[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 233 (Monday, December 7, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64078-64084]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-29067]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9087-1]


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, 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 
EPA has made under the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS); the 
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP); and 
the

[[Page 64079]]

Stratospheric Ozone Protection Program.

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 Office of Enforcement 
and Compliance Assurance (OECA) Web site at:
    http://www.epa.gov/compliance/monitoring/programs/caa/adi.html. The 
document may be located by control number, date, author, subpart, or 
subject search. For questions about the ADI or this notice, contact 
Rebecca Kane at EPA by phone at: (202) 564-5960, 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 Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) part 60 and the General Provisions to 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 commonly referred to as 
applicability determinations. See 40 CFR 60.5 and 61.06. Although the 
part 63 NESHAP [which includes Maximum Achievable Control Technology 
(MACT) standards] and section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) 
regulations 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 on the ADI on a quarterly 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 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, NESHAP, and 
stratospheric ozone regulations. 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 39 such documents added to 
the ADI on November 20, 2009. The subject and header of each letter and 
memorandum are 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 through the OECA Web site at: www.epa.gov/compliance/monitoring/programs/caa/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 November 20, 2009; 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. This notice does not 
change the status of any document with respect to whether it is ``of 
nationwide scope or effect'' for purposes of section 307(b)(1) of the 
Clean Air Act. For example, this notice does not make an applicability 
determination for a particular source into a nationwide rule. Neither 
does it purport to make any document that was previously non-binding 
into a binding document.

                                ADI Determinations Uploaded on November 20, 2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Control No.                     Category                Subparts                    Title
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0900038............................  NSPS..................  Dc....................  Boiler Derate Request.
0900039............................  NSPS..................  VV....................  Alternative Monitoring for
                                                                                      Equipment in Acetic Acid
                                                                                      Service.
0900040............................  NSPS..................  G.....................  Alternative Monitoring for
                                                                                      Certifying NOX CEMS.
0900041............................  NSPS..................  WWW...................  Alternative Monitoring for
                                                                                      Gas Collection and Control
                                                                                      System.
0900042............................  NSPS..................  Dc....................  Boiler Derate Request.
0900043............................  NSPS..................  Db....................  Alternative Opacity
                                                                                      Monitoring.
0900044............................  NSPS..................  Db....................  Alternative Monitoring
                                                                                      Using NOX PEMS.
0900045............................  NSPS..................  WWW...................  Alternative Temperature
                                                                                      Limits for Gas Collection
                                                                                      Wells.
0900046............................  NSPS..................  D.....................  Alternative Monitoring
                                                                                      Using PM CEMS.
0900047............................  NSPS..................  OOO...................  Delay of Initial PM
                                                                                      Performance Test.
0900048............................  NSPS..................  PPP...................  Alternative Monitoring for
                                                                                      Wet Electrostatic
                                                                                      Precipitator.
0900049............................  NSPS..................  WWW...................  Extension of Deadline to
                                                                                      Correct Positive Pressure
                                                                                      Exceedances.
0900050............................  NSPS..................  J.....................  Alternative Monitoring of
                                                                                      Fuel Gas Stream.
0900052............................  NSPS..................  WWW...................  Gas Collection Well
                                                                                      Reconfiguration.
0900053............................  NSPS..................  VV....................  Alternative Monitoring for
                                                                                      Equipment in Diketene
                                                                                      Service.
0900054............................  NSPS..................  Db....................  Alternative Monitoring
                                                                                      Using NOX PEMS.
0900056............................  NSPS..................  OOO...................  Crusher Derate.
0900057............................  NSPS..................  A, RR.................  Replacement of Regenerative
                                                                                      Thermal Oxidizer.
0900058............................  NSPS..................  WWW...................  Gas Treatment System.
0900059............................  NSPS..................  WWW...................  Alternative Compliance and
                                                                                      Monitoring Timelines.
0900060............................  NSPS..................  WWW...................  Gas Treatment System.
0900061............................  NSPS..................  WWW...................  Gas Treatment System.

[[Page 64080]]

 
0900062............................  NSPS..................  WWW...................  Extension to Correct
                                                                                      Positive Pressure
                                                                                      Exceedance.
0900063............................  NSPS..................  WWW...................  Gas Treatment System.
0900064............................  NSPS..................  WWW...................  Adjusted Oxygen and
                                                                                      Pressure Standards/
                                                                                      Alternative Compliance
                                                                                      Timeline.
0900067............................  NSPS..................  GG, KKKK..............  Gas Turbine Refurbishment
                                                                                      and Commence Construction.
0900068............................  NSPS..................  A, CC.................  COMS Data Collection and
                                                                                      Reporting.
M090001............................  MACT..................  R.....................  Gasoline Distribution
                                                                                      Terminals, MTBE (methyl
                                                                                      tertiary butyl ether) Ban,
                                                                                      Reduction of Potential to
                                                                                      Emit.
M090005............................  MACT..................  R.....................  Gasoline Distribution
                                                                                      Terminals, MTBE Ban,
                                                                                      Reduction of Potential to
                                                                                      Emit.
M090033............................  MACT..................  YYYY..................  Existing Stationary
                                                                                      Combustion Turbines.
M090034............................  MACT..................  HHHHH.................  Process Vessels.
M090036............................  MACT..................  RRR...................  Alternative Monitoring,
                                                                                      Recordkeeping, and
                                                                                      Reporting for Aluminum
                                                                                      Scrap Shredder and
                                                                                      Delacquering Kiln.
M090038............................  MACT..................  IIII, ZZZZ............  Reciprocating Internal
                                                                                      Combustion Engines.
M090039............................  MACT..................  PPPPPP................  Performance Test Waiver
                                                                                      Request.
M090040............................  MACT..................  PPPPP.................  Performance Test Waiver
                                                                                      Request.
M090041............................  MACT..................  SS, WWWW..............  Closed Vent System
                                                                                      Inspection.
M090042............................  MACT..................  RRR...................  Testing Waiver for Ring
                                                                                      Crusher.
M090043............................  MACT..................  GGGGG.................  Ownership and Permitting
                                                                                      Responsibility.
Z090003............................  NESHAP................  H.....................  Alternative Monitoring for
                                                                                      Insulated Valves.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abstracts

Abstract for [0900038]

    Q: Does EPA approve a request by the Hospital of Saint Raphael in 
New Haven, Connecticut, to derate its boiler from 31 MMBtu to below 30 
MMBtu under 40 CFR part 60, subpart Dc?
    A: Yes. EPA approves the request of the Hospital of Saint Raphael 
to derate its boiler to below 30 MMBtu under NSPS subpart Dc, provided 
that the hospital (1) replaces the oil burner in the boiler to reduce 
its capacity while operating on residual oil; and (2) modifies the 
natural gas fuel system by replacing the jets/nozzles to reduce its 
capacity while operating on natural gas.

Abstract for [0900039]

    Q: Does EPA approve the request of DuPont Engineering Polymers 
(DuPont) to use sensory methods (sight, sound, and smell), under 40 CFR 
part 60, subpart VV, to detect leaks from equipment in acetic acid 
service at its facility in Chattanooga, Tennessee?
    A: Yes. EPA approves DuPont's request based upon previous approvals 
under NSPS subpart VV for similar monitoring alternatives in Region 4 
and the physical properties of acetic acid that allow leaks to be 
detected readily using sensory methods.

Abstract for [0900040]

    Q: Does EPA approve the request of Solutia, Inc. to use an 
alternative method under 40 CFR part 60, subpart G, for certifying the 
nitrogen oxides monitoring system installed on its nitric acid plant in 
Gonzalez, Florida?
    A: Yes. EPA approves Solutia's request for an alternative method 
based upon a previous approval under NSPS subpart G for a similar E.I. 
du Pont de Nemours nitric acid plant in Orange County, Texas.

Abstract for [0900041]

    Q1: Does EPA approve the request to exempt certain areas at the 
J.E.D. Solid Waste Management Facility in St. Cloud, Florida, from the 
monthly gas collection well monitoring requirements in 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart WWW? Specific areas where a monitoring exemption is requested 
are haul roads, truck traffic areas, active areas, areas under 
construction, and slopes with a horizontal to vertical ratio of 3:1 or 
greater.
    A1: EPA finds that the proposed exclusions, with the exception of 
the one for roads, are unacceptable. This determination is consistent 
with a previous Region 4 determination for the Three Rivers Landfill in 
Aiken County, South Carolina.
    Q2: Does EPA approve a request to exclude monitoring of gas 
collection and control system components that have been raised between 
ten and twenty feet in the air at the active face of the landfill in 
order to accommodate a vertical expansion under 40 CFR part 60, subpart 
WWW?
    A2: Yes. EPA finds that the company has legitimate safety concerns 
about monitoring these components under NSPS subpart WWW. Given the 
number of wells at the site, the majority of the wells will still be 
monitored on a monthly basis. In addition, based upon the operating 
life of the landfill, the duration of the proposed exemption will be 
relatively short.

Abstract for [0900042]

    Q: Does EPA approve the request of Robert Bosch, LLC, to derate the 
capacity of a boiler at its Charleston, South Carolina facility so that 
it will no longer be subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart Dc? The 
proposal includes the replacement of the boiler's existing burner with 
a new lower-rated burner to reduce the heat input capacity to less than 
10 million Btu/hour.
    A: Yes. EPA approves the request as it complies with the policy on 
derates under NSPS subpart Dc.

Abstract for [0900043]

    Q: Does EPA approve a request for an alternative opacity monitoring 
procedure for a boiler under 40 CFR part 60, subpart Db, at Unilin 
Flooring's thin high-density fiberboard plant in Mt. Gilead, North 
Carolina?
    A: Based upon the operation of the Mt. Gilead plant, EPA approves 
the request to use a combination of EPA Methods 9 and 22 under NSPS 
subpart Db to monitor opacity from the heating plant's startup/
shutdown/idle stack when the facility's regenerative thermal oxidizer 
is shut down for maintenance. However, EPA does not approve the request 
to delay the collection of EPA Method 9 data for up to 24 hours when 
the presence of visible emissions is detected using Method 22.

Abstract for [0900044]

    Q: Does EPA approve the request of the Oak Ridge National 
Laboratory to use a predictive emission monitoring system (PEMS), under 
40 CFR part 60, subpart Db, for measuring nitrogen oxides during oil 
combustion in Boiler No. 6 at its Oak Ridge, Tennessee facility?
    A: Yes. EPA approves the request for a PEMS under NSPS subpart Db 
based upon the results of a relative accuracy

[[Page 64081]]

test audit conducted at the plant on September 25, 2008.

Abstract for [0900045]

    Q: Does EPA agree that the owner/operator of the Trail Ridge 
Landfill in Baldwin, Florida, may unilaterally establish alternative 
temperature limits for gas collection wells under 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart WWW?
    A: No. Based upon the language in NSPS subpart WWW and guidance 
issued by EPA, the State of Florida must approve alternative 
temperature limits for gas collection wells.

Abstract for [0900046]

    Q: Does EPA approve Kentucky Utility's request under 40 CFR part 
60, subpart D, to install a particulate matter continuous emission 
monitoring system (PM CEMS) as an alternative to a continuous opacity 
monitoring system (COMS) on Unit 4 of its facility in Ghent, Kentucky?
    A: Yes. NSPS subpart D contains provisions allowing owners/
operators to petition to use a PM CEMS as an alternative to COMS. Under 
the delegation of authority for subpart D, the Kentucky Department of 
Environmental Protection is authorized to approve such proposals. 
Because the use of PM CEMS is relatively new, this determination 
includes suggestions for conditions that should be imposed as part of 
the approval process.

Abstract for [0900047]

    Q: Does EPA approve a request by Georgia Power Company (GPC) to 
delay the initial particulate matter (PM) performance test for a 
limestone unloading operation under 40 CFR part 60, subpart OOO, at its 
Plant Bowen in Cartersville, Georgia?
    A: Conditional. Because it will be difficult to complete a three-
run PM performance test in a reasonable period of time until at least 
three of the four scrubbers at Plant Bowen are operating, a temporary 
delay of the initial test would be acceptable, under NSPS subpart OOO, 
provided that GPC supplies other data that provide reasonable assurance 
of compliance with the applicable limit. As the terms GPC proposes in 
justifying the waiver will not provide adequate assurance of 
compliance, the letter outlines a series of conditions under which a 
temporary waiver of the PM performance test would be acceptable under 
subpart OOO.

Abstract for [0900048]

    Q: Does EPA approve a request by Johns Manville for an alternative 
monitoring approach under 40 CFR part 60, subpart PPP, for a wet 
electrostatic precipitator (ESP) that controls particulate emissions 
from a process line at its wool fiberglass manufacturing plant in 
Winder, Georgia?
    A: Yes. Because the liquid used in the ESP on this process line is 
not recycled, the solids content of the water is inherently low. Given 
this and given the substantial margin of compliance during the three 
most recent performance tests conducted on the process line, verifying 
that only once-through municipal water is used in the ESP is an 
acceptable alternative, under NSPS subpart PPP, to monitoring the 
solids content of the water.

Abstract for [0900049]

    Q: Does EPA approve a request by Waste Management Company to extend 
the deadline for correcting pressure exceedances, under 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart WWW, for six gas collection wells at its Outer Loop Landfill in 
Louisville, Kentucky?
    A: Yes. Given the suspected cause of the pressure exceedances 
(water buildup in the header line for the wells), the NSPS subpart WWW 
requirement to install additional collection wells if the exceedances 
cannot be corrected within 15 days is unlikely to correct the 
exceedances. The proposal to use a camera to pinpoint the location of 
water buildup in the line and to either regrade the line or run a 
jumper line to a vacuum source with enough capacity to clear the line 
is more likely to correct the exceedances. Therefore, EPA approves 
extending the subpart WWW deadline for correcting exceedances.

Abstract for [0900050]

    Q: Does EPA approve the request of the Ergon Refining facility in 
Vicksburg, Mississippi, for alternative hydrogen sulfide monitoring for 
a fuel gas stream generated in the pressure swing absorber (PSA) under 
40 CFR part 60, subpart J?
    A: Yes. EPA approves the request. Because both of the feed streams 
for the PSA unit are treated to remove sulfur, the likelihood that 
hydrogen sulfide will be present in the vent stream from the unit is 
extremely low. Thus, it is acceptable under NSPS subpart J to install a 
continuous monitor on the vent stream from the PSA unit.

Abstract for [0900052]

    Q: Does EPA approve a request from Waste Management Company (WMC) 
to reconfigure, under 40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW, six gas collection 
wells at its Iris Glen Landfill in Johnson City, Tennessee, by 
replacing the six existing vertical extraction wells with a horizontal 
collector?
    A: Yes. EPA approves the request because WMC proposes to replace 
one landfill gas collection device (vertical wells) with a gas 
collection device (a horizontal collector), which is acceptable under 
NSPS subpart WWW. In the event that exceedances of the 500 parts per 
million methane surface concentration limit are identified during 
future monitoring at the site, WMC will need to either adjust the 
system to meet the limit or install additional wells to improve the 
performance of the collection system.

Abstract for [0900053]

    Q: Does EPA approve the request of Eastman Chemical Company for 
alternative monitoring under 40 CFR part 60, subpart VV, of equipment 
in diketene service at its Kingsport, Tennessee facility?
    A: Yes. EPA approves this request because a review of this proposal 
and similar previous proposals for the Kingsport plant show that leaks 
will be detected and repaired more quickly under the proposed 
alternative monitoring approach than they would be under the monitoring 
procedures specified in NSPS subpart VV.

Abstract for [0900054]

    Q: Is the nitrogen oxides predictive emission monitoring system 
(PEMS) proposed for Boiler No. 6 at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory 
(ORNL) in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, an acceptable alternative to a 
continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) under 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart Db?
    A: Conditional. Based upon a review of relative accuracy test audit 
(RATA) results provided by ORNL, the PEMS will be an acceptable 
alternative, under NSPS subpart Db, to a CEMS when the primary fuel 
(natural gas) for the boiler is used. In order for the PEMS to be 
approved as an alternative to a CEMS when the backup fuel (No. 2 fuel 
oil) for the boiler is used, ORNL will need to supply RATA results for 
the backup fuel.

Abstract for [0900056]

    Q: Neill Grading & Construction Company (Neill Grading) in Hickory, 
North Carolina, proposes to derate the capacity of a portable jaw 
crusher to avoid applicability of 40 CFR part 60, subpart OOO. Neill 
Grading proposes to use shims to restrict the size of the crusher 
discharge opening and reduce the capacity. Does EPA approve this 
proposed means of derating?
    A: No. EPA does not approve this proposed means for derating 
because it

[[Page 64082]]

does not constitute a permanent physical reduction in the capacity of 
the crusher. Jaw crushers are designed with adjustable shims to enable 
operation at various throughput settings, and each particular discharge 
setting or adjustment in the shims does not constitute a permanent 
physical restriction in the maximum capacity. The design capacity of 
the crusher is used to determine applicability of NSPS subpart OOO, 
rather than the intended throughput capacity an owner or operator 
proposes to utilize.

Abstract for [0900057]

    Q: Would the replacement of three regenerative thermal oxidizers 
(RTO) with a single RTO system on three pressure sensitive vinyl/paper 
roll coating lines trigger the performance test requirements of 40 CFR 
part 60, subparts A and RR, at Avery Dennison's facility in Lowell, 
Indiana?
    A: No. NSPS subpart RR applies to any affected facility that begins 
construction, modification, or reconstruction after December 30, 1980. 
Because no construction, modification, or reconstruction appears to 
have occurred, NSPS requirements have not been triggered. A 
modification could occur if the new RTO system proves to be less 
efficient than the old RTO system at controlling volatile organic 
compounds.

Abstract for [0900058]

    Q: Is the methane gas to electrical energy gas processing facility 
that Industrial Power Generating Company (INGENCO) proposes to 
construct at the CDT landfill located in Joliet, Illinois, considered a 
treatment system under 40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW?
    A. Yes. EPA considers filtering of the gas through a 10 micron 
screen to reduce particulate matter, de-watering of the gas using 
chillers or other dehydration equipment to reduce moisture content, and 
compression using gas blowers or similar devices to further reduce 
moisture content and raise gas pressure as ``treatment'' when the gas 
is used in an energy recovery project. INGENCO's CDT facility appears 
to meet these requirements under current NSPS subpart WWW. Once the gas 
has been treated and sent to the internal combustion (IC) engines, it 
is no longer subject to the NSPS requirements. However, once proposed 
amendments to NSPS subpart WWW regarding treatment systems are 
finalized, INGENCO may have to comply with new or additional 
requirements regarding landfill gas treatment systems.

Abstract for [0900059]

    Q: Does EPA approve the request of the Roxana Landfill (Roxana) in 
Roxana, Illinois, for several alternative timelines to bring certain 
specified wells that were unable to perform the required monitoring for 
May 2008 into compliance under 40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW?
    A: Yes. Roxana was unable to perform the required monitoring for 
May 2008 for landfill gas extraction wells 9, 36, 41, 44, and 47 due to 
unsafe conditions in the area of these wells. EPA approves the request 
to exempt these wells under NSPS subpart WWW for one month of 
monitoring only because of the safety issues and because the request 
covers a small percentage of the total wells at the site for a 
relatively short time period. EPA will grant Roxana alternative 
compliance timelines of various lengths to correct operating parameter 
exceedances at several other wells.

Abstract for [0900060]

    Q: Will processes prior to combustion at the proposed methane gas 
to electrical energy processing facility at Waste Management's 
Settler's Hill Recycling and Disposal Facility (Settler's Hill) in 
Batavia, Illinois, be considered a treatment facility under 40 CFR part 
60, subpart WWW?
    A. Yes. EPA considers filtering of the gas through a 10-micron 
screen to reduce particulate matter, de-watering of the gas using 
chillers or other dehydration equipment to reduce moisture content, and 
compression using gas blowers or similar devices to further reduce 
moisture content and raise gas pressure as ``treatment'' when the gas 
is used in an energy recovery project. Waste Management's proposed 
facility at Settler's Hill appears to meet these requirements under 
current NSPS subpart WWW. Once the gas has been treated and sent to the 
IC engines, it is no longer subject to the NSPS requirements. However, 
once proposed amendments to NSPS subpart WWW regarding treatment 
systems are finalized, Settler's Hill may have to comply with new or 
additional requirements regarding landfill gas treatment systems.

Abstract for [0900061]

    Q: Is Upper Rock Island County Landfill (Upper Rock) in East 
Moline, Illinois, required under 40 CFR part 60, subpart WWW, to 
install a landfill gas collection and control system at this time?
    A. No. A June 2006 Tier 2 five-year re-test at Upper Rock showed 
that emissions were 59.49 Mg/year. The facility submitted a Gas 
Collection and Control Design Plan to Illinois in July 2007. In August 
2007, EPA approved Upper Rock to conduct additional Tier 2 testing to 
update the June 2006 values because the site had met all the other NSPS 
reporting obligations in a timely manner. The testing was conducted 
February 13, 2008, and the facility emissions were 11.24 Mg/year, which 
is less than the 50 Mg/year NMOC emission threshold for installing 
controls under NSPS subpart WWW.

Abstract for [0900062]

    Q: Does EPA approve the request of the Winnebago Reclamation 
Service Landfill (Winnebago) for an alternative timeline under 40 CFR 
part 60, subpart WWW, to correct a positive pressure exceedance 
exhibited on June 2, 2008, at Well GW191 of its Rockford, Illinois 
facility?
    A: Yes. EPA approves Winnebago's request, but only until July 17, 
2008. Winnebago originally requested an alternative timeline until 
September 30, 2008, due to plugging of the lateral. However, on July 
17, 2008, the facility informed EPA that the well came back into 
compliance on July 8, 2008.

Abstract for [0900063]

    Q: Will the processes prior to combustion at the methane gas to 
electrical energy processing facility proposed at Waste Management's 
Woodland Recycling and Disposal Facility (Woodland) in South Elgin, 
Illinois, be considered a treatment facility under 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart WWW?
    A. Yes. EPA considers filtering of the gas through a 10-micron 
screen to reduce particulate matter, de-watering of the gas using 
chillers or other dehydration equipment to reduce moisture content, and 
compression using gas blowers or similar devices to further reduce 
moisture content and raise gas pressure as ``treatment'' when the gas 
is used in an energy recovery project. Waste Management's proposed 
facility in South Elgin appears to meet these requirements under 
current NSPS subpart WWW. Once the gas has been treated and sent to the 
IC engines, it is no longer subject to the NSPS requirements. However, 
once proposed amendments to NSPS subpart WWW regarding treatment 
systems are finalized, Woodland may have to comply with new or 
additional requirements regarding landfill gas treatment systems.

Abstract for [0900064]

    Q1: Does EPA approve adjusted standards under 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart

[[Page 64083]]

WWW, for oxygen and pressure at five gas extraction locations at Veolia 
Environmental Services Zion Landfill in Zion, Illinois?
    A1: For the three vertical gas extraction wells, the pressure and 
oxygen exceedances are due to declining gas quality and gas production 
in an area of older waste. EPA will approve adjusted standards for 
these wells under NSPS subpart WWW. These locations may remain shut 
off, under positive pressure, with monthly monitoring and periodic 
adjustment to vacuum to remove accumulated landfill gas. However, EPA 
will not approve alternative standards for the two horizontal trenches 
in question because these points appear to not be meeting the standards 
because of operational problems and not because of low gas production 
or low gas quality inherent in the waste.
    Q2: Does EPA approve an alternative timeline under 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart WWW, to correct oxygen exceedances at a sixth well at Veolia 
Environmental Services Zion Landfill in Zion, Illinois?
    A2: Yes. EPA approves an alternative timeline of 90 days only under 
NSPS subpart WWW to correct the oxygen exceedance.

Abstract for [0900067]

    Q1. Does work performed on a stationary gas turbine owned by 
CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission at a compressor station in 
Morrilton, Arkansas, that is subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart KKKK, 
and that included moving the turbine to a new site, qualify the turbine 
as a new source?
    A1. No. Relocation in and of itself does not trigger applicability. 
Further, because only portions of the affected facility as defined in 
NSPS subpart KKKK were replaced, it does not appear that a new affected 
facility was constructed.
    Q2. Is the turbine modified?
    A2. It is not clear whether the turbine has been modified, as the 
submission does not include sufficient information to evaluate whether 
emissions at the affected facility increased.
    Q3. Does overhauling and uprating the turbine with old and new 
parts constitute reconstruction?
    A3. The request letter does not contain sufficient information to 
make a determination about whether this is reconstruction. The cost of 
the new and old components that were added to the affected facility is 
included in the reconstruction analysis. Equipment that is outside of 
the affected facility is not included in the reconstruction 
calculation. Reconstruction involves consideration of whether it is 
technically and economically feasible to meet the applicable standards.
    Q4. Does the Letter of Authorization (LOA) with the manufacturer to 
purchase the turbine constitute commencement of construction? The 
letter predates the applicability date for 40 CFR part 60, subpart 
KKKK.
    A4. No. The LOA does not require the type of activities that 
commence construction. Planning work does not commence construction, 
and contracts for services such as site preparation, planning, 
engineering, or architectural drawings do not constitute a contractual 
obligation for construction within the meaning of NSPS subpart KKKK.

Abstract for [0900068]

    This letter addresses the following questions from Saint-Gobain 
Containers, relative to COMS requirements in NSPS subparts A and CC.
    Q1: Are glass furnaces under the NSPS required to base their six-
minute opacity averages on 36 or 24 data points?
    A1: The opacity value determined under 40 CFR 60.263(c)(4) is based 
on 24 data points, as specified at 40 CFR 60.293(c)(3). The ongoing 
COMS opacity monitoring averages are based on 36 data points, 
consistent with 60.13(h)(1).
    Q2: Does proposed Method 203 for Part 51 or state guidance, both of 
which require 83-percent minimum data availability, apply to NSPS 
subpart CC?
    A2: No. However, states may impose minimum data availability 
requirements that are more stringent than the NSPS.
    Q3: Is a minimum of 24 valid data points always required for 40 CFR 
60.293(c)(3), even if more are sought?
    A3: Yes. However, all valid data should be used in calculating the 
six-minute averages.
    Q4: Can the first and final readings of a six-minute COMS reading 
be missed and still satisfy the requirement that COMS data points be 
equally spaced over each six-minute period?
    A4: Under 40 CFR 60.13(h)(1) for COMS, a valid reading is required 
every 10 seconds, at a minimum, for each six-minute period.
    Q5: Does CMS downtime include periods when COMS data is interrupted 
for daily calibration or zero/span adjustment?
    A5: The term ``CMS downtime'' as used in the summary reports at 40 
CFR 60.7(d) includes downtime due to calibration. The reporting 
requirements of 40 CFR 60.7(c) exclude zero and span checks from 
reported periods of CMS inoperation.
    Q6: Does CMS downtime include periods when the COMS is offline due 
to furnace shutdown?
    A6: No. CMS downtime does not include periods when the COMS is 
offline due to furnace shutdown.

Abstract for [M090001]

    Q: Are Motiva Enterprises LLC's gasoline distribution terminals in 
Bridgeport and New Haven, Connecticut, still subject to 40 CFR Part 63, 
subpart R, if Connecticut banned the sale of gasoline containing methyl 
tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) and the facility is no longer a major 
hazardous air pollutants (HAP) source?
    A: Yes. EPA concludes that the Motiva Enterprises' Bridgeport and 
New Haven Terminals remain subject to NESHAP subpart R, because they 
were a major source of HAP on the first substantive compliance date of 
the NESHAP regardless of the level of their potential to emit after 
that date.

Abstract for [M090005]

    Q. Is Motiva Enterprises LLC's gasoline distribution terminal in 
Providence, Rhode Island, still subject to 40 CFR Part 63, subpart R, 
if Rhode Island banned the sale of gasoline containing MTBE and the 
facility is no longer a major HAP source?
    A. Yes. EPA concludes that Motiva Enterprises' Providence Terminal 
remains subject to NESHAP subpart R, because it was a major source of 
HAP on the first substantive compliance date of the NESHAP regardless 
of the level of its potential to emit after that date.

Abstract for [M090033]

    Q1. Does 40 CFR part 63, subpart YYYY, apply to the existing 
stationary combustion turbines at Lake Road Generating Company, in 
Killingly, Connecticut (Lake Road)?
    A1. Yes. EPA finds that MACT subpart YYYY applies to the existing 
stationary combustion turbines at Lake Road but that it does not at 
this time impose any requirements on these units.
    Q2. Does EPA find that Lake Road is a major source of HAP emissions 
under MACT subpart YYYY?
    A2. Yes. EPA has determined that Lake Road does not have a 
federally enforceable limit on its potential to emit or a state-
enforceable, practically enforceable limit on its potential to emit. 
Therefore, Lake Road is currently considered a ``major source'' of HAP 
emissions that is subject to MACT subpart YYYY.

Abstract for [M090034]

    Q. Is a portable 125 gallon mixer at the ITW Devcon/Plexus facility 
in Danvers, Massachusetts, part of an affected source under 40 CFR part 
63, subpart HHHHH?

[[Page 64084]]

    A. No. EPA has determined that because the portable mixer has a 
capacity of less than 250 gallons, the portable mixer does not meet the 
definition of ``process vessel,'' which is considered equipment that is 
part of an affected source under MACT subpart HHHHH. Additionally, as 
the portable mixer does not meet any other criteria for inclusion in 
the affected source, it is not part of the affected source under 
subpart HHHHH.

Abstract for [M090036]

    Q: Does Aleris International's proposal for alternative 
methodologies to conduct stack testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, and 
reporting for the aluminum scrap shredder and delacquering kiln at its 
facility in Uhrichsville, Ohio, comply with the requirements of 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart RRR?
    A: Yes. Aleris International's proposal for alternative 
methodologies to conduct stack testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, and 
reporting for the aluminum scrap shredder and delacquering kiln 
complies with MACT subpart RRR. EPA approves the proposed method for 
determining the delacquering kiln feed/charge weight during testing for 
the aluminum scrap shredder and delacquering kiln. EPA also approves 
using twelve-hour shifts for the shredder feed/charge weight during 
normal operations and keeping the delacquering kiln feed/charge rate in 
twelve-hour shifts.

Abstract for [M090038]

    Q1: Does 40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ, apply to non-road, non-
stationary reciprocating internal combustion engines located at a major 
source of hazardous air pollutants?
    A1: No. MACT subpart ZZZZ does not apply to non-road, non-
stationary reciprocating internal combustion engines located at a major 
source of hazardous air pollutants.
    Q2: Does 40 CFR part 60, subpart IIII, apply to non-road, non-
stationary reciprocating internal combustion engines?
    A2: No. NSPS subpart IIII does not apply to non-road, non-
stationary reciprocating internal combustion engines.

Abstract for [M090039]

    Q1: Does EPA approve a request to waive the performance testing 
requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart PPPPPP, for two Hardinage ball 
mills at the Johnson Controls Battery Group (Johnson Controls) facility 
in Holland, Ohio, based upon the performance test results from similar 
affected sources at Johnson Controls facility in Tampa, Florida?
    A1: No. EPA does not approve the request under MACT subpart PPPPPP. 
The affected sources are located at different facilities in different 
states, and maximum production capacities differ by 400-pounds per 
hour. Also, Johnson Controls has not conducted a performance test at 
the Tampa affected facilities since November 2002.
    Q2: Does EPA approve a request from Johnson Controls to use the 
performance test results from two cast-on-strap (COS) lines to 
demonstrate compliance under 40 CFR part 63, subpart PPPPPP, for the 
four other COS lines at its facility in Holland, Ohio?
    A2: No. EPA does not approve this request under MACT subpart 
PPPPPP. Johnson Controls did not submit a copy of any test reports for 
any of the COS lines and did not submit any information to demonstrate 
that the six COS lines were produced by the same manufacturer, have the 
same model number or other manufacturer's designation in common, and 
have the same rated capacity and operating specifications.

Abstract for [M090040]

    Q: Will EPA reconsider its September 25, 2008, disapproval of a 
request to waive the stack testing requirements for six cast-on-strap 
lines at Johnson Controls Battery Group's lead acid battery facility in 
Holland, Ohio?
    A: No. Johnson Controls Battery Group has not demonstrated that the 
performance tests are impractical or technically or economically 
infeasible. EPA affirms its previous decision.

Abstract for [M090041]

    Q: Does EPA waive the closed vent system inspection procedures 
using Method 21 of 40 CFR part 60 for add-on air pollution control 
equipment subject to 40 CFR part 63, subparts WWWW and SS, given that 
EPA has made such a determination with respect to 40 CFR part 261, 
subpart CC?
    A: No. EPA has previously determined that when waste management 
units are required to use air emissions control under both RCRA and CAA 
NESHAP, it is unnecessary for owners and operators of those waste 
management units subject to air standards under both sets of rules to 
perform duplicative testing and monitoring, keep duplicative sets of 
records, or perform other duplicative actions. Given no applicable RCRA 
air regulations, EPA finds that the facts here do not justify waiving 
the closed vent inspection procedures using Method 21.

Abstract for [M090042]

    Q: Does EPA approve the request of Aleris International for a 
waiver of the performance testing required for scrap shredders under 40 
CFR part 63, subpart RRR, for the ring crusher at its Wabash Alloys 
facility in Wabash, Indiana?
    A: Yes. EPA approves the request under MACT subpart RRR, as the 
facility has demonstrated that it is technically infeasible to use 
Method 5 to measure emissions. Because Method 9 visible emissions 
readings showed uncontrolled opacity far below the limit for a 
controlled source, this provides assurance that the ring crusher is in 
continuous compliance with the PM standard.

Abstract for [M090043]

    Q: Is Spirit Aerosystems (Spirit) responsible under 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart GGGGG, for remediation activities conducted and controlled by 
Boeing on Spirit Aerosystems' property?
    A: No. This is a unique situation in which Boeing is legally 
responsible for compliance with MACT subpart GGGGG. Although Spirit 
purchased the existing site from Boeing, Boeing retained ownership of 
the remediation unit ``facilities'' located on the site, along with the 
environmental liability. Prior to Spirit's purchase of the property, a 
Kansas Department of Health and Environment Consent Order was signed 
requiring Boeing to conduct remediation activities at the site.

Abstract for [Z090003]

    Q: Does EPA approve the request of Dow Chemical Company (Dow) to 
use insulation plugs to access the insulated valve stem interface for 
valves subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart H, at its Midland, Michigan 
facility?
    A: Yes. EPA approves Dow's request. Using insulation plugs is a 
feasible and adequate way under MACT subpart H of monitoring the 
insulated valves at Dow's Midland plant site while still maintaining 
the integrity and functionality of the insulation.

    Dated: November 5, 2009.
Lisa Lund,
Director, Office of Compliance.
[FR Doc. E9-29067 Filed 12-4-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P