja..............  Alternative Monitoring Plan for
                                                                               Tank Degassing and Vapor Control
                                                                               Projects at Petroleum Refineries.
1500054..........................  NSPS................  NNN................  Alternative Monitoring for an
                                                                               Absorber on a Distillation Unit.
1500056..........................  NSPS................  OOO................  Applicability Determination for
                                                                               Nonmetallic Mineral Processing
                                                                               Loading Station Enclosed in a
                                                                               Building.
1500057..........................  NSPS................  Ce, Ec.............  Alternative Monitoring for Wet
                                                                               Scrubber at a Waste Incinerator.
1500058..........................  NSPS................  J..................  Alternative Monitoring for Wet Gas
                                                                               Scrubber In Lieu of COMS at an
                                                                               FCCU.
1500059..........................  NSPS................  IIII...............  Emergency Generator Applicability
                                                                               with Respect to Readiness Testing
                                                                               and Commissioning.
1500060..........................  MACT, NESHAP, NSPS..  IIII, ZZZZ.........  Regulatory Interpretation of NSPS
                                                                               and NESHAP Emergency Internal
                                                                               Combustion Engine Provisions.

[[Page 17699]]

 
1500062..........................  NSPS................  Ja.................  Alternative Monitoring of Hydrogen
                                                                               Sulfide and TRS in Sour Gas
                                                                               Routed to Flares.
1500063..........................  NSPS................  J..................  Alternative Monitoring Plan for
                                                                               Wet Gas Scrubber at a Refinery.
1500064..........................  NSPS................  OOOO...............  Alternate Reporting Schedule for
                                                                               Gas Plant.
1500065..........................  NSPS................  JJJJ...............  Applicability Determination and
                                                                               Testing Waiver Request for Spark
                                                                               Ignition Engines.
1500066..........................  NSPS................  JJJJ...............  Alternative Testing for Spark
                                                                               Ignition Engines.
1500067..........................  NSPS................  IIII...............  Alternative Test Method Request
                                                                               for Compression Ignition Engines
                                                                               Switching to Biodiesel.
1500068..........................  NSPS................  J, Ja..............  Alternative Monitoring of Hydrogen
                                                                               Sulfide from Portable Thermal
                                                                               Oxidizers at Multiple Refineries.
1500069..........................  NSPS................  JJJJ...............  Alternative Test Method to Cutter
                                                                               Analyzers for Emissions from an
                                                                               Internal Combustion Engine.
1500071..........................  NSPS................  JJJJ...............  Alternative Test Method for Non-
                                                                               methane Organic Emissions from
                                                                               Stationary Spark Ignition
                                                                               Combustion Engines.
1500072..........................  NSPS................  J..................  Alternative Monitoring Plan for
                                                                               Hydrogen Sulfide Content of
                                                                               Refinery Fuel Gas.
1500073..........................  MACT, NSPS..........  ZZZZ, JJJJ.........  Alternative Test Method for Non-
                                                                               methane Organic Emissions from
                                                                               Stationary Spark Ignition
                                                                               Combustion Engines.
1500074..........................  NSPS................  Ec.................  Deadline for Initial Compliance
                                                                               Testing of a Waste Incinerator.
1600004..........................  NSPS................  DD.................  Clarification of the Definition of
                                                                               Permanent Storage Facilities.
A150001..........................  Asbestos............  M..................  Standard Practice for
                                                                               Comprehensive Building Asbestos
                                                                               Surveys.
C150001..........................  CFC.................  C..................  Regulatory Interpretation of
                                                                               Evaporator Coil Leak Repair
                                                                               Requirement.
M150010..........................  MACT, NESHAP, NSPS..  A, PPPPPP, KK......  Request for Opacity Test Waiver.
M150011..........................  MACT, NSPS..........  ZZZZ, IIII.........  Applicability of Emergency and
                                                                               Certified Engines to NSPS and
                                                                               NESHAP.
M150012..........................  MACT................  ZZZZ...............  Applicability Determination for
                                                                               Nonroad versus Stationary Engine.
M150013..........................  MACT, NESHAP........  HHHHHH.............  Applicability Determination for
                                                                               Vehicle Undercoating.
M150015..........................  MACT, NESHAP........  A, PPPPPP..........  Alternative Visible Emission
                                                                               Monitoring at a Lead Acid Battery
                                                                               Plant.
M150016..........................  MACT, NESHAP........  MMMMMM, YY.........  Applicability of Tire Reclamation
                                                                               Facility to Carbon Black
                                                                               Production NESHAP.
M150017..........................  MACT, NESHAP........  HHHHHH.............  Regulatory Interpretation of
                                                                               Applicability of Truck Bed Lining
                                                                               Operations to Area Source NESHAP
                                                                               for Paint Stripping and
                                                                               Miscellaneous Surface Coating.
M150023..........................  MACT................  LLL................  Alternative Monitoring for
                                                                               Particulate Matter on a Common
                                                                               Stack at a Portland Cement Plant.
M150024..........................  MACT................  S..................  Alternative Averaging Time for
                                                                               Inlet Flow Monitoring as a
                                                                               Surrogate for Methanol
                                                                               Destruction at a Pulp and Paper
                                                                               Facility.
M150025..........................  MACT................  ZZZZ...............  Alternative Load Level for
                                                                               Pressure Drop Measurement at
                                                                               Internal Combustion Engines.
M150026..........................  MACT, NSPS..........  ZZZZ, IIII.........  Applicability Determination for
                                                                               Internal Combustion Engine to
                                                                               NSPS and NESHAP.
M150027..........................  MACT................  ZZZZ...............  Applicability Determination for
                                                                               Remote Reciprocating Internal
                                                                               Combustion Engine.
M150028..........................  MACT................  DDDD, DDDDD........  Applicability Determination for
                                                                               Rotary Gasifiers as Process
                                                                               Heaters to the Boiler MACT.
M150029..........................  MACT................  ZZZZ...............  Performance Test Waiver for
                                                                               Reciprocating Internal Combustion
                                                                               Engines.
M150030..........................  MACT................  DDDDD..............  Applicability Determination for a
                                                                               Hybrid Suspension Grate Biomass
                                                                               Boiler under the Boiler MACT.
M150031..........................  MACT................  JJJJJJ.............  Applicability Determination for
                                                                               Electric Generating Units under
                                                                               the Boiler Area Source NESHAP.
M150034..........................  MACT................  ZZZZ...............  Applicability Determination for
                                                                               Backup Power Generator under RICE
                                                                               NESHAP.
M150036..........................  MACT, NESHAP........  A..................  60-day Advance Test Notice Waiver.
Z150002..........................  NESHAP..............  N..................  Applicability Determination for
                                                                               Manufacture of Colored Art Glass.
Z150004..........................  MACT, NESHAP, NSPS..  ZZZZ, Db, IIII,      Applicability Determination for
                                                          JJJJ.                Offshore Gas Port Emission Units.
Z150005..........................  MACT, NESHAP........  ZZZZ...............  Applicability Determination for
                                                                               Emergency Stationary Internal
                                                                               Combustion Engines at an
                                                                               Institutional Facility.
Z150006..........................  MACT, NESHAP........  ZZZZ...............  Regulatory Interpretation on
                                                                               Minimizing Engine Idle Time for
                                                                               Internal Combustion Engines.
Z150009..........................  MACT, NESHAP........  ZZZZ...............  Regulatory Interpretation of
                                                                               Emergency Generator Provisions
                                                                               under NESHAP Subpart ZZZZ.
Z150010..........................  MACT, NESHAP........  ZZZZ...............  Regulatory Interpretation on Rule
                                                                               Applicability to Stationary
                                                                               Engines.
Z150011..........................  MACT, NESHAP........  ZZZZ...............  Applicability Determination for
                                                                               Emergency Engines to RICE NESHAP.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 17700]]

Abstracts

Abstract for [1500021]

    Q: Will EPA approve a change to the previously approved March 22, 
2011 alternative monitoring plan (AMP) for Shell Oil Products Puget 
Sound Refinery (PSR) in Anacortes, Washington?
    A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves Shell's revision to the PSR 2011 
AMP. For the monitoring of H2S, PSR is requesting to monitor as 
required by NSPS subpart J, rather than the alternative monitoring 
method that was specified in the 2011 AMP. PSR requests that certain 
portions of the approved AMP stay in place to maintain approval of an 
alternative means for demonstrating compliance for three interconnected 
flares. The conditions that must be satisfied to allow PSR to rely on 
the AMP instead of utilizing an H2S continuous monitoring system 
according to subpart J are stated in the EPA approval letter.

Abstract for [1500022]

    Q: Will EPA approve an alternative monitoring plan (AMP) for the 
Shell Oil Anacortes, Washington facility to install, maintain, and 
operate a total sulfur continuous monitoring system (CMS) as an 
alternative to a hydrogen sulfide (H2S) CMS, and to use sulfur data 
collected at the east flare to represent the sulfur content at the 
north and south flares?
    A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves Shell's AMP for utilizing a H2S 
CMS. The conditions to allow Shell to rely on the AMP instead of 
utilizing an H2S CMS are stated in the EPA is approval letter.

Abstract for [1500023]

    Q: Will EPA grant approval of exempted status under 40 CFR 
60.2887(h) of the NSPS subpart EEEE as a rural institutional waste 
incinerator for an incineration unit that Glacier Bay National Park and 
Preserve (the Park) in Alaska intends to purchase and install?
    A: Yes. EPA determines that the proposed incinerator meets the 
exclusion for rural institutional waste incinerators because the unit 
is located more than 50 miles from the boundary of the nearest 
Metropolitan Statistical Area, alternative disposal options are not 
available or are economically infeasible, and the Park has submitted 
this request prior to initial startup of the incinerator.

Abstract for [1500024]

    Q: Are all on-site units at Kalama Export located in Kalama, 
Washington that were constructed after August 3, 1978, subject to NSPS 
subpart DD for Grain Elevators when applicability is triggered due to 
expanded capacity?
    A: No. In its response to the Southwest Clean Air Agency in 
Vancouver, Washington, EPA explains that the rule applies to each 
individual affected facility at a grain elevator. Therefore, only the 
units that are constructed, modified, or reconstructed when and after 
the NSPS is triggered because of expanded capacity become subject to 
the rule.

Abstract for [1500025]

    Q1: Does NSPS subpart AAAA for Small Municipal Waste Combustion 
(MWC) Units apply to gas combustion turbine that combust a small amount 
of non-condensable hydrocarbon gases, which is located at the Green 
Power facility in Pasco, Washington?
    A1: Yes. In a response to the Washington State Department of 
Ecology and the counsel to the source, EPA indicates that the NSPS 
subpart AAAA applies to the gas combustion turbine it is considered to 
be within the MWC unit boundaries and based on the capacity of the MWC. 
Based on the MWC definition at 40 CFR 60.1465, the catalytic pressure-
less de-polymerization process (CDP) begins the MWC since it is used to 
convert municipal solid waste into synthetic liquid petroleum fuel, 
which includes a small amount of non-condensable hydrocarbon gases. 
Since the non-condensable hydrocarbon gas generated by the CDP is 
combusted in the turbine, the compressor section and combustor section 
of the turbine at the facility are within the MWC boundaries. In 
addition, it is determine that the combustion capacity of the MWC, 
which would not include the capacity attributable to the flare since it 
is a control device, is within the applicable range of subpart AAAA. 
Furthermore, the Green Power operation does not combust landfill gases 
and the landfill gas exemption, therefore, is not applicable.
    Q2: Does NSPS subpart AAAA apply to the Green Power CDP if it 
operates in anaerobic environment, exposed only to inert gases, due to 
explosion hazard?
    A2: No. EPA determines that the Green Power CDP would not be 
subject to Subpart AAAA due to the absence of combustion if the plant 
is constructed such that there is no combustion of the synthetic fuel 
product.
    Q3: Does NSPS subpart AAAA apply to the Green Power proposed Algae 
Production Alternative whereby the non-condensable hydrocarbon gases 
produced in the reactor are routed to a biological treatment unit as a 
nutrient in the production of algae which would subsequently be 
harvested and reintroduced as a feedstock for the CDP process?
    A3: No. EPA determines that in this scenario Subpart AAAA would not 
apply due to the absence of combustion.

Abstract for [1500026]

    Q: Will EPA approve a source test plan submitted by Eielson Air 
Force Base in Alaska for a particulate matter source test on six bin 
vent filters for a new mechanical coal tipper subject to NSPS subpart 
Y?
    A: Yes. EPA approves the Eielson source test plan under subpart Y. 
Eielson has incorporated the guidance received by EPA regarding the 
proper location for a testing port installation to address issues with 
inadequate duct diameter sizing for that bin into the source test plan.

Abstract for [1500027]

    Q1: Will EPA, in consideration of difficulty in applying existing 
methods to new technology, waive the Method 5 and a portion of the 
Method 9 readings for three ship loader bustle filters at EGT 
Development, LLC's (EGT's) Export Elevator facility at Port of 
Longview, Washington?
    A1: Yes. EPA grants EGT the waiver for the Method 5 reading 
required under the initial performance and for a portion of the 
required Method 9 readings for the three bustle filters for several 
reasons. There are technical difficulties that arise in performing the 
test methods with the new loading spout dust control system design. 
Specifically, technical issues arise with conducting the Method 5 test 
where the loading spout dust control system has been moved to the 
bottom of the ship loader spout, and with conducting a Method 9 opacity 
reading while the loading spout is within the hold of the ship loading 
grain. These technical issues combined with the anticipated significant 
margin of compliance, the testing of other units with identical filter 
media at the same facility, and the opacity readings that can be 
performed justifies the waiver approval.
    Q2: Will EPA approve a waiver of initial performance testing for 
certain Donaldson bin vent CPV design PowerCore Filters (CPV filters) 
that EGT plans to install at this facility when they are in a group of 
identical units?
    A2: Yes. EPA waives the initial Method 5 performance test for 
certain CPV filters as outlined in the EPA approval letter. NSPS 
emission test results with Duraplex filter media show maximum emissions 
are an order of magnitude lower than the

[[Page 17701]]

manufacturer's guarantee (0.002 grains/dscf), and two orders of 
magnitude lower than the 0.01 grains/dscf NSPS limit. Furthermore, the 
local air permitting authority will be requiring additional testing on 
a reasonable schedule and there will be a rotation of testing within a 
group, so that a different unit within the group is tested each time 
for any future performance tests. This applies to a total of 14 NSPS 
test units, which represents a group of identical units where that 
group is unique, has a unique air volume and aspirates a conveyor or 
facility with a unique conveying capacity.

Abstract for [1500028]

    Q: Will EPA waive the requirement for Cargill Environmental Finance 
(Cargill) to performance test at two biogas-fueled generators under 
NSPS subpart JJJJ based on the test results of an identical (third) 
biogas-fueled generator at the Dry Creek Dairy in Hanson, Idaho?
    A: Yes. EPA waives the Cargill performance test for the three 
generators that are located at the same facility, produced by the same 
manufacture, have the same model number, rated capacity, operating 
specifications, and are maintained in a similar manner. There is a 
substantial margin of compliance documented by the prior performance 
test results that were submitted.

Abstract for [1500029]

    Q: Will EPA waive the requirement of 40 CFR 60.8(d) to provide 
notification 30 days in advance of a performance test for recently 
installed biogas-fueled generators at Big Sky West in Gooding, Idaho 
due to winter weather conditions and the pending holidays?
    A: Yes. EPA waives the requirement to provide notification 30 days 
in advance of a performance test pursuant to the provisions at 40 CFR 
60.19(f)(3) to implement it early in December due to weather conditions 
and the pending Holidays. EPA requests that you provide the exact 
testing date, a copy of the full testing protocol, and the results of 
the test once completed to the regulatory agencies.

Abstract for [1500030]

    Q: Does EPA determine that Shell Offshore's incineration unit 
located on the Discoverer Drill vessel, operated in the Chukchi Sea is 
exempted from the requirements of 40 CFR part 60 subpart CCCC for 
Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units pursuant to 
the exemption provided in 40 CFR 60.2020(c)(2)?
    A: Yes. Based on the information provided, EPA determines that 
Shell's incinerator qualifies for the exemption in 40 CFR 60.2020(c)(2) 
for units under a certain capacity that burn greater than 30 percent 
municipal solid waste or refuse-derived fuel, provided that Shell keeps 
the records required to demonstrate that it continues to qualify for 
the exemption on an ongoing basis.

Abstract for [1500031]

    Q: Does EPA determine that physical changes made to two boilers 
subject to NSPS subpart Dc owned and operated by Yakama Forest Products 
(YFP) at the Large Log Complex have de-rated the boilers' heat input 
capacity?
    A: Yes. Based on the test data submitted following the physical 
changes of replacing the burners on each boiler, EPA determines that 
boilers No. 3 and 4 have been permanently de-rated to a heat input 
capacity below 30 MM BTU/hr. YFP must ensure that oil pressure at the 
burners meets the conditions of this determination to remain consistent 
with the conditions during the source test that was the basis for this 
determination.

Abstract for [1500033]

    Q: Will EPA approve Northwest Pipeline's request for an extension 
of the deadline to conduct a performance test required by 40 CFR 
60.4340(a) in NSPS subpart KKKK for a turbine located at the Chehalis 
Compressor Station?
    A: No. EPA determines that an applicable basis for waiving the 
testing requirement has not been identified. According to 40 CFR 
60.4340(a), testing can be performed once every two years when 
emissions are less than 75 percent of the emission limit. Therefore, 
Northwest Pipeline must perform annual performance tests in accordance 
with Sec.  60.4400.

Abstract for [1500034]

    Q: Will EPA approve an alternative monitoring procedure (AMP)for 
monitoring the amount of waste combusted in the Northstar incinerator 
to demonstrate that the incinerator qualifies for the co-fired 
combustor exemption under 40 CFR part 60 subpart Ec for Hospital 
Medical Infectious Waste (HMIW) Incinerators located at BP Exploration 
Alaska's (BPXA's) Northstar Development Facility in the Beaufort Sea?
    A: No. EPA denies the AMP because use of the proposed method to 
weigh only the HMIW incinerated, instead of weighing both the HMIW and 
the non-HMIW, will not assure compliance with BPXA's claim that the 
incinerator meets the exemption for co-fired combustors under 40 CFR 
part 60 subpart Ec, as well as the exemption for ``municipal waste 
combustion units'' in 40 CFR 62.14525(c)(2).

Abstract for [1500035]

    Q: Does EPA determine that Andarko's incineration unit located at 
various drilling locations within the Gubik and Chandler Prospects in 
Alaska is exempted from the requirements of 40 CFR part 60 subpart CCCC 
pursuant to the provisions at 40 CFR 60.2020(c)(2)?
    A: Yes. Based on the information provided, EPA determines that 
Andarko's incinerator qualifies for the exemption in 40 CFR 
60.2020(c)(2) for units under a certain capacity that burn greater than 
30 percent municipal solid waste or refuse-derived fuel. Andarko must 
keep the records required to demonstrate that it continues to qualify 
for the exemption on an ongoing basis.

Abstract for [1500036]

    Q: Is fuel sampling required for two turbines owned by Black Hills 
Corporation that monitor under NSPS subpart GG custom fuel monitoring 
schedules for semi-annual periods in which the turbines have not 
operated for the entire semi-annual period? The turbines are located at 
the Glenns Ferry Cogeneration Partners and Rupert Cogeneration Partners 
facilities in Idaho.
    A: No. EPA determines that fuel sampling required by a custom fuel 
monitoring schedule is not required for semi-annual periods in which 
the turbine has not operated for the entire semi-annual period. 
Sampling must be done upon re-startup.

Abstract for [1500038]

    Q: Will EPA waive the requirement in 40 CFR 60.8(d) for Cargill to 
provide a notification 30 days in advance of a performance test for the 
recently installed biogas-fueled generators at Dry Creek Dairy in 
Hansen, Idaho?
    A: Yes. EPA waives the requirement to provide notification 30 days 
in advance of a performance test pursuant to the provisions at 40 CFR 
60.19(f)(3). The source identified a date on which testing would be 
conducted.

Abstract for [1500039]

    Q: Will EPA grant a waiver to Covanta Marion, Incorporated (CMI) in 
Brooks, Oregon, for the municipal waste combustor (MWC) unit load level 
limitations, under 40 CFR 60.53b(b)(2), for the two weeks preceding, 
and during the annual dioxin/furan and mercury performance tests for 
the purpose of evaluating system performance?

[[Page 17702]]

    A: Yes. For the purpose of evaluating system performance, EPA 
waives the MWC load limit for the two week period preceding, and during 
the annual dioxin/furan and mercury performance test.

Abstract for [1500049]

    Q: Will EPA provide a waiver pursuant to 40 CFR 60.8(b)(4) from the 
initial and subsequent performance testing requirement under NSPS 
subpart KKKK for three identical Solar Saturn T-1301 turbines operating 
under the same conditions on the same platform in the Cook Inlet at XTO 
Energy's Kenai, Alaska facility?
    A: Yes. EPA grants the request to expand the November 9, 2011 
waiver to Solar Saturn T-1301 turbine, serial number SDR-105092 under 
the condition that a different turbine will be tested each year on a 
three year rotation. If any tests exceeds 50 percent of the NOx 
emission limits, all turbines will be required to conduct performance 
tests.

Abstract for [1500051]

    Q: Can EPA approve an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for Envent 
Corporation to conduct monitoring of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) emissions, 
in lieu of installing a continuous emission monitoring system when 
performing tank degassing and other similar operations controlled by 
portable, temporary thermal oxidizers, at refineries in Region 6 States 
that are subject to NSPS subparts J or Ja?
    A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves the AMP based on the description 
of the process, the vent gas streams, the design of the vent gas 
controls, and the H2S monitoring data furnished. EPA specifies the 
proposed operating parameter limits and data which the refineries must 
furnish as part of the conditional approval. The approved AMP applies 
only to similar degassing operations conducted by ENVENT at refineries 
in EPA Region 6.

Abstract for [1500054]

    Q: Is the alternative monitoring plan (AMP) submitted to the 
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) for the 
distillation unit in Source B-99A-2 at the Eastman Chemical Company 
(Eastman) facility in Kingsport, Tennessee acceptable?
    A: Yes. Based upon the information provided in the AMP by Eastman, 
EPA determines that the AMP is acceptable since the proposed monitoring 
parameters (water flow rate, propionic acid flow rate, and propionic 
acid inlet temperature) will provide adequate assurance of compliance. 
We agree that three of the parameters that the company would be 
required to monitor under NSPS subpart NNN (propionic acid specific 
gravity, water specific gravity, and water temperature) will not be 
useful indicators of absorber performance for the source in question. 
For ongoing compliance demonstration, EPA also provides guidance on how 
to define excess emissions in terms of the alternative monitoring 
parameters.

Abstract for [1500056]

    Q1: Does a silo or frame structure enclosing a railcar loading 
station at three separate Hi-Crush Proppant nonmetallic mineral 
processing plants located in Augusta, Independence, and Blair, 
Wisconsin meet the definition of a ``building'' under NSPS subpart OOO?
    A1: Yes. Based on Hi-Crush's representation that the enclosed 
railcar loading stations are housed in structures with roofs, EPA 
concludes that these structures would meet the definition of 
``building'' in NSPS subpart OOO.
    Q2: Would the openings of those buildings be considered a ``vent''?
    A2: No. The building openings have no mechanically induced air flow 
for the purpose of exhausting from a building.
    Q3: Since these railcar loading stations are contained in a 
building, would the applicable particulate matter standard only be that 
fugitive emissions from the building openings must not exceed 7 percent 
opacity?
    A3: Yes. One emission limit option for an enclosed railcar loading 
station that is itself enclosed in a building is to restrict fugitive 
emissions from the building openings (except for vents as defined in 40 
CFR 60.671) to 7 percent opacity, per section 60.672(e)(1).

Abstract for [1500057]

    Q: Does EPA approve a waiver from the 40 part 60 subpart Ec 
requirement to monitor the minimum pressure drop across a wet scrubber 
that control emissions of acid gases (i.e., HCl) and is part of the 
emission control system for the Stericycle hospital/medical/infectious 
waste incineration (HMIWI) unit in Apopka, Florida? The Stericycle 
HMIWI unit is equipped with a dry scrubber followed by a fabric filter 
and a wet scrubber and with a selective noncatalytic reduction system. 
All other applicable parameter monitoring requirements are proposed to 
be met by the facility.
    A: Yes. EPA approves the waiver request since the removal of acid 
gases is not dependent on the monitoring of wet scrubber minimum 
pressure drop and all other applicable monitoring parameters for the 
control system will be met. Monitoring of the other wet scrubber 
monitoring parameters identified in Table 3 of subpart Ec (i.e., the 
minimum scrubber liquor flow rate and the minimum scrubber liquor pH) 
will indicate if the scrubber is working properly. Further, compliance 
with the PM emission limit is achieved without the use of the wet 
scrubber based on information.

Abstract for [1500058]

    Q: May an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) be conditionally 
approved for parametric monitoring in lieu of a continuous opacity 
monitoring system (COMS) for a Wet Gas Scrubber (WGS) on a Fluidized 
Catalytic Cracking Unit (FCCU) subject to NSPS subpart J, at the 
Phillips 66 Company Alliance Refinery in Belle Chasse, Louisiana?
    A: Yes. Based on the information provided, EPA approves the AMP for 
the proposed operating parameters conditioned on the source conducting 
a performance test that demonstrates compliance and that establishes 
the operating parameter limits (OPLs) for the WGS. EPA approves the two 
proposed operating parameters, including the 1) minimum Liquid-to-Gas 
(L/G) Ratio on a 3-hour rolling average basis; and, 2) minimum slurry 
liquid circulation pump discharge pressure on a 3-hour rolling average 
basis. The OPLs are to be recalculated based on the average of three 
runs, provided the average PM emissions for the three runs meet the PM 
emissions limit of the rule in pounds per kilopounds of coke processed.

Abstract for [1500059]

    Q: Is Capitol One National Association required to petition the 
Administrator under 40 CFR 60.4211(e) for approval to exceed the 100 
hour readiness testing limit for emergency generators testing for 
commissioning purposes under subpart IIII for internal compression 
engines during the initial onsite commissioning process of its Data 
Center in Chester, Virginia?
    A: No. A petition is not necessary or appropriate. When a new 
greenfield source is under construction, subpart IIII allows emergency 
generators to be used as needed to complete the construction process, 
so long as Capitol One abides by the 100 hours limitation when the Data 
Center is in commercial operation.

Abstract for [1500060]

    Q: Portland General Electric Company (PGE) seeks verification that 
the emergency diesel-fired emergency generators at its Carver Readiness 
Center in Clackamas, Oregon, run for 50 of 100 hours total use to 
supply power,

[[Page 17703]]

allowed under NSPS subpart IIII and NESHAP subpart ZZZZ, can be part of 
its Dispatchable Standby Generation (DSG) program.
    A: 40 CFR 60.4211 and 63.6640 authorize limited non-emergency use 
of diesel engines that are classified and regulated as emergency 
engines. EPA determines that the language in 40 CFR 63.6640 of subpart 
ZZZZ regarding emergency engines dispatched under a financial 
arrangement with another entity was not intended to prohibit utilities 
from dispatching engines that they own and operate under the 50-hour 
non-emergency operation option provided.

Abstract for [1500062]

    Q: Does EPA approve revisions to the Alternative Monitoring Plan 
(AMP) for monitoring hydrogen sulfide (H2S) concentration and 
determining the total reduced sulfur (TRS) concentration in the sour 
gas routed to flares at the Lion Oil Company El Dorado (Lion Oil), 
Arkansas Refinery, which are subject to NSPS subpart Ja?
    A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves Lion Oil's revised AMP, which 
supersedes previous approvals to expand use of the approved AMP for 
determining TRS under NSPS subpart Ja, and that includes additional 
operating parameters, clarifications on sampling locations, and test 
protocol specifications.

Abstract for [1500063]

    Q: Does EPA approve a revision to an Alternative Monitoring Plan 
(AMP) that has been conditionally approved for the wet gas scrubber 
(WGS) on a Fluidized Catalytic Cracking Unit (FCCU) at Marathon 
Petroleum's refinery in Texas City, Texas subject to NSPS Part 60 
subpart J, be resubmitted for approval of a revision based on an 
additional operation mode at reduced charge rate?
    A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves the revision to the EPA-approved 
AMP based on the additional information provided by Marathon to add an 
additional mode of operation. The condition for approval requires 
Marathon to conduct performance testing to demonstrate compliance and 
to establish the operating parameter limits (OPLs) for the WGS at the 
additional FCCU reduced charge rate, as established in the EPA response 
letter.

Abstract for [1500064]

    Q: Does EPA approve alternate semiannual reporting periods under 
section 60.5420(b) of NSPS subpart OOOO to run from April 1 through 
September 30, and from October 1 through March 31, at the Atlas 
Pipeline Driver Gas Plant in Midland, Texas?
    A: Yes. EPA approves the proposed alternate reporting schedule to 
align the periodic reporting time period requirements of NSPS subpart 
0000 since it does not extend the reporting period that would be 
covered by the next semiannual report, as allowed under section 
60.5420(b). The alternate reporting schedule does not extend the 
reporting period that would be covered by the next semiannual.

Abstract for [1500065]

    Q1: Are the five City of Rock Island Public Works Department 880 HP 
spark ignition natural gas fired engines (plus one offline spare) at 
their wastewater treatment plant in Wisconsin considered emergency 
engines under NSPS subpart JJJJ?
    A1: No. Since the engines would be operated approximately 16 times 
per year for 270 hours, EPA determines that the engines do not meet the 
definition of emergency stationary internal combustion engines. 
Therefore, the engines are subject to subpart JJJJ.
    Q2: Can a waiver from performance testing be granted for the 
engines?
    A2: No. EPA cannot grant a waiver of performance testing for these 
engines, but due to the potential difficulties in testing, EPA 
encourages the City to request alternative testing if necessary.

Abstract for [1500066]

    Q: May EPA approve an alternative to stack testing under NSPS 
subpart JJJJ for nine identical non-certified Riverview bio-gas fueled 
generators located on three farms (Riverview Dairy, West River Dairy, 
and District 45 Dairy) in Minnesota?
    A: No. EPA does not approve any of the five alternative options 
proposed by Riverview for its generators, which included: (1) exemption 
from ongoing testing for engines that meet the standard, (2) 
retroactive certification by the manufacturer, (3) self-certification 
through testing, (4) provide certification to manufacturers that have 
met the standards, and (5) test one engine and apply results to all 
nine. However, EPA does provide two alternatives, Modified Option 1A 
and 1B that could be used to demonstrate compliance. Modified Option 1A 
is annual testing for NO, NOX, CO and O2 using a 
portable analyzer. Modified Option 1B is to test each dairy's engine 
sets at least once every three years, rotating annually on a three-year 
cycle.

Abstract for [1500067]

    Q: May an alternative test method be approved for Hawaiian Electric 
Company's four new compression ignition engines subject to NSPS subpart 
IIII at the Honolulu International Airport in Oahu that were certified 
on diesel but will be operated on biodiesel?
    A: Yes. EPA determines that operation of the engines on biodiesel 
would not void the certification if all of the following conditions are 
met: the biodiesel meets the requirements of 40 CFR 60.4207(b), the 
manufacturer's warranty includes the use of the biodiesel, and the 
biodiesel meets ASTM D6751. The engines must also be installed, 
configured, operated and maintained per the manufacturer's 
instructions.

Abstract for [1500068]

    Q: Does EPA approve an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for 
Evergreen Industrial Services (EIS) to conduct monitoring of hydrogen 
sulfide (H2S) emissions in lieu of installing a continuous emission 
monitoring system (CEMS), to monitor emissions controlled by portable 
and temporary thermal oxidizers units (TOUs) during tank degassing and 
other similar operations at refineries in Region 6 that are subject to 
NSPS subparts J or Ja?
    A: Yes. Based on the description of the process, the vent gas 
streams, the design of the vent gas controls, and the H2S monitoring 
data furnished, EPA conditionally approves the AMP when EIA is 
conducting degassing operations at refineries in Region 6 since it is 
impractical to use a H2S CEMS in a portable TOUs. The EPA response 
letter list the operating conditions for degassing operations and data 
which the refineries must furnish to EIS as part of the conditional 
approval.

Abstract for [1500069]

    Q: May Derenzo & Associates in Livonia, Michigan use a TECO Model 
55C analyzer in lieu of Method 18 that will be used with Method 25A to 
determine nonmethane organic compounds emitted from an internal 
combustion engine subject to NSPS subpart JJJJ?
    A: Yes. EPA approves the request to use TECO Model 55C as an 
alternative to Method 18 for measuring methane since it should produce 
results similar to the ``cutter'' analyzers already allowed by the 
regulation.

 Abstract for [1500071]

    Q: Does EPA approve the use by TRC Companies located in Lowell, 
Massachusetts of a TECO Model 55C analyzer to measure non-methane 
organic compounds (NMOC) from engines subject to NSPS subpart JJJJ?

[[Page 17704]]

    A: Yes. EPA approve TRC Companies request for use of the TECO Model 
55C analyzer in lieu of Method 18 to measure NMOC from subpart JJJJ 
engines, and the analyzer may be used by other engines subject to NSPS 
subpart JJJJ. EPA will announce this as broadly applicable to all 
stationary spark ignition combustion engines on our Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/trnethods.html#CatB).

 Abstract for [1500072]

    Q1: Does EPA conditionally approve a revision to a previously 
approved Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) to allow for an automatic 
sampling system, and an associated flow meter for collecting and 
recording hydrogen sulfide (H2S) content, to be included for the West 
Operations Ground Flare (Multi Jet Flare), which is part of a Flare Gas 
Recovery System (FGRS) subject to NSPS subpart Ja, at the Motiva 
Enterprises Norco Refinery in Norco, Louisiana?
    A1: Yes. EPA conditionally approves the AMP revision based on how 
the automatic sampling system functions regarding the configuration and 
operation of the FGRS. The H2S concentration of the combined 
refinery fuel gas stream routed to the FGRS and the Multi Jet Flare was 
less than 1 part per million. This satisfied EPA's condition for 
approval that the H2S content shall be inherently low. Additionally, 
the automatic sampling device samples the blended fuel gas stream 
before it is sent to the Multi Jet Flare, and there are no crossover 
points between the FGRS and other fuel gas streams. This satisfied 
EPA's condition for approval that no crossover points shall exist in 
the fuel gas vent stream going to the Multi Jet Flare. Based on review 
by EPA Headquarters, Motiva also was authorized to use an alternate 
test method for testing and analysis, which removed the previous 
requirement to measure and record refinery fuel gas H2S concentrations 
using the Length of Stain Tube method. EPA's ``Conditions for Approval 
of the Alternative Monitoring Plan for Miscellaneous Refinery Fuel Gas 
Streams, dated December 7, 1999, are incorporated by reference, except 
for the monitoring provisions in Steps 1 through 7, as described in the 
EPA response letter.
    Q2: What recordkeeping and report requirements are included in the 
conditional approval?
    A2: Motiva shall maintain the H2S concentration data 
from the sampling system and the alternate test method in the 
laboratory information management system. The gas flow data from the 
flow meter will be maintained in the electronic process data storage 
system. Additional records shall be kept to note when the FGRS is 
operating in either of two different scenarios. Quarterly reporting 
must be submitted, except more frequently under certain circumstances, 
as outlined in the conditional EPA approval letter.

 Abstract for [1500073]

    Q: May Derenzo & Associates in Livonia, Michigan use the TECO Model 
55I analyzer (which is a newer version of the previously approved Model 
55C) in lieu of Method 18 and Method 25A to determine non-methane 
organic compounds (NMOC) emitted from RICE subject to NSPS subpart JJJJ 
or NESHAP subpart ZZZZ?
    A: Yes. EPA approves the alternative testing request for NSPS 
subpart JJJJ, provided that the facility follows all applicable 
requirements in Method 25A for sample heating, appropriate test 
procedures, calibration and standardization. Since NESHAP subpart ZZZZ 
does not require the measurement of NMOC that part of the request is 
not considered.

 Abstract for [1500074]

    Q: Can EPA confirm the proposed deadline for completing the initial 
performance test under 40 CFR part 60 subpart Ec for the University of 
Texas Medical Branch's medical infectious waste incinerator in 
Galveston, Texas?
    A: Yes. EPA confirms that the initial compliance performance test 
should be completed within 60 days of achieving maximum production 
rate, and not later than 180 days after initial startup as required 
under section 60.8 of the General Provisions.

 Abstract for [A150001]

    Q: Does the use of the Pre-Construction Survey, as described in 
ASTM E2356-14 ``Standard Practice for Comprehensive Building Asbestos 
Surveys,'' demonstrate compliance with the ``thorough inspection'' 
requirement at 40 CFR 61.145(a)?
    A: Yes. If an owner/operator follows the steps described in 
Sections 1 through 5 and Section 8 in ASTM E2356-14 ``Standard Practice 
for Comprehensive Building Asbestos Surveys'', it would provide a 
thorough inspection of the facility. However, EPA would not accept the 
Limited Asbestos Screen (i.e., Practice E2308) described in Section 1.5 
as a substitute for the Comprehensive Building Asbestos Survey, and 
would not consider the Limited Asbestos Screen as a thorough 
inspection.

 Abstract for [C150001]

    Q: Do regulations related to ozone depleting substances under 40 
CFR part 82 prohibit the use of Leak Stop to repair leaks in 
residential air conditioning systems that contain chlorofluorocarbons?
    A: No. The use of aerosol chemical products such as Leak Stop are 
not prohibited as long as there is no ``knowing venting'' or ``knowing 
release'' of an ozone depleting substance taking place. We do not 
currently have any information about the propellant used by the Leak 
Stop product. However, if it is propelled by a Class I or II ozone 
depleting substance, then it is banned under the non-essential products 
exclusion found at 40 CFR 82.60.

 Abstract for [M150010]

    Q: Will EPA approve a waiver of the initial performance test 
according to the provisions of 40 CFR 60.8(b)(4) and 63.7(h) for a new 
chemset chamber subject to the NESHAP for Lead Acid Battery 
Manufacturing, 40 CFR part 63 subpart PPPPPP, and the NSPS for Lead 
Acid Battery Manufacturing, 40 CFR part 60 subpart KK, at the Johnson 
Controls Battery Group Inc.'s (JCBGI''s) facility in Canby, Oregon?
    A: No. EPA is denying the requested waiver because the new unit is 
not identical to the previously installed units and could have a 
different capacity. While emissions are expected to be low, the initial 
performance test is valuable to verify the installations of new 
equipment.

 Abstract for [M150011]

    Q: Will EPA approve a National Security Exemption (NSE)for the 
Department of Defense to waive the performance testing requirements for 
twelve stationary diesel fired engines constructed between 2003 and 
2009, all of which are subject to the National Emissions Standard for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Stationary Reciprocating Internal 
Combustion Engines (RICE) at 40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ, while five 
engines are also subject to the New Source Performance Standard for 
Compression Ignition RICE at 40 CFR part 60, subpart IIII, which are 
located at Fort Greely, Alaska?
    A: No. An NSE exemption is not necessary because 40 CFR part 63 
subpart ZZZZ does not require performance testing for emergency 
engines; according, an exemption from performance testing is not 
necessary for these twelve engines if they meet the definition of 
``emergency stationary RICE'' under subpart XXXX. In addition,

[[Page 17705]]

subpart IIII does not require performance testing for manufactured-
certified engines; accordingly, an exemption from performance testing 
under subpart IIII is not necessary for the five manufactured-certified 
engines located at Fort Greely.

 Abstract for [M150012]

    Q: Does EPA determine that the operation of an emergency generator 
owned and operated by the Union Pacific Railroad's rail yard facility 
in Lane County, Oregon is classified as a stationary source under 
NESHAP subpart ZZZZ?
    A: No. EPA determines that the engine used to provide power 
restoration for emergencies at railroad tunnels in Oregon is a portable 
diesel generator. Because the engine has not provided power, or 
operated for emergency use, or any other purpose other than testing at 
the location where it has been stored for more than 12 months, it does 
not meet the definition of stationary engine for that location under 
subpart ZZZZ.

 Abstract for [M150013]

    Q1: Does EPA determine that 40 CFR part 63 subpart HHHHHH, National 
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Paint Stripping and 
Miscellaneous Surface Coating Operations at Area Sources, apply to the 
process of spray applying vehicle undercoating?
    A1: Yes. EPA determines the process of spray applying vehicle 
undercoating is subject to NESHAP subpart HHHHHH. The undercoating 
would be considered a coating under the NESHAP definitions and would 
not be a sealant. It is generally spray-applied using a hand-held 
device that creates an atomized mist of coating and deposits the 
coating on a sub straight, just as are other automotive coatings.
    Q2: Does EPA determine that the exemption for facilities that do 
not spray-apply target HAP-containing coatings is available to part of 
a facility?
    A2: No. EPA determines that a facility that is not exempt must 
satisfy the rule requirements for all of their spray-applied coating 
operations. If the facility spray-applies no target HAP, then it may 
request exemption from the rule.

 Abstract for [M150015]

    Q: Will EPA approve an alternative to the visible emissions 
monitoring requirement of 40 CFR 63.11423(b) of the National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Lead Acid Battery 
Manufacturing Area Sources, subpart PPPPPP, for Johnson Controls 
Battery Group Incorporated's facility in Canby, Oregon to shut down 
equipment per permit conditions if any visible emissions are observed 
rather than continuing to operate and conduct a Method 9 test?
    A: Yes. EPA approves this minor change in monitoring methodology 
pursuant to 40 CFR 63.8(b)(i) because it will be more stringent than 
that which is required according to 40 CFR 63.11423(b) by the NESHAP 
standard.

 Abstract for [M150016]

    Q: Does 40 CFR part 63 subpart MMMMMM for Area Source Carbon Black 
Production apply to Reklaim Technologies' tire reclamation facility at 
the Port of Morrow near Boardman, Oregon?
    A: No. Based on the information provided by Reklaim, EPA determines 
that the process at Reklaim's facility is materially different from the 
``carbon black production'' process that is subject to subpart MMMMMM. 
The process involves heating shredded tires in an oxygen starved 
environment to recover carbon black, oil and steel from the tires. As 
such the process does not fall within the definition of ``carbon black 
production'' and is not subject to subpart MMMMMM.

 Abstract for [M150017]

    Q: The Olympic Region Clean Air Agency (ORCAA) in Port Angeles, 
Washington asked if 40 CFR part 63 subpart HHHHHH for Paint Stripping 
and Miscellaneous Surface Coating Operations apply to the process of 
spray-applied truck bed lining.
    A: EPA determines that operations that spray-apply coatings to 
truck bed liners, including color coatings, are subject to subpart 
HHHHHH, based on the definitions of coatings and spray-applied coating 
operations in 40 CFR 63.11180. Although the definition of ``truck bed 
liner coating'' does exclude color coats, that definition is not 
referred in 40 CFR 63.11170, the applicability section for subpart 
HHHHHH. The lining operation is generally spray-applied using a hand-
held device that creates an atomized mist of coating and deposits the 
coating on a substrate, just as are other automotive coatings.

 Abstract for [M150023]

    Q: Does EPA approve Holcim's particulate matter (PM) alternative 
continuous parameter monitoring system (CPMS) plan for the common stack 
venting exhaust emissions from different sources at their Portland 
cement plant in Florence, Colorado, subject to the National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants From the Portland Cement 
Manufacturing Industry, subpart LLL?
    A: Yes. Pursuant to 40 CFR 63.8(f)(2) and 63.1350(o)(4), EPA 
conditionally approves the use of one PM CPMS on the common stack 
whereby a site-specific operating limit is established that corresponds 
to the results of performance testing demonstrating compliance with the 
kiln and clinker cooler emission limits. The conditions for approval 
are specified in the EPA response letter.

 Abstract for [M150024]

    Q: Does EPA approve an alternative monitoring plan that uses a 
longer averaging time for inlet flow monitoring as a surrogate 
parameter for monitoring methanol destruction in the Aeration 
Stabilization Basin (ASB) subject to the National Emission Standards 
for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) from the Pulp and Paper Industry, 
subpart S, at the Clearwater Paper Corporation, Cypress Bend Mill 
located in McGehee, Arkansas?
    A: Yes. Based on the monitoring data provided by the company and 
performance test results, EPA approves the AMP request. EPA agrees that 
a daily flow is not representative of the actual hydraulic retention 
time in the ASB, whereas a nine-day rolling average inlet flow 
established per 40 CFR 63.453(n)(4) provides an actual representation 
of the treatment system retention time.

 Abstract for [M150025]

    Q: Does EPA approve an alternative monitoring request to conduct 
monthly pressure differential measurements across the catalyst at load 
conditions within plus or minus 10 percent of the baseline load 
established during the initial engine performance tests outlined in QEP 
Field Services Company's (QEP) Consent Decree, rather than the plus or 
minus 10 percent of 100 percent load as required in 40 CFR part 63 
subpart ZZZZ for Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines 
located at Chapita, Coyote Wash, Island and Wonsits Valley Compressor 
Stations?
    A: Yes. EPA conditionally approves the AMP request pursuant to 
Sec.  63.8(t)(2) based on the performance testing negotiated as part of 
the QEP Consent Decree. EPA believes that it is technically appropriate 
to conduct the monthly pressure drop readings at plus or minus 10 
percent of the load at an affected facility engine when the initial 
performance test that was conducted is showing compliance with the MACT 
ZZZZ. The conditions for approval are described in the EPA response 
letter.

[[Page 17706]]

 Abstract for [M150026]

    Q: Do NSPS subpart IIII and NESHAP subpart ZZZZ apply to the engine 
of a mobile power generator in Springdale, Arkansas that is designed to 
supply electrical power on a temporary basis, at various locations 
within the Kawneer Springdale Plant, and does not remain at any 
location greater than 12 months?
    A: No. EPA determines that NSPS subpart IIII and NESHAP subpart 
ZZZZ do not apply since this engine is considered a nonroad mobile 
source. The mobile generator is a wheeled unit and its engine meets the 
criteria for a nonroad engine that it be by itself or in or on a piece 
of equipment that is portable or transportable. Furthermore, it will 
not remain in a single location for longer than 12 consecutive months.

 Abstract for [M150027]

    Q1: Is the stationary gas compression reciprocating internal 
combustion engine (RICE) at the Dimension Energy Company Coquille Bay, 
Louisiana facility a remote affected source under 40 CFR part 63 
subpart ZZZZ?
    A1: Yes. After reviewing the description of the RICE and its 
operations, EPA determines that it is an existing area source which 
meets the definition of a remote stationary RICE under 40 CFR 63.6675.
    Q2: What are the continuing compliance requirements for a remote 
stationary RICE?
    A2: The operator must: Perform prescribed preventative maintenance 
at certain intervals; maintain the RICE according to the manufacturer's 
instructions; minimize startup time or develop a maintenance plan using 
good air pollution prevention practices; and, maintain records to 
demonstrate that applicable requirements have been completed.

Abstract for [M150028]

    Q: Does EPA agree that the Callidus Closed Loop Gasification System 
(CCLGS) at the Del-Tin Fiber plant in El Dorado, Arkansas is exempt 
from the Boiler MACT, subpart DDDDD under the exemption at 40 CFR 
63.7491(h) because it is subject to and complying with the Plywood 
MACT, subpart DDDD?
    A: No. The EPA determines that both the Boiler MACT and the Plywood 
MACT apply to specific components of the CCLGS based on a review of the 
design and operation information available for the Del-Tin Fiber 
facility, so the exemption at 40 CFR 63.7491(h) does not apply. The 
rotary gasifiers and secondary combustion chamber (SCC) are considered 
affected sources, specifically defined as ``process heaters'' under the 
Boiler MACT when combustion gases are not used to directly heat process 
material. The portion of combustion gases that directly flow through 
the dryer units are considered affected sources under the Plywood MACT 
(Sec.  63.2232(b) and Sec.  63.2292) and are thereby exempted from the 
Boiler MACT requirements (Sec.  63.7491(1)). However, any combustion 
gases from the rotary gasifiers and the SCC that bypass the dryer units 
and are used for indirect heat transfer to process material or to heat 
transfer material for use in a process unit are subject to the Boiler 
MACT (Sec.  63.7575).

 Abstract for [M150029]

    Q: Does EPA agree to accept data from a prior performance test in 
lieu of a new performance test to demonstrate initial compliance with 
40 CFR part 63 subpart ZZZZ for six natural gas fueled spark plug 
ignition engines at the ExxonMobil Chemical facility in Baton Rouge, 
Louisiana?
    A: Yes. EPA accepts a previous performance testing for six engines 
conducted in lieu of implementing an initial test. The testing was done 
using the same methods specified in subpart ZZZZ, and was conducted 
within two years of the performance test deadline. Additionally, the 
equipment was not modified following the April 2012 testing.

 Abstract for [M150030]

    Q: Does EPA agree that the RockTenn Hodge Mill Boiler in Hodge, 
Louisiana is a biomass hybrid suspension grate boiler under 40 CFR part 
63 subpart DDDDD?
    A: Yes. EPA agrees that the boiler is subject to NESHAP subpart 
DDDDD since the description provided meets the definition of a hybrid 
suspension grate boiler found in the rule. Since natural gas and tire 
derived fuel (TDF) are also used, the facility must keep records to 
demonstrate the annual average moisture content is at or above 40 
percent. The facility must use natural gas for startup, shutdown, and 
flame stabilization, and use TDF when excessively firing wet biomass 
fuel.

 Abstract for [M150031]

    Q: Are three Electric Utility Generating Units (EUGUs) located at 
the Lafayette Utilities System (LUS) Doc Bonin Electric Generating 
Station in Lafayette, Louisiana considered to be affected sources with 
gas-fired boilers that are not subject to Boiler Area Source MACT, 
subpart JJJJJJ?
    A: EPA determines that the boilers are not affected sources subject 
to the Boiler Area Source MACT if all conditions at 40 CFR 63.11237 are 
met. Gas-fired boilers are excluded from subpart JJJJJJ per 40 CFR 
63.11195(e). A permit limitation is necessary to verify applicability 
requirements are met for each EUGU for burning fuel oil only during 
natural gas curtailment, and to not exceed testing hours with fuel oil 
during any calendar year.

 Abstract for [M150032]

    Q1: Does EPA approve an Alternative Monitoring Plan (AMP) for three 
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) subject to NESHAP 
subpart ZZZZ at the Occidental Permian Terrill Gas Treating Facility 
for testing at less than 100 percent maximum load?
    A1: Yes. EPA approves Occidental Permian proposed AMP for a lower 
engine load be set as a maximum load for compliance demonstration. 
Specifically, we approve performance testing at the alternate lower 
maximum engine load with monitoring required at plus or minus 10 
percent. The three RICE cannot operate at 100 percent load due to site-
specific operations at the facility, and therefore cannot be tested at 
100 percent plus or minus 10 percent operational capacity, as specified 
at 40 CFR 63.6620(b)(2). If operations change such that the maximum 
load of the engines exceeds the alternative lower maximum load, the AMP 
approval will be terminated, and retesting will be required to 
demonstrate compliance with NESHAP subpart ZZZZ at the higher engine 
load.

 Abstract for [M150034]

    Q: Does EPA agree that the backup power generator at the Freddie 
MAC facility in Carrollton, Texas is classified as an existing 
commercial emergency stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion 
Engine (RICE) that is not subject to 40 CFR part 63 subpart ZZZZ?
    A: Yes. EPA determines that the Freddie MAC facility is an area 
source with a commercial NAICS code, and the backup power generator 
meets the exemption provided at 40 CFR 63.6585(f)(2) applicable to 
emergency stationary RICE operated at an area source. This RICE, used 
solely for backup power generation, have not exceeded 50 hours for any 
activities during any one year period within the past two year period.

 Abstract for [M150036]

    Q: Will EPA provide a waiver to CertainTeed Corporation of the 60-
day requirement under 40 CFR 63.9(c) to notify EPA in advance of the 
initial

[[Page 17707]]

performance test at the GS Roofing facility in Portland, Oregon?
    A: Yes. EPA is granting a waiver of the 60-day requirement for a 
notification prior to the initial performance test pursuant to 40 CFR 
63.9(i) of the 40 CFR 63.9(c) requirement to enable testing during 
facility's highest volume period with the maximum ambient temperature, 
which is will occur in less than 60 days. This would enable the 
estimation of what the emissions are during a worst case scenario to 
test the limits of our system.

 Abstract for [Z150002]

    Q: Does 40 CFR part 61 subpart N apply to the Bullseye Glass 
Company's manufacture of colored art glass in its Portland, Oregon 
facility?
    A: Yes. NESHAP subpart N applies to the company's manufacture of 
colored art glass. According to 40 CFR 61.160(a), 40 CFR part 61 
subpart N does not apply to pot furnaces but rather to each glass 
melting furnace that uses commercial arsenic as a raw material. 
However, based on information provided by Bullseye Glass including 
descriptions, photos and diagrams, EPA determines that the vessels used 
by Bullseye do not meet the definition of pot furnaces because they are 
not sealed off from the furnace atmosphere so that there is potential 
for emissions to escape with the furnace exhaust.

 Abstract for [Z150004]

    Q: Are boilers/engines/marine equipment on a liquefied natural gas 
carrier (LNGC) at the proposed Aguirre Gasport located approximately 3 
miles offshore of the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority subject to 
NSPS and NESHAP standards when the LNGC will be converted into a 
Floating Storage and Regasification Unit (FSRU) to be permanently 
moored at the GasPort?
    A: Yes. Based on the information provided, EPA determines that the 
FSRU is a stationary source because it utilizes boilers as the main 
propulsion devices instead of reciprocating internal combustion engines 
(RICE) and it will be permanently moored, except when there is a need 
to take the unit to safer water due to and special circumstances. 
Therefore, the affected equipment on the FSRU, except for non-
reciprocating internal combustion engine (RICE), is subject to NSPS and 
NESHAP standards. All non-reciprocating RICE equipment on the FSRU is 
not a stationary sources because it falls under the definition of 
nonroad engines as they will be used on self-propelled equipment. 
Therefore, the NSPS and NESHAP do not apply to the nonroad RICE. 
However, the nonroad RICE must comply with the applicable nonroad 
engine standards in 40 CFR parts 89, 94, 1039, 1042, 1043, 1045, 1048, 
1054, 1065, and 1068, if applicable. Specific questions on the 
requirements and applicability of a particular NSPS and NESHAP rules 
can be discussed separately on a case-by-case basis as the need arises.

 Abstract for [Z150005]

    Q: Are the 39 emergency stationary reciprocating internal 
combustion engines (RICE) at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) area 
source facility subject to RICE NESHAP requirements?
    A: No. EPA determines that the 39 emergency RICE at LANL are not 
subject to the RICE NESHAP because they are located at an area source 
that is classified as an ``institutional'' facility. The RICE rule 
excludes existing stationary emergency engines located at residential, 
commercial, or institutional facilities that are area sources of HAP. 
Note that the engines must meet the definition of ``Emergency 
stationary RICE'' in 40 CFR 63.6675.

 Abstract for [Z150006]

    Q: Northern Natural Gas based in Omaha, Nebraska asked that, under 
40 CFR 63.6625(h), part 63 NESHAP subpart ZZZZ for spark ignition 
reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE) regarding minimizing 
engine idle time, if an engine does not complete start up within the 
thirty minute time limit, are there any restrictions on initiating 
another startup of the engine and/or the time frame to complete the 
subsequent startup?
    A: No. An engine does not need to be shut off if it does not 
complete startup within thirty minutes. However, any further activity 
after thirty minutes is considered part of normal operation. Multiple 
startups should be counted as separate events with a thirty minute time 
limit per event. If startups occur consecutively with short durations 
in between, they could be considered as one startup since startups are 
part of a single occasion where the engine is working up to normal 
operations.

 Abstract for [Z150009]

    Q1: May emergency Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE) 
that currently do not qualify for the exclusion in 40 CFR 63.6585(f)(2) 
because they are contractually obligated to be available for more than 
15 hours for the purposes specified at 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(2)(ii) and 
(iii) and (f)(4)(ii), later qualify for exclusion once those contracts 
expire, provided that the other conditions of 40 CFR 63.6585(f)(2) are 
met?
    A1: If an emergency stationary RICE does not meet the conditions 
for the exclusion in 40 CFR 63.6585(f)(2) as of the compliance date, 
then it is subject to subpart ZZZZ at the date of compliance. However, 
if the engine's status subsequently changes to meet the conditions of 
40 CFR 63.6585(f)(2) after the compliance date, the engine would no 
longer be subject to subpart ZZZZ.
    Q2: Can emergency RICE located at area sources continue to 
participate in peak shaving programs for up to 50 hours per year until 
May 3, 2014 without losing their emergency engine status?
    A2: An emergency stationary RICE located at an area source of HAP 
emissions can be used for peak shaving for up to 50 hours per year 
until May 3, 2014 if the engine is operated as part of a peak shaving 
(load management program) with the local distribution system operator 
and the power is provided only to the facility itself or to support the 
local distribution system. This is the case whether or not the engine 
will be retrofitted to comply with the subpart ZZZZ standards for non-
emergency engines.
    Q3: Do 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(i) and (ii) address separate and 
distinct non-emergency situations, and does the ``local reliability'' 
exception set forth in 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(ii) have no sunset 
provision?
    A3: Yes. 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(i) and (ii) are separate and distinct 
situations and there is no sunset provision for the operation specified 
in Sec.  63.6640(f)(4)(ii). An emergency stationary RICE at an area 
source of HAP emissions can continue to operate for up to 50 hours per 
calendar year for the purpose specified in Sec.  63.6640(f)(4)(ii) 
beyond May 3, 2014.
    Q4: How does EPA interpret 40 CFR 63.6640(f)(4)(ii)(A), which 
requires that to qualify for the 50 hour exemption, the emergency RICE 
must be dispatched by the local balancing or local transmission and 
distribution system operator?
    A4: If the local transmission and distribution system operator 
informs the facility that they will be cutting their power, which, in 
turn, causes the facility to engage its emergency stationary RICE, the 
engine would be considered dispatched by the local transmission and 
distribution system operator.

 Abstract for [Z150010]

    Q1: What date is used under NESHAP subpart ZZZZ to determine if 
engines located at Allison Transmission Indianapolis facility in 
Indiana, are ``existing'' or ``new''?

[[Page 17708]]

    A1: The rule uses the date that the engine commenced construction 
to determine if the engine is existing or new. The General Provisions 
to 40 CFR part 63 define both ``construction'' and ``commenced'' and 
those definitions are applied to the subpart.
    Q2: Does NESHAP subpart ZZZZ apply to an engine that has been 
rebuilt, specifically where the engine core is reused, but components 
such as pistons, rings and bearings are reconditioned or replaced?
    A2: A rebuilt engine would need to be evaluated to determine if 
reconstruction had occurred. The General Provisions to part 63 defines 
``reconstruction.''

 Abstract for [Z150011]

    Q: Are the emergency engines located at the NASA Langley Research 
Facility in Hampton, VA subject to NESHAP subpart ZZZZ for 
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines?
    A: No. EPA determines that the emergency engines are located at a 
facility that is an area source and classified as an ``institutional'' 
facility. Therefore, under 40 CFR 63.6590(b)(3), emergency engines at 
the facility are exempt from requirements under NESHAP subpart ZZZZ.

 Abstract for [1600004]

    Q: Does EPA accept the industry coalition request to rescind a 
November 21, 2007, letter to the National Grain and Feed Association in 
which EPA stated that temporary storage facilities meet the definition 
of ``permanent storage capacity'' under 40 CFR part 60, subpart DD, 
NSPS for Grain Elevators (Subpart DD), and required it be included when 
determining applicability of Subpart DD for a particular facility?
    A: Yes. The EPA is proposing revisions to Subpart DD and has also 
decided to re-evaluate the rationale for the November 21, 2007 letter. 
While the definition of ``permanent storage capacity'' in Subpart DD is 
broad, we are now aware that temporary storage facilities (TSFs) 
generally handle the grain less time throughout the year than other 
types of permanent storage facilities and may require different 
treatment. Also, while not dispositive as to the applicability of the 
rule to these units, we note that TSFs did not exist during the 
development of Subpart DD, and their processes and handling techniques 
were not specifically considered during the rulemaking process. For 
these reasons, EPA rescinds the November 21, 2007 letter. As a result, 
TSFs do not meet the definition of ``permanent storage capacity'' under 
Subpart DD and should not be included when determining applicability 
under Subpart DD for a particular facility.

    Dated: February 25, 2016.
Betsy Smidinger,
Acting Director, Office of Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2016-07185 Filed 3-29-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P