[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 7 (Thursday, January 10, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1295-1300]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-624]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 60, 61, 63, 72, and 75

[FRL-7127-4]


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

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability and correction to November 15, 2001 
Notice of Availability.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces the availability of applicability 
determinations, alternative monitoring decisions, and regulatory 
interpretations that EPA has made under the New Source Performance 
Standards (NSPS)(40 CFR part 60), and the National Emission Standards 
for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP)(40 CFR parts 61 and 63). This 
document also corrects and clarifies the Notice of Availability 
published in the Federal Register on November 15, 2001 (66 FR 57453).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: An electronic copy of each complete 
document posted on the Applicability Determination Index (ADI) database 
system is available on the Internet through the ADI at: http://es.epa.gov/oeca/eptdd/adi.html. The document may be located by date, 
author, subpart, or subject search. For questions about the ADI or this 
document, contact Maria Malave at EPA by phone at: (202) 564-7027, or 
by e-mail at: [email protected]. For technical questions about the 
individual applicability determinations or monitoring decisions, 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 to the NSPS in 40 CFR part 60 and 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, reconstruction, or modification. EPA's 
written responses to these inquiries are broadly termed applicability 
determinations. See 40 CFR 60.5 and 61.06. The NSPS and NESHAP also 
allow sources to seek permission to use monitoring or recordkeeping 
which 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 broadly termed alternative monitoring 
decisions. Further, 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 broadly 
termed regulatory interpretations.
    EPA currently compiles EPA-issued NSPS and NESHAP applicability 
determinations, alternative monitoring decisions, and regulatory 
interpretations, and posts them on the Applicability Determination 
Index (ADI) on a quarterly basis. The ADI is an electronic index on the 
Internet with over one thousand EPA letters and memoranda pertaining to 
the applicability, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting 
requirements of the NSPS and NESHAP. The letters and memoranda may be 
searched by date, office of issuance, subpart, citation, control number 
or by string word searches.
    Today's notice comprises a summary of 42 such documents added to 
the ADI on October 19, 2001. The subject, author, recipient, and date 
(header) of each letter and memorandum is listed in this notice, as 
well as a brief abstract of the letter or memorandum. Complete copies 
of these documents may be obtained from the ADI at http://es.epa.gov/oeca/eptdd/adi.html.

Summary of Headers and Abstracts

    The following table identifies the database control number for each 
document posted on the ADI database system on October 19, 2001; the 
applicable category; the subpart(s) of 40 CFR part 60, 61, or 63 (as 
applicable) covered by 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.

Correction to November 15, 2001 Notice of Availability

    The previous Notice of Availability was published at 66 FR 57453 
under the heading ``Recent Posting of Agency Regulatory Interpretations 
Pertaining to Applicability and Monitoring for Standards of Performance 
for New Stationary Sources and National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants to the Applicability Determination Index (ADI) 
Database System.'' EPA mistakenly included in that notice the statement 
that ``Comments on any of the documents posted on the ADI database 
system must be submitted on or before January 14, 2002.'' Please 
disregard that statement and all associated statements regarding the 
submission of comments. EPA is not seeking comments on the documents 
listed in that notice, nor is it seeking comments on any of the 
documents contained in the ADI database.
    EPA notes further that although the November 15, 2001 notice, and 
this notice, are sufficient to satisfy the publication provisions of 5 
U.S.C. 552(a) and 42 U.S.C. 7607(b), the references to those provisions 
were done by mistake, and were not intended to imply that all of the 
documents posted on the ADI database fall within the scope of those 
statutory provisions. Although some of the documents on the ADI 
database are within the scope of those provisions, others are not, and 
for this reason, EPA does not refer to those provisions when the Agency 
publishes a quarterly Notice of Availability of the ADI database.

             ADI Determinations Uploaded on October 19, 2001
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Control No.        Category         Subpart             Title
------------------------------------------------------------------------
M010018..........  MACT            MMM             Subpart MMM
                                                    Applicability to
                                                    Creosote Production
                                                    Facilities.

[[Page 1296]]

 
M010021..........  MACT            S               Pulp and Paper MACT
                                                    Alternative
                                                    Monitoring.
M010019..........  MACT            S               Pulp and Paper MACT
                                                    Alternative
                                                    Monitoring.
M010020..........  MACT            S               Pulp and Paper MACT
                                                    Alternative
                                                    Monitoring.
M010022..........  MACT            S               Pulp and Paper MACT
                                                    Alternative
                                                    Monitoring.
M010023..........  MACT            S               Pulp and Paper MACT
                                                    Alternative
                                                    Monitoring.
M010024..........  MACT            S               Pulp and Paper MACT
                                                    Alternative
                                                    Monitoring.
M010025..........  MACT            I               NESHAP for Organic
                                                    HAPs for Certain
                                                    Processes.
M010026..........  MACT            LLL             Testing to Determine
                                                    Area or Major Source
                                                    Status.
M010027..........  MACT            A,RRR           Extension to Conduct
                                                    Initial Performance
                                                    Testing.
M010028..........  MACT            S               Alternative Closed
                                                    Collection and Vent
                                                    System Monitoring.
M010029..........  MACT            CC              Existing Refinery
                                                    Storage Vessels
                                                    Exempt from Refinery
                                                    MACT.
M010030..........  MACT            CC,R            Operating Parameter
                                                    Monitoring Request.
M010031..........  MACT            CC,R            Operating Parameter
                                                    Monitoring Request.
M010032..........  MACT            S               Alternative
                                                    Monitoring Protocol
                                                    for Bleach Plant
                                                    Scrubber.
M010033..........  MACT            G,H,VV          Waiver of Flare
                                                    Performance Test.
M010034..........  MACT            S               Pulp and Paper MACT
                                                    Alternative
                                                    Monitoring.
M010035..........  MACT            S               Pulp and Paper MACT
                                                    Alternative
                                                    Monitoring.
M010036..........  MACT            S               Pulp and Paper MACT
                                                    Alternative
                                                    Monitoring.
0100053..........  NSPS            GG              Custom Fuel
                                                    Monitoring Schedule.
0100054..........  NSPS            GG              Alternative Test
                                                    Methods Under
                                                    Subpart GG.
0100055..........  NSPS            Dc              Boiler Derate
                                                    Proposal.
0100056..........  NSPS            J               7-Day Trial for
                                                    Burning Refinery
                                                    Fuel Gas in Boiler.
0100057..........  NSPS            Dc              Applicability to
                                                    Process Heaters.
0100058..........  NSPS            QQQ             Definition of Oil-
                                                    water Separator.
0100059..........  NSPS            OOO             Replacement Equipment
                                                    Exemption--New
                                                    Production Line.
0100060..........  NSPS            QQQ             Alternative Testing
                                                    Procedure for Oil-
                                                    water Separator.
0100061..........  NSPS            SS              Applicability to
                                                    Clothing Press
                                                    Production Line.
0100062..........  NSPS            OOO,A           Replacement of
                                                    Equipment and
                                                    Notification
                                                    Requirements.
0100063..........  NSPS            CCCC            Applicability to Wood
                                                    By-product
                                                    Combustor.
0100065..........  NSPS            GG              Subpart GG Custom
                                                    Fuel Monitoring
                                                    Schedule.
0100066..........  NSPS            GG,A,Da         Alternate Emission
                                                    Standard and
                                                    Monitoring, and
                                                    Initial Performance
                                                    Test.
0100067..........  NSPS            GG              Use of Part 75 for
                                                    Alternate Monitoring
                                                    under Subpart GG.
0100068..........  NSPS            GG              Use of Part 75 for
                                                    Alternate Monitoring
                                                    under Subpart GG.
0100069..........  NSPS            GG              Alternate Test Method/
                                                    Waiver of Initial
                                                    Performance Test.
0100070..........  NSPS            GG              Proposal to Use New
                                                    Monitor for Subpart
                                                    GG.
0100071..........  NSPS            GG              Use of Part 75 for
                                                    Alternate Monitoring
                                                    under Subpart GG.
0100072..........  NSPS            GG              Subpart GG Alternate
                                                    Test Method/Initial
                                                    Performance Test.
0100073..........  NSPS            VV              Waiver of Flare
                                                    Performance Test.
0100074..........  NSPS            GG              Custom Fuel
                                                    Monitoring Schedule.
0100075..........  NSPS            GG              Custom Fuel
                                                    Monitoring Schedule.
0100076..........  NSPS            NNN,RRR         Applicability of NSPS
                                                    to Ethanol
                                                    Manufacturing
                                                    Plants.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abstracts

Abstract for (M010018)

    Q1: Are creosote blend tanks subject to the storage vessel 
standards or the process vent standards of subpart MMM?
    A1: Based on our review of the rule as currently drafted, the 
creosote blend tanks are subject to process vent standards.
    Q2: Are coal tar and naphthalene distillation processes upstream of 
the creosote blend tanks pesticide active ingredient process units 
subject to the rule?
    A2: Upstream distillation units are not pesticide active ingredient 
process units and therefore not part of the affected source subject to 
the rule.

Abstract for (010019)

    Q: May a facility which is subject to the bleaching and monitoring 
standards found at 40 CFR 63.445(c) and 63.453(c) of the pulp and paper 
MACT, subpart S, monitor bleach plant scrubber influent pH/ORP rather 
than the effluent pH/ORP?
    A: Yes. The configuration of the scrubbing system is such that the 
scrubbing medium is taken from the bottom of the scrubber and 
recirculated back to the inlet spray nozzles at the top of the 
scrubber. Several years of emission test data has shown chlorine 
(CL2) and chlorine dioxide (CLO2) emissions to be 
less than 1.0 ppmv, far below the 10 ppmv or less specified in subpart 
S.

Abstract for (010020)

    Q: May a facility which is subject to the bleaching and monitoring 
standards found at 40 CFR 63.445(c) and 63.453(c) of the pulp and paper 
MACT, subpart S, monitor fan amperage for the bleaching system gas 
scrubber vent gas fan in lieu of monitoring vent gas inlet flow rate?
    A: Yes. EPA's document for subpart S, titled ``Questions and 
Answers (Q&As) for the Pulp and Paper NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart 
S),'' dated September 22, 1999, discusses the alternative monitoring 
parameter issue. See pages 8-10. It allows the monitoring of fan 
operation instead of gas flow rate. Allowable monitoring parameters of 
fan operation include fan motor amperage, on/off status, or rotational 
speed of the fan.

Abstract for (010021)

    Q: May a facility which is subject to the bleaching and monitoring 
standards found at 40 CFR 63.445(c) and 63.453(c) of the pulp and paper 
MACT, subpart S, monitor bleach plant scrubber influent pH/ORP rather 
than the effluent pH/ORP?
    A: Yes. The configuration of the scrubbing system is such that the 
scrubbing medium is taken from the bottom of the scrubber and 
recirculated

[[Page 1297]]

back to the inlet spray nozzles at the top of the scrubber. Several 
years of emission test data has shown chlorine (CL2) and 
chlorine dioxide (CLO2) emissions to be less than 1.0 ppmv, 
far below the 10 ppmv or less specified in subpart S.

Abstract for (010022)

    Q: May a facility which is subject to the bleaching and monitoring 
standards found at 40 CFR 63.445(c) and 63.453(c) of the pulp and paper 
MACT, subpart S, monitor fan amperage for the bleaching system gas 
scrubber vent gas fan in lieu of monitoring vent gas inlet flow rate?
    A: Yes. EPA's document for subpart S, titled ``Questions and 
Answers (Q&As) for the Pulp and Paper NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart 
S),'' dated September 22, 1999, discusses the alternative monitoring 
parameter issue. See pages 8-10. It allows the monitoring of fan 
operation instead of gas flow rate. Allowable monitoring parameters of 
fan operation include fan motor amperage, on/off status, or rotational 
speed of the fan.

Abstract for (010023)

    Q: May a facility which is subject to the bleaching and monitoring 
standards found at 40 CFR 63.445(c) and 63.453(c) of the pulp and paper 
MACT, subpart S, monitor bleach plant scrubber influent pH/ORP rather 
than the effluent pH/ORP?
    A: Yes. The configuration of the scrubbing system is such that the 
scrubbing medium is taken from the bottom of the scrubber and 
recirculated back to the inlet spray nozzles at the top of the 
scrubber. Several years of emission test data has shown chlorine 
(CL2) and chlorine dioxide (CLO2) emissions to be 
less than 1.0 ppmv, far below the 10 ppmv or less specified in subpart 
S.

Abstract for (010024)

    Q: May a facility which is subject to the monitoring and inspection 
procedures for closed collection and vent systems found at 40 CFR 
63.443(c), 63.453(k) and (l) of the pulp and paper MACT, subpart S, 
request approval for alternative provisions for inspection, monitoring 
of closed collection and vent systems?
    A: Yes. The requested alternatives are consistent with requirements 
in other existing standards, such as the Hazardous Organic National 
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants.

Abstract for (010025)

    Q: A facility operates a toner process in which a styrene-butadiene 
rubber copolymer is manufactured; however, the affected equipment has 
not operated in hazardous air pollutant (HAP) service for greater than 
300 operating hours per year. Is the facility subject to subpart I?
    A: No. EPA has determined that the toner process described meets 
the definition of styrene-butadiene rubber production. However, because 
the facility has not operated the affected equipment in HAP service 
greater than 300 operating hours per year, the equipment is not subject 
to subpart I.

Abstract for (010026)

    Q: Does the portland cement MACT require the facility in question 
to conduct performance tests to determine its status as an area or 
major source?
    A: No, testing is not required. With its current emission profile, 
the facility is an area source.

Abstract for (010027)

    Q: May the deadline by which a performance test for a secondary 
aluminum processing unit is conducted be extended beyond 180 days of 
the initial startup?
    A: No. The general provisions at 40 CFR 63.7 allow for the 
rescheduling of testing, but they do not allow testing to be scheduled 
beyond 180 days of the initial startup if the initial startup date is 
after the effective date of the relevant standard.

Abstract for (010028)

    Q: May a facility conduct closed vent system inspections once a 
month, rather than once every 30 days as required by 40 CFR 63.453(k)?
    A: Yes. The facility may conduct closed vent system inspections 
once during the calendar month as long as at least 21 days elapse 
between inspections.

Abstract for (010029)

    Q: Are 45 existing storage vessels at the Koch refinery in Pine 
Bend, Minnesota subject to the refinery MACT?
    A: No. The vessels must meet 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb. The 
storage vessel provisions in the refinery MACT are very similar to 
those in subpart Kb. A 1992 Prevention of Significant Deterioration 
(PSD) permit required Koch to comply with subpart Kb, and the State 
issued the PSD permit before EPA proposed the refinery MACT.

Abstract for (010030)

    Q: Will EPA approve the selected operating parameter and its value 
for continuous monitoring at the Track 8 rail loading rack at the Koch 
refinery in Pine Bend, Minnesota?
    A: Yes. The flare demonstrated compliance with the standards in 40 
CFR 63.11(b). The presence of a pilot light will adequately demonstrate 
compliance with the emission standard in 40 CFR 63.422(b).
    Q: Will EPA approve the selected operating parameter and its value 
for continuous monitoring at the tank truck bottom loading rack at the 
Koch refinery?
    A: No. Reporting on a single operating parameter, the total 
volatile organic compound (VOC) concentration at the vapor recovery 
unit outlet, does not account for the effects of temperature, 
barometric pressure, volumetric flow, and rate of gasoline loading.

Abstract for (010031)

    Q: Will EPA approve the selected operating parameter for continuous 
monitoring and the parameter's value for the tank truck bottom loading 
rack at the Koch refinery in Pine Bend, Minnesota?
    A: Yes. Additional data shows that a total VOC concentration of 
2350 ppmv as a 6-hour average at the vapor recovery unit outlet will 
demonstrate compliance with the emission standard at 40 CFR 63.422(b).

Abstract for (010032)

    Q: Will EPA approve an alternative monitoring method for the Mead, 
Chillicothe, Ohio paper mill that uses on/off status as an operational 
parameter indicating the operating status of the fan used to convey 
gases to the bleach plant scrubber?
    A: Yes. Graphs indicating the operating status of the fan will be 
used to monitor and record the on/off status. The performance test must 
show compliance with the fan operating at maximum speed.

Abstract for (010033)

    Q: May the BP Chemicals facility waive the requirement to conduct 
initial performance testing of the Butanediol Plant flare?
    A: No. BP Chemicals cannot waive the requirement to conduct initial 
performance testing of the Butanediol Plant flare. Current methods for 
initial performance testing of flares are applicable to BP Chemicals.

Abstract for (010034)

    Q: May a facility which is subject to the bleaching and monitoring 
standards found at 40 CFR 63.445(c) and 63.453(c) of the pulp and paper 
MACT, subpart S, monitor fan amperage for the bleaching system gas 
scrubber vent gas fan in lieu of monitoring vent gas inlet flow rate?
    A: Yes. EPA's document for Subpart S, titled ``Questions and 
Answers (Q&As) for the Pulp and Paper NESHAP,

[[Page 1298]]

(40 CFR part 63, subpart S),'' dated September 22, 1999, discusses the 
alternative monitoring parameter issue. See pages 8 through 10. It 
allows the monitoring of fan operation instead of gas flow rate. 
Allowable monitoring parameters of fan operation include fan motor 
amperage, on/off status, or rotational speed of the fan.

Abstract for (010035)

    Q: May a facility which is subject to the bleaching and monitoring 
standards found at 40 CFR 63.445(c) and 63.453(c) of the pulp and paper 
MACT, subpart S, monitor bleach plant scrubber influent pH/ORP rather 
than the effluent pH/ORP?
    A: Yes. The configuration of the scrubbing system is such that the 
scrubbing medium is taken from the bottom of the scrubber and 
recirculated back to the inlet spray nozzles at the top of the 
scrubber. Several years of emission test data has shown chlorine 
(CL2) and chlorine dioxide (CLO2) emissions to be less than 
1.0 ppmv, far below the 10 ppmv or less specified in subpart S.

Abstract for (010036)

    Q: May a facility which is subject to the bleaching and monitoring 
standards found at 40 CFR 63.445(c) and 63.453(c) of the pulp and paper 
MACT, subpart S, monitor fan amperage for the bleaching system gas 
scrubber vent gas fan in lieu of monitoring vent gas inlet flow rate?
    A: Yes. EPA's document for Subpart S, titled ``Questions and 
Answers (Q&As) for the Pulp and Paper NESHAP 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
S,'' dated September 22, 1999, discusses the alternative monitoring 
parameter issue. See pages 8 through 10. It allows the monitoring of 
fan operation instead of gas flow rate. Allowable monitoring parameters 
of fan operation include fan motor amperage, on/off status, or 
rotational speed of the fan.

Abstract for (100053)

    Q: Will EPA approve a custom fuel monitoring schedule under Subpart 
GG for a facility whose turbines combust only pipeline-quality natural 
gas?
    A: Yes. Because the turbines combust only pipeline-quality natural 
gas fuel, EPA will approve the custom fuel monitoring schedule 
according to established EPA National Policy.

Abstract for (0100054)

    Q: Will EPA approve alternative test methods under Subpart GG and 
the waiver of various other test requirements for the three new gas 
turbines to be installed at Conectiv's Hay Road Power Complex in 
Wilmington, Delaware?
    A: EPA will approve some of the alternative testing methods but not 
all of them as the State of Delaware is requiring strict NSPS testing 
compliance through their own permitting authority.

Abstract for (100055)

    Q: Will EPA approve a boiler deration proposal under Subpart Dc?
    A: EPA will approve a boiler deration proposal that meets federal 
policy on being a permanent change to the steam output capacity of the 
boiler which cannot be easily reversed.

Abstract for (0100056)

    Q: May a facility operate its new Wickes boiler on refinery fuel 
gas for a 7 day trial period prior to installing a continuous emission 
monitor (CEM) for sulfur dioxide?
    A: Yes, EPA will allow this short trial period for selecting the 
correct CEM and ensuring proper boiler operation on the waste gas fuel. 
This is with the understanding that the facility will be sampling and 
analyzing the waste gas fuel for H2S content every 4 hours 
during the trial period.

Abstract for (0100057)

    Q: Two natural gas fired heaters are used to heat TiCl4 
and pure oxygen prior to being reacted. Are the two heaters subject to 
subpart Dc?
    A: No. The subpart Dc affected facility is identified as a steam 
generating unit. Since the definition of a steam generating unit 
excludes process heaters, the two heaters are not subject to subpart 
Dc.

Abstract for (0100058)

    Q: Two tanks which are subject to NSPS subpart Kb serve primarily 
as surge and equalization tanks and separate oil and water as an 
incidental function. Are the two tanks considered storage vessels or 
oil-water separator tanks, and are they exempt from 40 CFR 60.692 and 
60.693?
    A: The two tanks are considered storage vessels under subpart QQQ 
rather than oil-water separator tanks. Since the two tanks are subject 
to the standards specified at 40 CFR 60.112b, subpart Kb, they are not 
regulated by subpart QQQ due to the exemption provided in 40 CFR 60.692 
through 60.693(d).

Abstract for (0100059)

    Q: A new production line is being constructed at a nonmetallic 
mineral processing plant which will include affected facilities 
constructed after the subpart OOO applicability date and a crusher 
which was constructed prior to the applicability date. Will any of the 
affected facilities be subject to subpart OOO prior to the modification 
or reconstruction of the crusher?
    A: Yes. All affected facilities in the production line would be 
subject to subpart OOO except for the crusher. The exemption provided 
in 40 CFR 60.670(d)(1) only applies to the replacement of an existing 
facility with equipment of equal or smaller size having the same 
function as the existing facility. The use of a crusher which was 
constructed prior to the applicability date would not cause all other 
affected facilities in the new production line to be exempt under 40 
CFR 60.670(d).

Abstract for (0100060)

    Q: A double seal, internal floating roof is being used on an oil-
water separator to comply with the standard provided in 40 CFR 60.692 
through 60.693. Is the subpart Ka testing (inspection) standard 
acceptable as an alternative to the subpart QQQ inspection procedures?
    A: No. Since subpart Ka does not require any type of periodic 
inspections for internal floating roofs, the proposal is not 
appropriate. However, the use of subpart Kb inspection procedures for 
internal floating roofs provided in 40 CFR 60.113b(a) would be 
acceptable.

Abstract for (0100061)

    Q: Does NSPS, subpart SS, apply to surface coating operations used 
to paint clothing press parts and the surface of the clothing presses?
    A: No. The subpart SS affected facility is each surface coating 
operation in a large appliance surface coating line. Since a clothing 
press is not identified in subpart SS as a large appliance product, the 
surface coating of clothing presses is not regulated.

Abstract for (0100062)

    Q: Is a piece of equipment which is covered by the exemption in 40 
CFR 60.670(d)(1) considered an affected facility which is subject to 
the notification requirements of 40 CFR 60.7?
    A: Yes. When a piece of equipment is replaced with equipment of 
equal or smaller size, the replacement equipment is an affected 
facility subject to subpart OOO, even though the exemption in 40 CFR 
60.670(d) may apply.

Abstract for (0100063)

    Q: Is a wood by-product combustor subject to the Commercial and 
Industrial Solid Waste Incineration NSPS, subpart CCCC?
    A: No. Because the wood by-product combustor has heat recovery that 
is used

[[Page 1299]]

to heat the ventilation make-up air, and the combustor is only operated 
during the cold winter months when this heat is needed, it is not 
subject NSPS, subpart CCCC.

Abstract for (0100064)

    Q: May the El Paso Company obtain a relaxed sulfur-in-fuel 
monitoring schedule under 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG, for the operation 
of a 70 MMBtu/hr compressor station operating solely on natural gas?
    A: Yes. EPA routinely grants custom monitoring schedules under 
NSPS, subpart GG, for facilities burning low sulfur fuels.

Abstract for (0100065)

    Question: May the UAE Lowell LLC facility obtain a relaxed sulfur-
in-fuel monitoring schedule under 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG for the 
operation of a 90 MW stationary gas turbine with a primary fuel of 
natural gas and a secondary fuel of very-low sulfur distillate oil?
    Answer: Yes, EPA routinely grants custom monitoring schedules under 
NSPS, subpart GG for facilities burning low sulfur fuels.

Abstract for (0100066)

    Q1: May the Ameren facility demonstrate compliance with 40 CFR part 
60, subpart GG using the allowable NOX emission rate in 40 
CFR part 60, subpart Da (1.6 lb/MW-hr) as a limit on each entire 
combined cycle turbine?
    A1: Yes. Ameren may use the more stringent emission limit of 1.6 
lb/MW-hr NOX at 40 CFR part 60, subpart Da on the entire 
combined cycle turbine in lieu of monitoring separately under 40 CFR 
part 60, subpart Da and 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG.
    Q2: May the Ameren facility receive a waiver of the initial 
performance testing for NOX at 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG?
    A2: No. Ameren may not waive the initial performance testing 
required by 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG. However, U.S. EPA does waive 
the requirement to test at all four loads.
    Q3: May the Ameren facility use NOX CEMs for 
demonstrating compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG in lieu of 
fuel nitrogen monitoring?
    A3. Yes. Ameren may use NOX CEMs to demonstrate 
compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG in lieu of fuel nitrogen 
monitoring.

Abstract for (0100067)

    Q1: May the Cascade Creek facility use 40 CFR part 75 
NOX CEMs in lieu of monitoring for NOX as 
required at 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG?
    A1: Yes. Cascade Creek may use 40 CFR part 75 NOX CEMs 
in lieu of monitoring for NOX as required at 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart GG. This approval is based on certain conditions outlined in 
the approval letter.
    Q2: May the Cascade Creek facility use RATA test data obtained 
during CEM certification, as required by 40 CFR part 75, to demonstrate 
initial compliance with NOX limits at 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart GG in lieu of fuel monitoring for nitrogen content?
    A2: Yes. Cascade Creek may use RATA data to demonstrate initial 
compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG.
    Q3: May the Cascade Creek facility use fuel monitoring requirements 
for natural gas and number 2 fuel oil at 40 CFR part 75, appendix D in 
lieu of fuel monitoring required by 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG?
    A3: Yes. Cascade Creek may use fuel monitoring requirements for 
natural gas and number 2 fuel oil at 40 CFR part 75, appendix D in lieu 
of fuel monitoring required by 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG?

Abstract for (0100068)

    Q1: May the City of Chaska use newer ASTM methods for fuel sulfur 
content monitoring at 40 CFR part 75 at the Minnesota Municipal Power 
Agency's Minnesota River Station when burning fuel oil, in lieu of 
methods ASTM at 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG?
    A1: Yes. The City of Chaska may use newer ASTM methods given in 40 
CFR part 75 for determining sulfur content of fuel when fuel oil is 
burned.
    Q2: May the City of Chaska use a correlation graph developed in 
accordance with 40 CFR part 75, appendix E, to determine compliance 
with NOX emission limits at the Minnesota Municipal Power 
Agency's Minnesota River Station when burning fuel oil, in lieu of 
methods at 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG?
    A2: Yes. The City of Chaska may use a correlation graph developed 
in accordance with 40 CFR part 75, appendix E when burning either fuel 
oil or pipeline natural gas in lieu of methods at 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart GG. This approval is granted only if the turbines using the 
turbines are peaking units as defined at 40 CFR 72.2.
    Q3: May the City of Chaska use the default value of 0.0006 pounds 
of sulfur per million BTU of heat input and monitor the amount of 
natural gas burned to determine sulfur emissions in accordance with 40 
CFR part 75 at the Minnesota Municipal Power Agency's Minnesota River 
Station when burning pipeline natural gas, in lieu of sulfur monitoring 
at 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG?
    A3: Yes. The City of Chaska may use the default value of 0.0006 
pounds of sulfur per million BTU of heat input and monitor the amount 
of natural gas burned to determine sulfur emissions in accordance with 
40 CFR part 75 in lieu of sulfur monitoring at 40 CFR part 60, subpart 
GG. This approval is acceptable only when pipeline natural gas is being 
burned as fuel in the turbines.

Abstract for (0100069)

    Q1: May the Lakefield Junction facility use 40 CFR part 75 
NOX CEMs in lieu of monitoring for NOX as 
required at 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG?
    A1: Yes. Lakefield Junction may use 40 CFR part 75 NOX 
CEMs in lieu of monitoring for NOX as required at 40 CFR 
part 60, subpart GG. This approval is based on certain conditions 
outlined in the approval letter.
    Q2: May the Lakefield Junction facility use the custom monitoring 
schedule for sulfur content in fuel as outlined in the August 14, 1987 
memorandum from John Rasnic for the six turbines being installed and 
all future turbines installed?
    A2: Yes. Lakefield Junction may use the custom monitoring schedule 
for sulfur content for the six turbines being installed. This approval 
is not extended to all future turbines which may be installed. Future 
turbine installation will require a new determination request be made 
by the facility.
    Q3: May the Lakefield Junction facility use CEM certification data 
required by 40 CFR part 75 to demonstrate initial compliance in lieu of 
Reference Method 20?
    A3: U.S. EPA Region 5 has not been delegated authority to approve 
alternative test methods as proposed by Lakefield Junction. The 
Regional Office is, however, delegated authority to waive initial 
performance tests when compliance has been demonstrated by other means. 
U.S. EPA Region 5 does, therefore, waive the initial performance test 
requirements for NOX under 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG. This 
waiver is approved only if certain conditions are met.
    Q4: Will U.S. EPA Region 5 rescind the determination made in a 
letter dated September 8, 1999 addressed to MPCA?
    A4: Yes. U.S. EPA Region 5 rescinds the determination made for 
Lakefield Junction, through MPCA, on September 8, 1999.

Abstract for (0100070):

    Q: May the Northern Natural Gas Company and Northern Border 
Pipeline Company use a new monitor for

[[Page 1300]]

determining sulfur content in fuel for demonstrating compliance with 40 
CFR part 60, subpart GG?
    A: No determination was made. Additional information is necessary 
to clarify the facility's requests.

Abstract for (0100071):

    Q1: May the DP&L facility use NOX CEMs for in lieu of 
fuel monitoring requirements for nitrogen given at 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart GG?
    A1: Yes. DP&L may use CEMs as required by the acid rain program to 
demonstrate compliance with NOX limits in 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart GG. This approval is granted so long as listed conditions are 
met.
    Q2: May the DP&L facility get a waiver of the requirements to 
correct NOX CEM emission data to ISO conditions?
    A2: Yes. DP&L may waive the requirement to convert results to ISO 
conditions, so long as all data necessary for the conversion is still 
maintained.
    Q3: May the DP&L facility use RATA results obtained during 
certification of the NOX CEMs to demonstrate initial 
compliance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG?
    A3: Yes. DP&L may use RATA results to demonstrate initial 
compliance with NOX limits for NSPS subpart GG so long as 
certain conditions are met.
    Q4: May the DP&L facility use fuel monitoring provisions for sulfur 
at 40 CFR part 75, in lieu of fuel monitoring provisions for sulfur 
given at 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG?
    A4: Yes. DP&L may use monitoring provisions at 40 CFR part 75 for 
sulfur content in fuel in lieu of fuel monitoring requirements given at 
40 CFR part 60, subpart GG.

Abstract for (0100072)

    Q1: May the DP&L facility conduct initial performance testing of 
all turbines identified at base load only?
    A1: Yes. DP&L may conduct initial performance testing at base load 
if certain conditions are met.
    Q2: May DP&L use Method 7E in lieu of Method 20 for demonstrating 
initial compliance with NOX for NSPS subpart GG?
    A2: Yes. DP&L may use Method 7E to demonstrate initial compliance 
with NSPS subpart GG. This approval was granted by the Emissions, 
Monitoring and Analysis Division in the Office of Air Quality Planning 
and Standards, in a memorandum to George Czerniak.

Abstract for (0100073)

    Q: May the BP Chemicals facility waive the requirement to conduct 
initial performance testing of the Butanediol Plant flare?
    A: No. BP Chemicals cannot waive the requirement to conduct initial 
performance testing of the Butanediol Plant flare. Current methods for 
initial performance testing of flares are applicable to BP Chemicals.

Abstract for (0100074)

    Q: Will EPA Region III approve a custom fuel monitoring schedule 
for sulfur content under 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG?
    A: Yes. EPA has National Policy in regard to fuel sampling and 
analysis for sulfur content under subpart GG for stationary gas 
turbines that combust pipeline-quality natural gas fuel.

Abstract for (0100075)

    Q: Will EPA Region III approve a custom fuel monitoring schedule 
for Wolf Hills Energy Under 40 CFR part 60, subpart GG?
    A: Yes. Because the request meets the conditions of EPA's National 
Policy on such schedules, EPA Region III will approve the request.

Abstract for (0100076)

    Q: Are ethanol manufacturing facilities exempt from the 
requirements of 40 CFR part 60, subparts RRR and NNN?
    A: Yes. EPA has previously determined that ethanol manufacturing 
facilities may be exempt from NSPS, subparts RRR and NNN, on a case-by-
case basis. In this instance, the ethanol facilities in question use a 
biological process to ferment the converted starches in corn into 
ethanol. These subparts did not envision unit operations for biological 
processes.

    Dated: January 4, 2002.
Lisa C. Lund,
Acting Director, Office of Compliance.
[FR Doc. 02-624 Filed 1-9-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P