[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 203 (Monday, October 21, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64742-64746]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-26576]



[[Page 64741]]

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

Part III





Environmental Protection Agency





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



40 CFR Part 63



National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Publicly 
Owned Treatment Works; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 203 / Monday, October 21, 2002 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 64742]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[FRL-7394-7]
RIN 2060-AJ66


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: 
Publicly Owned Treatment Works; Final Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule, amendments.

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

SUMMARY: On October 26, 1999, we promulgated the national emission 
standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for publicly owned 
treatment works (POTW). In this action, we are promulgating amendments 
which were proposed pursuant to a settlement agreement with the 
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) regarding 
their petition for judicial review of the POTW NESHAP. The amendments 
will rescind an applicability provision; adopt, for all industrial POTW 
treatment plants that are area sources of hazardous air pollutants 
(HAP), the same NESHAP requirements that apply to industrial POTW 
treatment plants that are major sources of HAP; and exempt industrial 
POTW treatment plants that are area sources of HAP from the permit 
requirements in section 502(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 21, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Docket. The administrative record compiled by EPA for this 
final rule, including public comments on the proposed rule, is located 
in public docket No. A-96-46 at the following address: Air and 
Radiation Docket and Information Center, Mail Code 6102T, U.S. EPA, 
1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B108, Washington DC 20460. The 
docket may be inspected from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, excluding legal holidays. Materials related to the final 
amendments are available upon request from the Air and Radiation Docket 
and Information Center by calling (202) 566-1742. The FAX number for 
the Center is (202) 566-1741. A reasonable fee may be charged for 
copying docket materials.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning 
applicability and rule determinations, contact your State or local 
regulatory agency representative or the appropriate EPA Regional Office 
representative. For information concerning analyses performed in 
developing the final amendments, contact Mr. Robert Lucas, Waste and 
Chemical Processes Group, Emission Standards Division (C439-03), Office 
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. EPA, Research Triangle 
Park, NC 27711, telephone number (919) 541-0884, facsimile number (919) 
541-0246, electronic mail address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Public Comments. The amendments for the POTW NESHAP were proposed 
on March 22, 2002 (67 FR 13496), and two comment letters were received 
on the proposed amendments. The comment letters are available in Docket 
No. A-96-46. The regulatory text and other materials related to the 
final amendments are available for review in the docket or copies may 
be mailed on request from the Air Docket by calling (202) 260-7548. A 
reasonable fee may be charged for copying docket materials.
    Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, 
an electronic copy of the final amendments will also be available on 
the WWW through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following 
signature, a copy of today's amendments will be posted on the TTN's 
policy and guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules at the 
following address: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides 
information and technology exchange in various areas of air pollution 
control. If more information regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN 
HELP line at (919) 541-5384.
    Judicial Review. Under CAA section 307(b), judicial review of the 
final amendments is available only by filing a petition for review in 
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on or 
before December 20, 2002. Only those objections to the final amendments 
which were raised with reasonable specificity during the period for 
public comment may be raised during judicial review. Under section 
307(b)(2)of the CAA, the requirements established by the final 
amendments may not be challenged separately in any civil or criminal 
proceeding we bring to enforce such requirements.
    Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated 
by this action include:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Category                  SIC a        NAICS b                    Regulated entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Government..................       4952           22132  Sewage treatment facilities, and federally
                                                                  owned treatment works.
State/local/tribal Governments......       4952           22132  Sewage treatment facilities, municipal
                                                                  wastewater treatment facilities, and publicly-
                                                                  owned treatment works.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Standard Industrial Classification.
b North American Information Classification System.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this 
action. This table lists the types of entities that could potentially 
be regulated by the final amendments. Other types of entities not 
listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether your 
facility is regulated by this action, you should carefully examine the 
applicability criteria in Sec.  63.1580 of the POTW NESHAP and in 40 
CFR 63.1. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this 
action to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the 
preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

Outline

    The final amendments are organized as follows:

I. What is the background for this action?
II. What changes to the existing rule are we adopting?
III. What were the comments received on the proposed amendments?
IV. What are the administrative requirements?
    A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 
U.S.C. 601 et seq.
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
    J. Congressional Review Act


[[Page 64743]]



I. What Is the Background for This Action?

    On October 26, 1999 (64 FR 57572), we promulgated the NESHAP for 
new and existing POTW using our authority under the CAA. In the POTW 
NESHAP, we required air pollution controls on new or reconstructed 
treatment plants at POTW that are major sources of HAP. Section 
112(a)(1) of the CAA defines a major source as:

* * * any stationary source or group of stationary sources located 
within a contiguous area and under common control that emits or has 
the potential to emit considering controls, in the aggregate, 10 
tons per year or more of any hazardous air pollutant or 25 tons per 
year or more of any combination of hazardous air pollutants.

    The standards also define the requirements for industrial POTW. 
Industrial POTW treat regulated waste streams from an industry (e.g., 
pharmaceutical manufacturing) that may be subject to other NESHAP, and 
this treatment allows the industry to comply with the NESHAP. The 
standards include a provision in 40 CFR 63.1580(c) stating that if an 
industrial major source complies with the other NESHAP by using the 
treatment and controls at a POTW, then the POTW is considered to be a 
major source.
    On March 23, 2001 (66 FR 16140), we published final rule amendments 
that clarified and corrected errors in the promulgated rule. The PhRMA 
filed a timely petition for judicial review of the POTW NESHAP. The 
PhRMA expressed concern regarding the practical effect of the provision 
classifying an industrial POTW as a major source if the POTW receives 
wastewater for treatment from a major source. In particular, PhRMA was 
concerned that industrial POTW might be subject to permitting 
requirements that would otherwise not apply, and that such POTW might 
elect not to accept wastewater for treatment in these circumstances. We 
entered into settlement discussions with PhRMA and executed a 
settlement agreement with PhRMA on November 14, 2001.
    On March 22, 2002 (67 FR 13496), we proposed amendments to the POTW 
NESHAP pursuant to the agreement with PhRMA. We received two public 
comment letters on the proposed amendments. The commenters were the 
Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies (AMSA) and PhRMA. Copies 
of these letters are found in docket A-96-46. All of the comments have 
been carefully considered. Because none of the comments submitted 
requested any substantive changes to the proposed amendments, the final 
amendments remain unchanged from those which we proposed.

II. What Changes to the Existing Rule Are We Adopting?

    In the settlement agreement we reached with PhRMA, we agreed to 
propose the following three changes: (1) Rescind the applicability 
provision set forth in 40 CFR 63.1580(c); (2) adopt, for all industrial 
POTW treatment plants that are area sources of HAP, the same NESHAP 
requirements that apply to industrial POTW treatment plants that are 
major sources of HAP; and (3) exempt industrial POTW treatment plants 
that are area sources of HAP from the permit requirements in section 
502(a) of the CAA. Area sources of HAP are those stationary sources 
that emit, or have the potential to emit, less than 10 tons per year of 
any one HAP or less than 25 tons per year of a combination of HAP.
    The CAA gives us the authority to adopt an alternative definition 
of major source in appropriate circumstances. Our original intent in 
adopting the alternate definition in 40 CFR 63.1580(c) of the POTW 
NESHAP was to make all industrial POTW subject to direct enforcement 
under the CAA, thereby providing additional assurance that they would 
adhere to the treatment and control limits of the applicable industrial 
NESHAP. The final amendments will still accomplish this goal because 
all POTW that meet our definition of industrial POTW will remain 
subject to direct enforcement and will be required to meet the control 
limits of the applicable industrial NESHAP.

III. What Were the Comments Received on the Proposed Amendments?

    Two comment letters were received on the proposed amendments. This 
section summarizes the comments and provides our response.
    The comments on the proposed amendments to the POTW NESHAP 
supported the following amendments to the POTW NESHAP for area source 
POTW: the proposal to set generally available control technology under 
the CAA section 112(k) urban air toxics program at no control for area 
source new or existing non-industrial POTW and to exempt these area 
source POTW from the POTW NESHAP notifications requirements at 40 CFR 
63.1590; the proposal to require area source industrial POTW to comply 
with the same maximum achievable control technology (MACT) requirements 
as are required for major source industrial POTW, accompanied by an 
exemption from the CAA's title V permitting requirements.
    One of the commenters did raise some additional issues. The AMSA 
questioned whether we have the statutory authority to apply regulations 
under the urban air toxics section of the CAA (section 112(k)) to rural 
area source POTW. The AMSA did not oppose our use of a national 
standard in this particular instance, but stated that it might oppose 
such a construction of the CAA in the context of a future rulemaking.
    We find nothing in the statute to prevent the application of rules 
promulgated pursuant to CAA section 112(k) to the entire nation. We 
believe that we have the authority, in appropriate circumstances, to 
limit such a rule to particular geographic regions, but we do not 
believe that such an approach would have been appropriate for this 
situation. As for the effect our construction of the CAA might have in 
a future rulemaking, that is a hypothetical question beyond the scope 
of this proceeding.
    The AMSA also suggested that we consider adding a provision to the 
POTW NESHAP amendments to encourage the discharging industry and the 
receiving POTW to enter into a written agreement in which the parties 
clearly state that the POTW will fulfill the discharging industry's 
NESHAP wastewater treatment obligations. We believe that the POTW 
NESHAP clearly defines an industrial POTW treatment plant. We think 
that a detailed written agreement between the discharging party and the 
POTW will generally be beneficial, and we encourage the routine use of 
such agreements. While we believe that the parties will elect to make a 
specific contractual agreement in most instances, the final rule does 
not require such an agreement for a POTW to be considered an industrial 
POTW.

IV. What Are the Administrative Requirements?

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the 
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and, therefore, subject to review of the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive 
Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely 
to result in a rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy,

[[Page 64744]]

productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or 
safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligation of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    It has been determined that the final amendments are not a 
``significant regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 
12866 and are, therefore, not subject to OMB review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    An Information Collection Request (ICR) document was prepared for 
the October 26, 1999 POTW NESHAP by the EPA and was submitted to and 
approved by OMB. A copy of this ICR (OMB control number 2060-0428) may 
be obtained from Susan Auby by mail at the Office of Environmental 
Information, Collection Strategies Division, U.S. EPA (2822T), 1200 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, by e-mail at 
[email protected], or by calling (202) 566-1672. A copy may also be 
downloaded off the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr.
    Burden means total time, effort, or financial resources expended by 
persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide 
information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed 
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize 
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and 
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to 
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; 
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; 
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; 
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the 
EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. 
The final amendments will not require additional burden on the affected 
entities.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.

    The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment 
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any 
other statute unless the Agency certifies that the rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small 
governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's final rule on 
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business 
according to the Small Business Administration (SBA) size standards by 
NAICS code; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government 
of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a 
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is 
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated 
and is not dominant in its field.
    The EPA determined that it is not necessary to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis in connection with these final amendments. The EPA 
also determined that the amendments will not impose a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The 
amendments impose no new requirements on new or existing POTW treatment 
plants. In addition, by eliminating title V permit requirements, these 
amendments decrease the compliance costs for a few smaller facilities. 
Therefore, pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 605(b), I certify 
that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, we 
generally must prepare a written statement, including cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires us to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt 
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows us to adopt an alternative with other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative if we 
publish with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was not 
adopted.
    Before we establish any regulatory requirements that may 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal 
governments, we must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a 
small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying 
potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected 
small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the 
development of our regulatory proposals with significant Federal 
intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising 
small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.
    We have determined that the final amendments do not contain a 
Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more 
for State, local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the 
private sector in any 1 year. The regulatory revisions in the final 
amendments have no associated costs and do not contain requirements 
that apply to small governments or impose obligations upon them. 
Therefore, the final amendments are not a ``significant'' regulatory 
action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866 and do not impose 
any additional Federal mandate on State, local and tribal governments 
or the private sector within the meaning of the UMRA. Thus, today's 
final amendments are not subject to the requirements of sections 202, 
203, and 205 of the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) requires EPA 
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely 
input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have 
federalism implications'' are defined in the Executive Order to include 
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on 
the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on 
the distribution of power and

[[Page 64745]]

responsibilities among the various levels of Government.''
    The final amendments do not have federalism implications. They will 
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship 
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of Government, 
as specified in Executive Order 13132. The amendments apply only to 
POTW and do not pre-exempt States from adopting more stringent 
standards or otherwise regulate State or local governments. Thus, the 
requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to the 
final amendments.

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

    Executive Order 13175, (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000) requires EPA 
to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely 
input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies 
that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, 
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the 
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
    The final rule amendments do not have tribal implications, as 
specified in Executive Order 13175. The amendments impose no new 
requirements on new or existing POTW. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does 
not apply to the final amendments.

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

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

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

    The final amendments are not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because they are not a significant regulatory 
action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Under section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and 
Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, all Federal 
agencies are required to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in 
their regulatory and procurement activities unless to do so would be 
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary 
consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials 
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, business practices) 
developed or adopted by one or more voluntary consensus bodies. The 
NTTAA requires Federal agencies to provide Congress, through annual 
reports to OMB, with explanations when an agency does not use available 
and applicable VCS.
    The final amendments do not involve any additional technical 
standards. Therefore, the requirements of the NTTAA do not apply to 
this action.

J. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing the final 
amendments and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. 
House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United 
States prior to publication of the final amendments in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2). The final amendments will be effective on October 21, 2002.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

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

    Dated: October 11, 2002.
Christine Todd Whitman,
Administrator.

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

PART 63--[AMENDED]

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

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


    2. Section 63.1580 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  63.1580  Am I subject to this subpart?

    (a) You are subject to this subpart if the following are all true:
    (1) You own or operate a publicly owned treatment works (POTW) that 
includes an affected source (Sec.  63.1595);
    (2) The affected source is located at a POTW which is a major 
source of HAP emissions, or at any industrial POTW regardless of 
whether or not it is a major source of HAP; and
    (3) Your POTW is required to develop and implement a pretreatment 
program as defined by 40 CFR 403.8 (for a POTW owned or operated by a 
municipality, State, or intermunicipal or interstate agency), or your 
POTW would meet the general criteria for development and implementation 
of a pretreatment program (for a POTW owned or operated by a 
department, agency, or instrumentality of the Federal government).
    (b) If your existing POTW treatment plant is not located at a major 
source as of October 26, 1999, but thereafter becomes a major source 
for any reason other than reconstruction, then, for the purpose of this 
subpart, your POTW treatment plant would be considered an existing 
source. Note to Paragraph (b): See Sec.  63.2 of the national emission 
standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) General Provisions in 
subpart A of this part for the definitions of major source and area 
source.
    (c) If you reconstruct your POTW treatment plant, then the 
requirements for a new or reconstructed POTW treatment plant, as 
defined in Sec.  63.1595, apply.

[[Page 64746]]


    3. Section 63.1586 introductory text is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  63.1586  What are the emission points and control requirements 
for a non-industrial POTW treatment plant?

    There are no control requirements for an existing non-industrial 
POTW treatment plant. There are no control requirements for any new or 
reconstructed area source non-industrial POTW treatment plant which is 
not a major source of HAP. The control requirements for a new or 
reconstructed major source non-industrial POTW treatment plant which is 
a major source of HAP are as follows:
* * * * *

    4. Section 63.1590 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) 
introductory text to read as follows:


Sec.  63.1590  What reports must I submit?

    (a)(1) If you have an existing non-industrial POTW treatment plant, 
or a new or reconstructed area source non-industrial POTW treatment 
plant, you are not required to submit a notification of compliance 
status. If you have a new or reconstructed non-industrial POTW 
treatment plant which is a major source of HAP, you must submit to the 
Administrator a notification of compliance status, signed by the 
responsible official who must certify its accuracy, attesting to 
whether your POTW treatment plant has complied with this subpart. This 
notification must be submitted initially, and each time a notification 
of compliance status is required under this subpart. At a minimum, the 
notification must list--
* * * * *

    5. Section 63.1591 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.1591  What are my notification requirements?

    (a) If you have an industrial POTW treatment plant or a new or 
reconstructed non-industrial POTW which is a major source of HAP, and 
your State has not been delegated authority, you must submit 
notifications to the appropriate EPA Regional Office. If your State has 
been delegated authority you must submit notifications to your State 
and a copy of each notification to the appropriate EPA Regional Office. 
The Regional Office may waive this requirement for any notifications at 
its discretion.
* * * * *

    6. Section 63.1592 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  63.1592  Which General Provisions apply to my POTW treatment 
plant?

    (a) Table 1 to this subpart lists the General Provisions (40 CFR 
part 63, subpart A) which do and do not apply to POTW treatment plants.
    (b) Unless a permit is otherwise required by law, the owner or 
operator of an industrial POTW which is not a major source is exempt 
from the permitting requirements established by 40 CFR part 70.

    7. Table 1 to subpart VVV is amended by revising the entries 
``Sec.  63.1(c)(2)(i)'' and ``Sec.  63.9(b)'' to read as follows:

      Table 1 to Subpart VVV of Part 63.--Applicability of 40 CFR Part 63 General Provisions to Subpart VVV
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Applicable to subpart
     General provisions reference                VVV                               Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Sec.   63.1(c)(2)(i).................  No.....................  State options regarding title V permit. Unless
                                                                 required by the State, area sources subject to
                                                                 subpart VVV are exempted from permitting
                                                                 requirements.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Sec.   63.9(b).......................  Yes....................  Applicability of notification requirements.
                                                                 Existing major non-industrial POTW treatment
                                                                 plants, and existing and new or reconstructed
                                                                 area non-industrial POTW treatment plants are
                                                                 not subject to the notification requirements.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 02-26576 Filed 10-18-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P