[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 239 (Tuesday, December 15, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66470-66494]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-29570]



[[Page 66469]]

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

Part IV





Environmental Protection Agency





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



40 CFR Parts 9 and 63



National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source 
Categories: Gasoline Distribution Bulk Terminals, Bulk Plants, and 
Pipeline Facilities; and Gasoline Dispensing Facilities; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 239 / Tuesday, December 15, 2009 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 66470]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 9 and 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0406, FRL-9092-1]
RIN 2060-AP16


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 
Source Categories: Gasoline Distribution Bulk Terminals, Bulk Plants, 
and Pipeline Facilities; and Gasoline Dispensing Facilities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; reconsideration.

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

SUMMARY: EPA received two petitions for reconsideration from trade 
associations representing their stakeholders regarding the National 
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories: 
Gasoline Distribution Bulk Terminals, Bulk Plants, and Pipeline 
Facilities; and Gasoline Dispensing Facilities, which EPA promulgated 
on January 10, 2008, and amended on March 7, 2008. In this action, EPA 
is proposing amendments and clarifications to certain definitions and 
applicability provisions of the final rules in response to some of the 
issues raised in the petitions for reconsideration. In addition, 
several other compliance-related questions posed by various individual 
stakeholders and State and local agency representatives are addressed 
in this proposed action. We are seeking comments only on the proposed 
amendments presented in this action. We will not respond to any 
comments addressing other provisions of the final rules or any related 
rulemakings.

DATES: Comments. Written comments must be received on or before 
February 16, 2010.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts EPA requesting to speak at a 
public hearing by December 28, 2009, a public hearing will be held on 
December 30, 2009.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2006-0406, by one of the following methods:
     http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions 
for submitting comments.
     E-mail: [email protected].
     Fax: (202) 566-9744.
     Mail: Air and Radiation Docket, Environmental Protection 
Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 
20460. Please include a total of two copies.
     Hand Delivery: In person or by courier, deliver your 
comments to: Air and Radiation Docket, Public Reading Room, EPA West 
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004. 
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of 
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information. Please include a total of two copies.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2006-0406. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site 
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public 
docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov docket index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air and Radiation 
Docket, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 
Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone 
number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone 
number for the Air and Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742.
    We request that you also send a separate copy of each comment to 
the contact persons listed below (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    General and Technical Information: Mr. Stephen Shedd, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, Sector Policies and Programs Division, 
Coatings and Chemicals Group (E143-01), U.S. EPA, Research Triangle 
Park, NC 27711, telephone: (919) 541-5397, facsimile number: (919) 685-
3195, e-mail address: [email protected].
    Compliance Information: Ms. Rebecca Kane, Office of Compliance, Air 
Compliance Branch (2223A), U.S. EPA, Ariel Rios Building, 1200 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460, telephone: (202) 564-
5960, facsimile number: (202) 564-0050, e-mail address: 
[email protected].

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Examples of regulated
             Category                NAICS *            entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry..........................     324110  Operations at area
                                       493190   sources that transfer
                                       486910   and store gasoline,
                                       424710   including bulk
                                       447110   terminals, bulk plants,
                                       447190   pipeline facilities, and
                                                gasoline dispensing
                                                facilities.
Federal/State/local/tribal
 governments.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* North American Industry Classification System.


[[Page 66471]]

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this 
action. To determine whether your facility is regulated by this action, 
you should examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR part 63, 
subparts BBBBBB and CCCCCC. If you have any questions regarding the 
applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult either the 
air permit authority for the entity or your EPA regional representative 
as listed in 40 CFR 63.13.
    Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, 
an electronic copy of today's proposal will also be available through 
the WWW. Following the Administrator's signature, a copy of this action 
will be posted on EPA's Technology Transfer Network (TTN) policy and 
guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/. The TTN at EPA's Web site provides information 
and technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control.
    Public Hearing. Persons interested in presenting oral testimony or 
inquiring as to whether a hearing is to be held should contact Ms. 
Janet Eck, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, 
Sector Policies and Programs Division, Coatings and Chemicals Group 
(E143-01), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 
541-7946, e-mail address: [email protected], at least 2 days in advance 
of the potential date of the public hearing. If a public hearing is 
held, it will be held at 10 a.m. at EPA's Campus located at 109 T.W. 
Alexander Drive in Research Triangle Park, NC, or an alternate site 
nearby. If no one contacts EPA requesting to speak at a public hearing 
concerning this rule by December 28, 2009 this hearing will be 
cancelled without further notice.
    Outline: The information presented in this preamble is organized as 
follows:

I. Background
    A. Petitions for Reconsideration
    B. Other Stakeholder Issues
II. Summary of Proposed Amendments
    A. Proposed Amendments Applicable to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart 
BBBBBB
    B. Proposed Amendments Applicable to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart 
CCCCCC
III. Rationale for the Proposed Amendments
    A. Applicability
    B. Throughput Thresholds
    C. Rule Clarifications
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations

I. Background

    On January 10, 2008 (73 FR 1916) EPA promulgated National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories: Gasoline 
Distribution Bulk Terminals, Bulk Plants, and Pipeline Facilities; and 
Gasoline Dispensing Facilities (40 CFR part 63, subparts BBBBBB and 
CCCCCC) pursuant to sections 112(c)(3) and 112(d)(5) of the Clean Air 
Act (CAA). On March 10, 2008, the Administrator received two petitions 
for reconsideration of the final rules. One petition was filed by the 
Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (Alliance) and the other by the 
American Petroleum Institute (API) (Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0406, 
items 0174 and 0173). The Alliance also filed a petition for judicial 
review of the final rules in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District 
of Columbia Circuit. In addition, the Alliance, API, and several other 
stakeholders (affected facilities and State and local government 
agencies) have contacted EPA with questions or issues related to the 
implementation of the final rules. We discuss these requests below.

A. Petitions for Reconsideration

1. The Alliance Petition
    The Alliance petition identified three issues for reconsideration. 
The Alliance asserted:
    1. The broad definition of ``Bulk Gasoline Plant'' and unclear 
language in 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB, section 63.11086, can be 
read to impose duplicative and redundant requirements on facilities 
also subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC.
    2. The broad definition of ``Bulk Gasoline Plant'' appears to 
regulate some specialized engine testing facilities under 40 CFR part 
63, subpart BBBBBB when such facilities should be regulated only by 40 
CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC.
    3. Emergency generators and fire pump gasoline storage tanks should 
be exempt from regulation under both 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB and 
40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC.
    Today we are granting reconsideration of, and requesting comment 
on, the first two issues raised in the petition for reconsideration 
filed by the Alliance. These two issues raise concerns regarding the 
definition of ``bulk gasoline plant'' and allege that the ambiguous 
language in the definition may impose duplicative requirements on 
facilities under both subparts BBBBBB and CCCCCC, or improperly 
regulate certain facilities under subpart BBBBBB rather than subpart 
CCCCCC. The Alliance raised similar concerns in their comments 
submitted on the proposed rule; EPA included its response to those 
comments in the preamble to the final rule and in the December 19, 
2007, Memorandum, ``Summary of Comments and Responses to Public 
Comments on November 9, 2006 Proposal for Gasoline Distribution Area 
Sources'' (Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0406, item 0141). Nonetheless, we 
grant reconsideration on these two issues in the Alliance petition for 
reconsideration so that we may more fully address these potential 
ambiguities in the definition and more clearly identify what facilities 
are ``bulk gasoline plants'' and therefore only subject to subpart 
BBBBBB. We discuss our proposed changes to this definition and to other 
applicable regulatory text for addressing these issues in Section III 
of this preamble.
    Moreover, on June 30, 2009 (74 FR 31273) we published a proposed 
settlement agreement with the Alliance in the Federal Register 
regarding the petition for judicial review filed by the Alliance in the 
DC Circuit Court of Appeals. After a 30-day public comment period, EPA 
and the Alliance formally entered into the settlement agreement. Under 
the terms of the settlement agreement, we are proposing the amendments 
contained in Attachment A of the agreement. The proposed amendments in 
Attachment A are those that address the issues for which we grant 
reconsideration above.
2. The API Petition
    The API petition identified four issues for reconsideration. API 
asserted:
    1. The rule should be clarified so that facilities would be allowed 
180 days from the compliance date to conduct a performance test and an 
additional 60 days to submit the Notice of Compliance Status. 
Additionally, API stated that the requirements under the rule should 
not be triggered prior to the compliance date regardless of whether or 
not a Notice of Compliance Status is submitted prior to

[[Page 66472]]

the compliance date specified in the rule.
    2. The monitoring requirements do not appropriately accommodate 
daily monitoring and recording requirements for control equipment at 
facilities that are not manned daily or that have alternative control 
system configurations.
    3. The identification of affected units in 40 CFR part 63, subparts 
BBBBBB and CCCCCC inadvertently regulate equipment not meant to be part 
of this rule.
    4. EPA has identified startup/shutdown/malfunction (SSM) reporting 
requirements within the entries of Table 3 of the rule when there is no 
requirement for an SSM plan for facilities subject to 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart BBBBBB.
    Additionally, on May 8, 2008, API sent a letter to EPA that further 
clarified the four issues raised in its March 10, 2008 petition. The 
May 8 letter also introduced seven new issues regarding the final 
rules. Since these seven issues were not included in the March 10 
petition for reconsideration, EPA is not addressing them as part of the 
petition for reconsideration; instead, EPA is addressing them with the 
issues raised by other stakeholders (see section I.B. below). In 
section III. (Rationale for Proposed Amendments) of this preamble, 
API's issues are identified by the order in which they are listed in 
the May 8 letter.
    Despite having ample time and opportunity to do so, API did not 
submit comments on any of the issues raised in its petition for 
reconsideration during the public comment period. The provisions that 
provoked all of these questions were included in the proposed rules, 
yet API did not seek to resolve them until after EPA promulgated the 
final rules. Under CAA section 307(d)(7)(B), EPA is not obligated to 
reconsider these issues as not being ``properly noticed'' as alleged by 
API in their petition for reconsideration. Nonetheless, EPA is today 
granting reconsideration on all four of the issues raised in API's 
petition for reconsideration. EPA recognizes the value of addressing 
these questions for the facilities that are attempting to implement the 
rules; providing clarity on possibly confusing provisions will enhance 
owner/operator compliance with these rules. Thus, EPA agrees that 
addressing these issues is appropriate at this time. Section III 
contains a detailed explanation of the issues as well as EPA's proposed 
methods for resolving those issues. The package also includes proposed 
changes to the regulatory text, where appropriate, that address the 
four issues raised in API's petition for reconsideration.
    Our final decision on reconsideration of all the issues for which 
we are not granting reconsideration today will be issued no later than 
the date by which we take final action on the issues discussed in 
today's action.

B. Other Stakeholder Issues

    In addition to the petitions for reconsideration discussed above, 
several other compliance-related questions have been raised by various 
stakeholders, including the Alliance,\1\ API, State and local air 
pollution control agencies, equipment suppliers, etc. The questions 
raised by stakeholders include topics such as: Clarification of the 
applicability of the two subparts to various types of gasoline-handling 
operations; options for submerged fill pipe lengths; applicability of 
the subparts to storage tanks that are used infrequently or used only 
for surge control at pipeline facilities; the definition of monthly 
throughput and how monthly throughput is to be calculated; the timing 
of certain recordkeeping activities and submittal of notifications; 
clarification of the rule text regarding continuous compliance 
monitoring; clarification of the frequency of required storage tank 
inspections; and the applicability of several General Provisions 
subparts. We are addressing these questions in today's action. Section 
III. of today's notice presents the details on each of the questions 
that have been raised and on our responses to the questions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Letters from the Alliance and API have been added to Docket 
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0406 and can be found at items 0175 through 
0180.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The amendments being proposed today addressing both the petitions 
for reconsideration and the additional questions from other 
stakeholders primarily clarify the final rules and do not substantially 
change the requirements of the final rules. Thus, the estimates of 
environmental, cost, and information collection impacts are not 
substantially different than estimated at promulgation of these rules, 
and no changes have been made to the estimates presented in the final 
rules.

II. Summary of Proposed Amendments

A. Proposed Amendments Applicable to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart BBBBBB

    As a result of our reconsideration of the issues raised by the 
petitions filed by the Alliance and API, as well as questions from 
other stakeholders regarding 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB, we are 
proposing to amend certain rule provisions. The rationale for the 
amendments is fully presented in the next section of this preamble. We 
are proposing to:
     Add a provision to Sec.  63.11081 clarifying that gasoline 
storage tanks located at bulk facilities, but used only for dispensing 
gasoline in a manner consistent with tanks located at a gasoline 
dispensing facility (GDF) as defined at Sec.  63.11132, are not subject 
to any of the requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB. Instead, 
these tanks must comply with the applicable requirements of 40 CFR part 
63, subpart CCCCCC.
     Add a provision to Sec.  63.11081 stating that if a bulk 
facility's monthly throughput ever exceeds an applicable throughput 
threshold in the definition of ``bulk gasoline terminal,'' or in Table 
2, item 1 of this subpart, the affected source will remain subject to 
those requirements even if the affected source's throughput later falls 
below the applicable throughput threshold.
     Add to Sec.  63.11086 a provision to allow storage tanks 
to have an additional option for submerged fill pipes that are further 
from the bottom of the tank than the distances previously specified in 
Sec.  63.11086 if adequate recordkeeping is performed and records are 
maintained by the owner or operator to demonstrate that the liquid 
level in the tank never drops below the highest point in the opening of 
the fill pipe.
     Amend item 1 in Table 1 to provide different controls than 
promulgated for two types of tanks, as follows:
    [cir] Add a capacity/throughput threshold below which small, 
infrequent-use gasoline storage tanks would be required to be equipped 
with a fixed roof and covers on all openings that are to be maintained 
in a closed position at all times when not in use.
    [cir] Add a definition for surge control tanks and provisions 
requiring that they be equipped with pressure/vacuum (PV) vents with a 
positive cracking pressure of no less than 0.50 inches of water and 
that all openings are to be maintained in a closed position at all 
times when not in use.
     Additionally, we are proposing to include the following 
clarifications:
    [cir] Correct typographical errors;
    [cir] Move the provision that indicates that certain storage tanks 
that are located at bulk plants are only subject to 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart CCCCCC from Sec.  63.11086(b)(2) to Sec.  63.111081;
    [cir] Clarify in Sec.  63.11092 the presentation and wording of 
bulk terminal loading rack testing, monitoring, and recordkeeping 
provisions;

[[Page 66473]]

    [cir] Clarify in a new paragraph (g) in Sec.  63.11081 that the 
20,000 gallons per day throughput threshold that distinguishes a bulk 
gasoline plant from a bulk gasoline terminal is the maximum throughput 
for any day and not an average;
    [cir] Clarify paragraph (c) in Sec.  63.11083 by removing the word 
``average'' in the discussion of monthly throughput;
    [cir] Clarify in a new paragraph in Sec.  63.11095(a)(4) the due 
dates for Notification of Compliance Status (NOCS) reports for storage 
tanks on extended compliance dates;
    [cir] Clarify the definition of ``bulk gasoline plant;''
    [cir] Clarify the rule by adding definitions of ``gasoline'' and 
``gasoline storage tank'' based on cross-referenced definitions used in 
other rules;
    [cir] Correct the definition of ``vapor-tight cargo tank;''
    [cir] Clarify in Table 1, item 2(b), that internal floating roof 
tanks are excluded from the secondary seal requirements in 40 CFR part 
63, subpart WW, as we did for 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb;
    [cir] Clarify, by adding rule text at Sec.  63.11081(d) and (e), 
that the following activities are not affected source categories under 
40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB: the loading of aviation gasoline into 
storage tanks at airports (including the subsequent transfer of 
aviation gasoline within the airport), and the loading of gasoline into 
marine tank vessels at bulk facilities, as discussed at promulgation of 
this rule;
    [cir] Clarify, by adding rule text at Sec.  63.11081(h), that the 
loading of gasoline into cargo tanks for on-site redistribution to 
another storage tank is considered to be a bulk plant operation; and
    [cir] Clarify the applicability of certain General Provisions 
paragraphs in Table 3.

B. Proposed Amendments Applicable to 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart CCCCCC

    As a result of our reconsideration of the issues raised in the 
petitions filed by the Alliance and API, as well as questions from 
other stakeholders regarding 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC, we are 
proposing to amend certain rule provisions. The rationale for the 
amendments is fully presented in the next section of this preamble. We 
are proposing to:
     Clarify in Sec.  63.11111(g) that the loading of aviation 
gasoline into storage tanks at airports (including the subsequent 
transfer of aviation gasoline within the airport) is not subject to 
this subpart.
     Clarify in a new paragraph (h) in Sec.  63.11111 the 
applicability of 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC to multiple GDF at 
different locations within the same area source.
     Add a paragraph (i) to Sec.  63.11111 stating that if a 
GDF's monthly throughput ever exceeds an applicable monthly throughput 
threshold, the GDF will remain subject to those requirements even if 
the GDF's monthly throughput later falls below the applicable monthly 
throughput threshold.
     Add a paragraph (j) to Sec.  63.11111 stating that the 
dispensing of gasoline from fixed gasoline storage tanks at a GDF into 
portable gasoline storage tanks for the on-site delivery and subsequent 
dispensing of the gasoline into the fuel tank of a motor vehicle or 
other gasoline-fueled engine or equipment used at the area source is 
subject to Sec.  63.11116 of this subpart.
     Add a paragraph (e) to Sec.  63.11113 specifying the dates 
by which the performance tests required under Sec.  63.11120 must be 
conducted. Section 63.11120(a) is also being revised to add a reference 
to this new paragraph.
     Add a paragraph (d) to Sec.  63.11116 stating that owners 
or operators using portable gasoline containers that meet the 
requirements of 40 CFR part 59, subpart F, (the Mobile Source Air 
Toxics Rule) will be considered in compliance with paragraph (a)(3) of 
this section.
     Add to Sec.  63.11117 a provision to allow storage tanks 
to have an additional option for submerged fill pipes that are further 
from the bottom of the tank than the distances previously specified in 
Sec.  63.11117 if adequate recordkeeping is performed and records are 
maintained by the owner or operator to demonstrate that the liquid 
level in the tank never drops below the highest point in the opening of 
the fill pipe.
     Clarify in Sec.  63.11124 the dates by which the NOCS must 
be submitted.
     Add a new paragraph (c) to Sec.  63.11125 clarifying that 
cargo tank vapor tightness testing records must be kept for a period of 
5 years, but adding that cargo tank owners or operators have the option 
of keeping only the current year's records with the cargo tank and 
keeping records for the previous 4 years in the owner's office if the 
records are instantly available.
     Add a definition of ``vapor-tight cargo tank,'' correct 
the definition of ``gasoline cargo tank,'' and clarify the location of 
vapor-tight testing records to clarify compliance for cargo tank owners 
and operators with item (vi) in Table 2 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
CCCCCC.
     Add definitions for ``gasoline,'' ``motor vehicle,'' 
``nonroad engine,'' and ``nonroad vehicle'' to ensure consistency with 
other rules.
     Amend the current definition of ``gasoline dispensing 
facility'' in Sec.  63.11132 to clarify our intent to include all 
public and private stationary facilities that dispense gasoline into 
the fuel tanks of on- and off-road engines, vehicles, and equipment 
rather than just those facilities that dispense gasoline into the fuel 
tanks of motor vehicles.
     Revise the definition of monthly throughput in Sec.  
63.11132 to remove the reference to a ``rolling 30-day average'' and to 
add a clarification on how monthly throughput is calculated. This 
revision is being proposed to clarify our intent that the monthly 
throughput is calculated by summing the volume of gasoline loaded into, 
or dispensed from, all gasoline storage tanks at each GDF during the 
current day, plus the total volume of gasoline loaded into, or 
dispensed from, all gasoline storage tanks at each GDF during the 
previous 364 days, and then dividing that sum by 12.
     Revise Sec.  63.11111(e) and Sec.  63.11113(c) to remove 
the word ``average.''
     Amend Table 1 by adding a footnote to clarify the 
applicability of the provisions in the Table.
     Clarify in Table 1, item 2, the construction date after 
which storage tanks at existing GDF are ``new'' and required to have 
dual-point vapor balance system.
     Clarify in Table 2, item (vi), that vapor tightness 
testing documentation must be carried ``with'' the cargo tank, rather 
than ``on'' the cargo tank.
     Clarify the applicability of certain General Provisions 
paragraphs in Table 3.

III. Rationale for the Proposed Amendments

A. Applicability

1. Definition of Bulk Gasoline Plant
    Alliance, in their petition (issue 1), stated that the 
broad definition of ``bulk gasoline plant'' in 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
BBBBBB could be interpreted to impose duplicative and redundant 
requirements on facilities also subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
CCCCCC. Alliance stated that, in the preamble to the proposed rule (71 
FR 66064, 66066, November 9, 2006), EPA described bulk gasoline plants 
as ``* * * intermediate storage and distribution facilities that 
normally receive gasoline from bulk terminals via tank trucks or 
railcars. Gasoline from bulk plants is subsequently loaded into tank 
trucks for transport to local dispensing facilities.'' They further 
stated that the final rule

[[Page 66474]]

does not reflect this description and could be interpreted to include 
any gasoline storage facility that receives less than 20,000 gallons of 
gasoline per day, including GDF regulated under subpart CCCCCC. 
Alliance noted that EPA revised the rule between proposal and 
promulgation, but stated that the revision was not clear and failed to 
specifically exempt facilities subject to subpart CCCCCC from the 
requirements of subpart BBBBBB. Alliance requested that such an 
exemption be clearly stated in subpart CCCCCC.
    We agree with the Alliance that the intent of the rule was to 
separately regulate bulk gasoline plants and GDF. We also agree that, 
as written, there could be confusion with the definition of ``bulk 
gasoline plant.'' The definition of ``bulk gasoline plant'' in 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart BBBBBB includes the phrase ``gasoline storage and 
distribution facility.'' Our intent was that by including the term 
``distribution facility,'' it would be clear that the gasoline stored 
at these facilities was distributed to smaller dispensing facilities 
rather than being dispensed into vehicles and other gasoline-fueled 
equipment. To address the issues raised by the Alliance in their 
petition, we are proposing to revise the definition of ``bulk gasoline 
plant'' to include the descriptive language, as used in the preamble, 
to clarify that gasoline from these facilities is subsequently loaded 
into gasoline cargo tanks for transport to GDF. The proposed definition 
is as follows: ``Bulk gasoline plant means any gasoline storage and 
distribution facility that receives gasoline by pipeline, ship or 
barge, or cargo tank and subsequently loads the gasoline into gasoline 
cargo tanks for transport to gasoline dispensing facilities, and has a 
gasoline throughput of less than 20,000 gallons per day. Gasoline 
throughput shall be the maximum calculated design throughput as may be 
limited by compliance with an enforceable condition under Federal, 
State, or local law and discoverable by the Administrator and any other 
person.'' This change should adequately address any potential confusion 
regarding the distinction between bulk plants and GDF; thus, we are not 
proposing to add an exemption for bulk plants to 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart CCCCCC.
    Alliance also mentioned that some facilities could be subject to 
overlapping requirements because the final rule failed to clearly 
exempt facilities that are subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC 
from the requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB. They requested 
that such an exemption be added to subpart BBBBBB.
    We agree that an operation that dispenses gasoline in a way that 
meets the definition of ``gasoline dispensing facility'' in 40 CFR part 
63, subpart CCCCCC should only be subject to the requirements of 
subpart CCCCCC regardless of the type of facility (bulk terminal, bulk 
plant, or pipeline facility) at which it is located. We are proposing 
to add a paragraph (c) to Sec.  63.11081 to read as follows: ``Gasoline 
storage tanks that are located at affected sources identified in 
paragraphs (a)(1) to (a)(4) of this section, and that are used only for 
dispensing gasoline in a manner consistent with tanks located at a GDF, 
as defined at Sec.  63.11132, are not subject to any of the 
requirements in this subpart. These tanks must comply with subpart 
CCCCCC of this part.''
2. Definition of Gasoline Dispensing Facility (GDF)
    Alliance, in their petition (issue 2), expressed concern 
that, under the current definitions in the rules, some facilities could 
be considered to be subject to both 40 CFR part 63, subparts BBBBBB and 
CCCCCC when they should only be subject to subpart CCCCCC. Alliance 
stated that the overly broad definition of ``bulk gasoline plant'' 
could subject some specialized test facilities that dispense gasoline 
into research and development engines, engine dynamometers, engine test 
stands, and other vehicle testing equipment to regulation under both 
subpart BBBBBB and CCCCCC because some of these facilities have a 
single gasoline storage tank that dispenses gasoline into complete 
motor vehicles as well as the incomplete items described above. 
Alliance recommended that EPA revise the definition of ``gasoline 
dispensing facility'' to specifically include facilities that dispense 
gasoline into motor vehicle engines, whether or not such engine is part 
of a complete motor vehicle.
    Alliance also stated (issue 3) that both subparts could be 
interpreted to cover storage tanks that fuel emergency generators and 
fire pumps, but that it is not clear how they apply to this equipment. 
Alliance added that neither the proposed nor final rules provided any 
notice that they could potentially apply to the gasoline storage tanks 
that dispense gasoline into thousands of emergency generators and fire 
pumps at various types of industrial and other facilities across the 
nation. Alliance recommended that, because of the small tank size and 
very low throughput, the storage tanks fueling this type of equipment 
should not be regulated under either subpart. They suggested that the 
rules be revised to exclude storage tanks attached to or solely used to 
fuel emergency generators and fire pumps.
    API requested in their May 8, 2008 letter (issue 4) that 
the definition of ``gasoline dispensing facility'' in 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart CCCCCC be revised to clarify that the rule does not apply to 
those facilities that dispense gasoline for use within the facility or 
by employees of the facility. They stated that these types of GDF do 
not dispense gasoline for retail sale, and emissions from the gasoline 
storage tanks are typically addressed by State/local permits or 
regulations.
    Several other stakeholders have questioned whether specific types 
of operations are considered to be GDF. One stakeholder questioned how 
a remote facility that has a 5,000-gallon storage tank, receives 
gasoline once per year, and dispenses about 300 gallons per month for 
use in stationary and nonroad portable engines is covered by this rule. 
A few stakeholders asked if the definition should include operations 
such as marinas that dispense gasoline into boats, storage tanks that 
are used to dispense gasoline into nonroad vehicles and landscaping or 
construction equipment, storage tanks that are brought onsite for short 
term use (such as in construction equipment), and gasoline dispensed 
for non-retail purposes.
    We did not intend to exclude any GDF from this rule and 
specifically stated in the preamble for the final rule that we intended 
to cover all public and private GDF (73 FR 1916, 1925). Thus, we are 
proposing to clarify this in 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC. This is 
appropriate because all of these operations are part of the source 
category that was listed and the facility operations and applicable 
controls are the same for all types of GDF.
    As discussed at promulgation, the CAA requires that EPA set Federal 
emission standards under CAA section 112(d) for source categories 
listed under CAA section 112(c)(3). The list of source categories was 
developed based on an emission inventory. The emission inventory for 
GDF is based on the total volume of gasoline consumed nationwide 
(including domestic production plus imports and stock changes from the 
previous year, minus exports), the emission factor for gasoline loading 
losses, and the amount of submerged and splash loading and vapor 
balancing in the industry. Total gasoline consumption is the total used 
nationwide, so the emission inventory estimated emissions for all end 
users of gasoline. See the August 22, 2008, Memorandum, ``Review of 
1990

[[Page 66475]]

emissions inventory supporting the listing Gasoline Distribution'' 
(Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0406, item 0181).
    We also believe that the types of storage tanks found at all of 
these facilities are the same, except that the average or typical size 
and throughput tend to be smaller than for the more typical GDF that 
refuel primarily motor vehicles. We considered both the size and 
throughput of GDF storage tanks in the selection of the control 
requirements in the current rule, so we believe the types of controls, 
and the control levels required, are appropriate to all of these 
facilities.
    At proposal and promulgation, we considered all public and private 
facilities in our calculations and decision-making; thus, tanks at all 
of these facilities are already covered under the previous estimates. 
However, in reviewing that data for this proposal, we found that the 
references that presented the estimated number of private facilities 
described those facilities as including government agencies, commercial 
and industrial consumers, school systems, and companies of all sizes, 
but they did not include farms, nurseries, and landscaping firms. 
However, it appears that this omission provides little if any impact to 
our previous estimates since we had considered most private GDF to have 
monthly throughputs below 10,000 gallons, meaning they would incur no 
additional control costs. GDF with throughputs of 10,000 gallons per 
month or less must only perform the good management practices to check 
for and minimize evaporation of gasoline that are standard industry 
practices.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 40 CFR 63.11116(a). ``You must not allow gasoline to be 
handled in a manner that would result in vapor releases to the 
atmosphere for extended periods of time. Measures to be taken 
include, but are not limited to, the following: (1) Minimize 
gasoline spills; (2) Clean up spills as expeditiously as 
practicable; (3) Cover all open gasoline containers and all gasoline 
storage tank fill-pipes with a gasketed seal when not in use; (4) 
Minimize gasoline sent to open waste collection systems that collect 
and transport gasoline to reclamation and recycling devices, such as 
oil/water separators.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are proposing to amend the current definition of ``gasoline 
dispensing facility'' to clarify our intent to include all stationary 
facilities that dispense gasoline into the fuel tanks of all end users 
of gasoline. The prior definition was: ``Gasoline dispensing facility 
(GDF) means any stationary facility which dispenses gasoline into the 
fuel tank of a motor vehicle.'' The new proposed definition is: 
``Gasoline dispensing facility (GDF) means any stationary facility 
which dispenses gasoline into the fuel tank of a motor vehicle, motor 
vehicle engine, nonroad vehicle, or nonroad engine, including a nonroad 
vehicle or nonroad engine used solely for competition. These facilities 
include, but are not limited to, facilities that dispense gasoline into 
on- and off-road, street, or highway motor vehicles, lawn equipment, 
boats, test engines, landscaping equipment, generators, pumps, and 
other gasoline-fueled engines and equipment.'' Thus, we agree with the 
Alliance that facilities that dispense gasoline into research and 
development engines, engine dynamometers, engine test stands, and other 
vehicle testing equipment do not qualify as bulk plants, but instead, 
qualify as GDF. We also emphasize, contrary to positions asserted by 
the Alliance, API, and other stakeholders, that all GDFs are covered 
under subpart CCCCCC, and are proposing amendments to the GDF 
definition to effectuate that originally expressed intent.
3. Tanks With Infrequent Use
    API, in their May 8, 2008 letter (issue 5), stated that 
the current threshold for installation of floating roofs and seals is 
based solely on the capacity of the tank. They stated that tanks that 
are used on a very limited basis do not warrant the significant 
investment associated with compliance in return for an insignificant 
reduction in hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions. API provided the 
example of a utility, or maintenance tank that would only hold material 
for short periods of time while primary tanks are out of service. API 
requested that additional consideration be given to tanks for which the 
limited duration of use results in emissions of less than 1 ton per 
year of volatile organic compounds, but did not provide the basis for 
using that value.
    API subsequently provided additional information in a letter dated 
August 19, 2008 (Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0406, item 0178), related 
to their concern about the control of storage tanks that are used 
infrequently. They stated that the tanks in question were small tanks 
(generally less than 40,000 gallon capacity, compared to the more 
typical tanks that have capacities of over 1,000,000 gallons) with few 
turnovers per year, and that the cost-effectiveness of installing a 
floating roof in tanks such as these was significantly higher than for 
the tanks EPA analyzed for the final rule. API provided an example of a 
40,000 gallon tank with 5 turnovers per year and a throughput of 
175,000 gallons per year (5 turnovers times a 35,000 gallon working 
capacity). They calculated a HAP cost-effectiveness of about $9,200 per 
ton for adding a floating roof to such a tank. API recommended that 
tanks up to 40,000 gallons capacity and with a throughput of less than 
175,000 gallons per year only be required to meet the requirements 
specified in Table 1, item 1 (a fixed roof with all openings closed at 
all times when not in use).
    We analyzed the information provided by API and agree that for 
infrequent-use and low-throughput tanks, the HAP cost effectiveness of 
adding a floating roof is expected to be $9,000 per ton or more. We are 
therefore proposing to establish a separate subcategory for these 
tanks, based on size and gasoline throughput, with the control 
requirements in Table 1, item 1. Specifically, we are proposing to 
amend item 1 of Table 1 of subpart BBBBBB by adding a second 
subcategory that specifies the control requirements for tanks that have 
a capacity of less than 151 cubic meters and a throughput of less than 
480 gallons per day. We are proposing that these gasoline storage tanks 
must be equipped with a fixed roof and that covers on all openings be 
maintained in a closed position at all times when not in use.
4. Surge Control Tanks
    API requested (issue 6 in their May 8, 2008 letter, also 
in their August 19, 2008 letter) that EPA revisit the requirements for 
surge control tanks. The rule currently would require these tanks to 
install internal floating roof tanks that would reduce the usable 
capacity of the tank, which could render the tank no longer adequately 
capable of providing the required surge relief.
    As explained by API, these are tanks used at pipeline facilities to 
provide a means of ensuring that the pressure in the pipeline does not 
exceed the level specified by the Department of Transportation (DOT). 
The surge control tanks are normally kept at very low levels so that 
gasoline can be pumped into them at any time there is a surge or excess 
pressure in the pipeline. In follow-up conversations with EPA, API also 
explained that these tanks are typically fixed roof tanks with 
capacities ranging from 20,000 to 200,000 gallons; they have PV vents 
with positive cracking settings of 0.50 inches of water; they are used 
two or three times per year, on average; the duration of their use is 
kept as short as possible so that surge capacity will always be 
available and the pipeline does not have to shutdown. API also 
explained that the use of floating roof systems in surge control tanks 
is risky as the loading of gasoline into the tanks is sometimes at such 
a high rate that the

[[Page 66476]]

floating roof can be damaged. API added that the cost-effectiveness 
would be very poor (nearly $100,000/ton of HAP reduced) to install 
internal floating roofs because many tanks would have to be replaced 
with larger tanks, or additional tanks would have to be added, to make 
up for the loss of capacity from adding the roof.
    We reviewed the applicable DOT regulations and agree that pipeline 
operations are required to maintain the pressure in the pipeline below 
an established level. It also appears that in the case of a storage 
tank that is sized just large enough to provide the minimum level of 
pressure relief, the installation of a floating roof system could 
reduce the working volume to an unacceptable level. This could 
necessitate the installation of a larger or an additional tank, 
resulting in a poor HAP cost-effectiveness as a consequence of 
complying with the internal floating roof requirement. Also, as pointed 
out by API, a floating roof system may not be a practical control 
method for surge control tanks because of the potential for damaging 
the roof during rapid filling of the tank. We are proposing to add an 
entry 3 in Table 1 in 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB, specifying that 
owners or operators must ``Equip each surge control tank with a fixed 
roof that is mounted to the tank in a stationary manner and with a PV 
vent with a positive cracking pressure of no less than 0.50 inches of 
water. Maintain all openings in a closed position at all times when not 
in use.''
    We are also proposing to add a definition of a surge control tank 
to implement this new provision. The definition is based on the 
requirement in DOT regulations (49 CFR 195.406(b)) which states that 
``no operator may permit the pressure in a pipeline during surges or 
other variations from normal operations to exceed 110 percent of the 
operating pressure limit.'' We are proposing the following definition: 
``surge control tank or vessel means, for the purposes of this subpart, 
those tanks or vessels used only for controlling pressure in a pipeline 
system during surges or other variations from normal operations.''
5. Definition of Storage Tank
    API requested (issue 6 in their May 8, 2008 letter) that 
the definition in new source performance standard (NSPS) 40 CFR part 
60, subpart Kb for ``storage tank'' be included in Sec.  63.11100. They 
stated that the definition of ``storage tank'' should be included in 40 
CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB rather than relying on the definitions in 
subpart Kb and 40 CFR part 63, subpart WW, because those definitions 
are somewhat different. API's view is that the definition of storage 
tank should exclude ``process tanks'' as is done in the subpart Kb 
definition of storage tank. API suggested that incorporating the 
subpart Kb definition would address the concern over the applicability 
of the rule to surge control tanks at pipeline facilities. As discussed 
previously, API requested that surge control tanks be excluded from the 
requirement to have floating roof systems.
    Our intent is that compliance with the control requirements of 40 
CFR part 60, subpart Kb, and 40 CFR part 63, subpart WW constitutes 
compliance with the control requirements for bulk facilities under 40 
CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB. As discussed in the proposal (71 FR 66064, 
66071, November 9, 2006) and final (73 FR 1916, 1926, January 10, 2008) 
preambles, we determined that certain seal types are appropriate. We 
only used the control provisions in subparts Kb and WW to specify the 
seal types and monitoring of those selected seal types that are 
referenced in this rule; the applicability requirements in subparts Kb 
and WW are not applicable for sources subject to subpart BBBBBB.
    In reviewing and considering API's suggestions, we agree we should 
add a definition of gasoline storage tank. However, since gasoline 
distribution does not include the typical process-type tanks that are 
described in the 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb definition, other than the 
surge control tanks mentioned by API, we do not believe it is necessary 
to provide an exemption for process tanks in the definition in 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart BBBBBB, as was done in subpart Kb. We are proposing a 
definition of gasoline storage tanks as follows: ``Gasoline storage 
tank or vessel means each tank, vessel, reservoir, or container used 
for the storage of gasoline, but does not include: (1) Frames, housing, 
auxiliary supports, or other components that are not directly involved 
in the containment of gasoline or gasoline vapors; or (2) subsurface 
caverns or porous rock reservoirs.'' This definition is based on the 
definition of ``storage vessel'' found in subpart Kb without the 
exemption for ``process tank.''
    We have, however, considered API's stated concern about the 
possible impacts of requiring control of tanks that are used solely as 
pipeline ``surge control'' tanks. We have included them in the analysis 
discussed previously on surge control tanks.
6. Aviation Gasoline at Airports and Marine Tank Vessel Loading at Bulk 
Facilities
    API (issue 3 in their petition and issue 10 in 
their May 8, 2008 letter) stated that, while the intended exclusion of 
aviation gasoline at airport facilities is clearly specified in 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart CCCCCC, there is no mention of this intended exclusion 
in 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB. They recommended that the 
applicability provision of Sec.  63.11081 be revised to specifically 
list, and exclude from coverage, the storage and loading of aviation 
gasoline at airports. API also pointed out that the preamble to subpart 
BBBBBB stated that the loading of gasoline into marine tank vessels is 
not included in the gasoline distribution source category, and that 
subpart BBBBBB does not specifically include such an exclusion. API 
recommended that such an exclusion be added to Sec.  63.11081.
    Neither the loading of aviation gasoline at airports nor the 
loading of gasoline into marine tank vessels at bulk facilities are 
part of this source category and are not intended to be covered by 40 
CFR part 63, subparts BBBBBB or CCCCCC. See the December 19, 2007, 
Memorandum, ``Summary of Comments and Responses to Public Comments on 
November 9, 2006 Proposal for Gasoline Distribution Area Sources'' 
(Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0406, item 0141). We are proposing to 
revise Sec.  63.11081 to clarify that these activities are not part of 
the source categories covered by subparts BBBBBB and CCCCCC by adding a 
paragraph (d), which reads ``The loading of aviation gasoline into 
storage tanks at airports, and the subsequent transfer of aviation 
gasoline within the airport, is not subject to this subpart'' and a 
paragraph (e), which reads: ``The loading of gasoline into marine tank 
vessels at bulk facilities is not subject to this subpart.''
7. Temporary/Contractor Tanks
    One stakeholder stated that 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC is not 
clear with regard to whether a facility is required to submit 
preconstruction, startup, and compliance certifications for temporary 
tanks, such as those brought onto a site by a contractor or another 
third party that remain entirely under the control of that party. The 
stakeholder recommended that EPA clarify how the regulations for GDF 
would apply to such tanks and which party (the contractor/third party 
or the owner/operator of the facility) would be responsible for 
ensuring compliance

[[Page 66477]]

and submittal of any applicable notifications.
    At this time, we are not proposing any revisions to the rule in 
response to the issue raised by the stakeholder, but we are requesting 
comment on the subject discussion below. We believe the issue raised by 
the stakeholder is not unique to 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC and 
could come up at facilities that are subject to a variety of national 
emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) regulations. 
Standards, including subpart CCCCCC, apply to the ``owner or operator'' 
of the affected source, and Sec.  63.2 defines ``owner or operator'' as 
``any person who owns, leases, operates, controls, or supervises a 
stationary source.'' It appears it is the responsibility of the owner 
or operator of the affected facility to ensure that all emission 
sources at the facility comply with the requirements of any applicable 
standards. It seems owners or operators could consider this 
responsibility when negotiating contracts with third parties and 
address it in the contracts for the specific work being done. Thus, the 
requirements in the General Provisions will likely adequately address 
the stakeholder's concern.
8. Coverage of Tanks Used To Fuel Vehicles and To Fill Cargo Tanks for 
On-Site Fuel Distribution
    One stakeholder requested clarification on how the two subparts 
would be applied to storage tanks that are used to fuel vehicles but 
that may also be used to dispense gasoline into portable tanks or cargo 
tanks. The stakeholder presented four different scenarios as examples 
of the types of operations in question. Two of the examples involve 
facilities that dispense gasoline from storage tanks into portable 
tanks (one a 150-gallon tank and the other a 500-gallon tank) that are 
then used to fill the fuel tanks of vehicles at test facilities. The 
other two examples involve operations where gasoline is dispensed from 
storage tanks into cargo tanks (4,000 to 8,000 gallon capacity) that 
subsequently off-load the gasoline into another stationary gasoline 
storage tank located at a separate location. The stakeholder questioned 
how 40 CFR part 63, subparts BBBBBB and CCCCCC would be applied to 
these examples and recommended that all of the example operations 
should be subject only to subpart CCCCCC.
    We reviewed the information provided by the stakeholder and agree 
that additional clarification of the rules is needed. The stakeholder's 
examples of facilities that dispense gasoline into portable tanks that 
are then used to fuel vehicles for use within the area source are 
operations that we consider to be covered by 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
CCCCCC. Such on-site redistribution of gasoline is not expected to 
occur at a volume or frequency that would exceed the 10,000 gallons per 
month threshold; if so, these operations would only be subject to the 
Management Practices specified in Sec.  63.11116. The other two 
examples, however, involve the loading of gasoline into a cargo tank 
and the subsequent unloading of the gasoline back into another storage 
tank. These operations appear to meet the definition of a bulk plant, 
so these operations would be subject to Sec.  63.11086. If so, the 
loading of the cargo tank and the subsequent off-loading from the cargo 
tank to the storage tanks must be performed using submerged filling. 
Because submerged filling of storage tanks and cargo tanks is a widely 
used and cost-effective method of reducing emissions, we expect that 
most gasoline transfers, such as the examples provided by the 
stakeholder, already use submerged filling.
    To address the questions raised by the stakeholder, we are 
proposing to add clarifying text to each subpart, as follows:
     Add a paragraph (h) to Sec.  63.11081 of subpart BBBBBB to 
read as follows: ``Storage tanks that are used to load gasoline into a 
cargo tank for the on-site redistribution of gasoline to another 
storage tank are subject to this subpart.''
     Add a paragraph (j) to Sec.  63.11111 of subpart CCCCCC to 
read as follows: ``The dispensing of gasoline from a fixed gasoline 
storage tank at a GDF into a portable gasoline tank for the on-site 
delivery and subsequent dispensing of the gasoline into the fuel tank 
of a motor vehicle or other gasoline-fueled engine or equipment used 
within the area source is subject to Sec.  63.11116 of this subpart.''
9. Applicability to Sources That Are Subject to and Complying With 40 
CFR Part 63, Subpart VVVVVV
    One stakeholder questioned whether a facility that receives and 
stores gasoline solely for the purpose of denaturing the ethanol that 
they produce would be subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB. The 
facility stores gasoline in a 30,000 gallon storage tank, blends it 
with the ethanol at a concentration of less than 5-percent gasoline, 
and then ships the mixture out of the facility.
    The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 
Chemical Manufacturing Area Sources (40 CFR part 63, subpart VVVVVV) 
includes as an affected source the storage and use of gasoline as a 
feedstock in chemical manufacturing, as described by the stakeholder. 
The control requirements in subpart VVVVVV for the loading of storage 
tanks are similar to the requirements found in 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
BBBBBB. However, because the tank size and throughput thresholds for 
determining the applicable control level for a given storage tank are 
not exactly the same in the two standards, a direct comparison of the 
requirements of the two standards must be on a case-by-case basis. 
Section 63.11500 of subpart VVVVVV specifies that if part of a facility 
is subject to both subpart VVVVVV and another Federal rule, the owner 
or operator may choose to comply only with the more stringent 
provisions of the two applicable subparts. For example, if the control 
requirements in the other rule were at least as stringent as those 
provided in subpart VVVVVV, but the monitoring, recordkeeping, or 
reporting requirement in the other rule were not as stringent or 
comprehensive as those in subpart VVVVVV, the source may comply with 
the control requirements from the other rule, but must comply with the 
more stringent monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in 
subpart VVVVVV. We are proposing to adopt the same approach in these 
subparts; therefore, we are proposing to amend subparts BBBBBB and 
CCCCCC to specify that if an affected source under either of these 
subparts is also subject to another Federal rule, like subpart VVVVVV, 
the owner or operator may elect to comply only with the more stringent 
provisions of the applicable subparts. We are proposing to add a new 
paragraph (i) to Sec.  63.11081 of subpart BBBBBB and a new paragraph 
(k) to Sec.  63.11111 of subpart CCCCCC, both of which would read as 
follows: ``For any affected source subject to the provisions of this 
subpart and another Federal rule, you may elect to comply only with the 
more stringent provisions of the applicable subparts. You must consider 
all provisions of the rules, including monitoring, recordkeeping, and 
reporting. You must identify the affected source and provisions with 
which you will comply in your Notification of Compliance Status (NOCS) 
required under Sec.  63.11093 [or Sec.  63.11124, as applicable]. You 
also must demonstrate in your NOCS that each provision with which you 
will comply is at least as stringent as the otherwise applicable 
requirements in this subpart. You are responsible for making accurate 
determinations concerning the more stringent provisions; noncompliance 
with this rule is not excused if it is later determined that your 
determination was

[[Page 66478]]

in error and, as a result, you are violating this subpart. Compliance 
with this rule is your responsibility and the NOCS does not alter or 
affect that responsibility.''

B. Throughput Thresholds

1. Once Over a Throughput Threshold
    Several stakeholders raised the question of whether a GDF whose 
gasoline throughput increases from below the 10,000 or 100,000 gallons 
per month thresholds to above the thresholds, making them subject to 
the submerged fill or vapor balancing requirements, respectively, in 40 
CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC, would still be subject to those 
requirements if their throughput subsequently decreases to below the 
relevant threshold.
    Our intent is that once a facility's throughput crosses the 
threshold for either submerged fill or vapor balancing, the facility 
must continue to use the controls even if their throughput subsequently 
decreases to below the applicable threshold. Because neither of these 
control technologies requires significant ongoing operating costs, the 
primary control costs that the facility would incur would be for the 
initial installation. For submerged fill, there are no operating costs 
and no monitoring, recordkeeping, or reporting costs. In fact, once a 
facility crosses the 10,000 gallon threshold level and installs 
submerged fill pipes, there would be an expense involved in converting 
the tanks back to splash fill (i.e., the cost of removing the submerged 
fill pipes). Thus, there would be no operational, practical, or 
economic incentive to discontinue the use of the required control 
technology.
    For vapor balance systems, there are periodic maintenance, testing, 
and recordkeeping and reporting costs, but these are minor components 
of the total costs of control. As with submerged fill, it would most 
likely be more trouble and expense to discontinue the use of the 
controls and to properly remove the equipment than to continue their 
use.
    Another consideration is the fact that these controls will continue 
to achieve substantial emissions reductions even if the facility's 
throughput decreases below the applicable thresholds. In addition, it 
would be reasonable to assume that if a facility once crossed an 
applicable throughput threshold, it might do so again at some point in 
the near future. Thus, in addition to the environmental gain in 
requiring the continued use of controls, there is a practical economic 
incentive to maintaining the equipment. We also believe the same holds 
true for the 20,000 gallons and 250,000 gallons per day throughput 
thresholds for distinguishing between a bulk terminal and a bulk plant, 
and requiring submerged fill versus vapor processors on loading racks 
at bulk terminals under 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB, respectively.
    Thus, we are proposing to clarify both 40 CFR part 63, subparts 
BBBBBB and CCCCCC to implement this intent. We are proposing to add the 
following provision to subpart BBBBBB, Sec.  63.11081(f): ``If your 
affected source's throughput ever exceeds an applicable throughput 
threshold in the definition of `bulk gasoline terminal' or in item 1 in 
Table 2 to this subpart, the affected source will remain subject to the 
requirements for sources above the threshold even if the affected 
source throughput later falls below the applicable throughput 
threshold.'' We are proposing to add the following provision to subpart 
CCCCCC, Sec.  63.11111(i): ``If your GDF's monthly throughput ever 
exceeds an applicable monthly throughput threshold in (c) or (d) of 
this paragraph, the GDF will remain subject to those requirements even 
if the GDF monthly throughput later falls below the applicable monthly 
throughput threshold.''
2. Monthly Throughput Definition
    Stakeholders requested clarification of the definition of ``monthly 
throughput'' for GDF and questioned how the throughput value is to be 
calculated. The stakeholders stated that the inclusion of the phrase 
``rolling 30-day average'' is confusing because the calculated value is 
actually a ``sum'' of the daily throughput over a 30-day period rather 
than an ``average.'' Stakeholders also questioned whether the use of 
the word ``average'' in the text of paragraph (e) of Sec.  63.11111(e) 
for GDF was an oversight or if it is a monthly average based on the 
last twelve months. Stakeholders have also stated that as an 
alternative to determining throughput based on the volume of gasoline 
``loaded'' into the GDF's storage tanks, the rule should allow for 
monthly throughput to be based on the volume of gasoline ``dispensed'' 
by the GDF during a month. These stakeholders explained that some 
States require throughput to be based on the volume of gasoline 
dispensed and that keeping two sets of records would be burdensome for 
GDF in those States.
    We agree with the stakeholders that we intended that the monthly 
throughput would be calculated by taking the total volume of gasoline 
loaded into all gasoline storage tanks for the last 365 days and 
dividing by 12 to get the monthly throughput. Not only is this method 
more simple to implement and understand, this was the method used to 
analyze the environmental and cost-effectiveness calculations for each 
threshold. In preparing the rule, we inadvertently used the rule text 
definition for monthly throughput from State and local rules and did 
not adjust them for how we evaluated controls and thresholds.
    The current definition provides that monthly throughput ``means the 
total volume of gasoline that is loaded into all gasoline storage tanks 
during a month, as calculated on a rolling 30-day average.'' We are 
proposing to revise the definition to remove the phrase ``rolling 30-
day average'' in the final rule, as well as to add a clarification on 
how it is calculated. Also, because we consider the term ``throughput'' 
to mean literally the volume that goes through the tank, we agree with 
the stakeholders that it can be measured as either the volume of 
gasoline going into the tank or the volume of gasoline coming out of 
the tank. Therefore, we are proposing to add text to allow throughput 
to be based on the volume of gasoline dispensed by a GDF. We are 
proposing the definition to read as follows: ``Monthly throughput means 
the total volume of gasoline that is loaded into, or dispensed from, 
all gasoline storage tanks at each GDF during a month. Monthly 
throughput is calculated by summing the volume of gasoline loaded into, 
or dispensed from, all gasoline storage tanks at each GDF during the 
current day, plus the total volume of gasoline loaded into, or 
dispensed from, all gasoline storage tanks at each GDF during the 
previous 364 days, and then dividing that sum by 12.''
    In the final rule, Sec.  63.11111(e) reads as follows: ``An 
affected source shall, upon request by the Administrator, demonstrate 
that their average monthly throughput is less than the 10,000-gallon or 
the 100,000-gallon threshold level, as applicable.'' We agree with the 
stakeholders that the use of the word ``average'' in the text of the 
paragraph is confusing. Because we have used an averaging method in the 
definition of ``monthly throughput,'' the word ``average'' is not 
needed in this provision; therefore, we propose to amend Sec.  
63.11111(e) to delete the word ``average'' from the text. We also found 
that Sec.  63.11113(c) contained the same incorrect use of the word 
``average'' and we are proposing to delete it from that section as 
well.
    While we are taking comment on these changes, we realize that some 
affected sources may have used either the ``per month'' or ``month 
average''

[[Page 66479]]

method for calculating their gasoline throughput to determine the 
applicable rule requirements that they subsequently reported in their 
Initial Notifications. We believe the use of these alternative methods 
was justified by the language in the final rule. (Additional discussion 
of the Initial Notifications is presented later in this preamble.) We 
are proposing that sources use the new method for calculating gasoline 
throughput prospectively, or in other words, beginning on the date of 
promulgation of the final rules. Affected sources must be in compliance 
with the requirements that are found to be applicable, using the final 
throughput definition, by January 10, 2011. Given that the current 
method is likely to capture fewer sources over the thresholds, due to 
seasonal variations, than the 30-day rolling average period, we believe 
there should be no need to provide more time to comply with the 
standards. We are therefore not proposing a change to the compliance 
dates in Sec.  63.11083.
    Additionally, Tables 1 and 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB 
contain throughput thresholds for determining applicable bulk terminal 
loading rack and storage tank emission controls (in gallons per day). 
Similar to the GDF thresholds discussed above, the bulk terminal 
thresholds were based on an environmental and cost analysis using total 
annual throughput for all gasoline loading racks at a bulk terminal 
divided by 365 days per year. We are proposing to clarify the method of 
calculation by adding a second sentence in item 1(ii) of Table 1, and 
in both items 1 and 2 of Table 2, as follows: ``Gallons per day is 
calculated by summing the current day's throughput, plus the throughput 
for the previous 364 days, and then dividing that sum by 365.'' We are 
also proposing to clarify the rule text for both items 1 and 2 of Table 
2 that the gasoline throughput is the total for all racks at the bulk 
gasoline terminal. Section 63.11083(c), which refers to Table 2, 
incorrectly refers to an ``average'' throughput, and because we are 
proposing to clarify the method of calculation in the text of Table 2, 
we are proposing to remove the word ``average'' in this paragraph.
    Also note that bulk gasoline terminals and bulk gasoline plants are 
defined and partly distinguished by throughput (20,000 gallons per 
day). This 20,000 gallons per day throughput threshold is interpreted 
as a maximum for any day (no averaging) and is used as such when 
determining compliance with other rules as well as with this rule. We 
are proposing to clarify the applicability of the 20,000 gallon per day 
throughput threshold by adding a paragraph (g) to Sec.  63.11081 
specifying that, for the purpose of defining a bulk gasoline plant and 
a bulk gasoline terminal, the 20,000 gallons per day throughput 
threshold is the maximum calculated design throughout for any day and 
is not an average.
3. Start of Throughput Records
    Several stakeholders also questioned when facilities must start 
keeping records of throughput for documenting whether they are 
operating above or below applicable throughput thresholds in each 
subpart.
    Existing sources that are subject to these subparts were required 
to submit Initial Notifications by May 9, 2008. EPA assumed that owners 
and operators would begin keeping throughput records immediately after 
the promulgation date of January 10, 2008, so that they could indicate 
exactly which standard was applicable to their facility in the Initial 
Notification. In addition to the legal requirements to complete the 
Initial Notification accurately, it is in the best interest of the 
facility to be aware as early as possible what control requirements 
must be met. For example, if a GDF's throughput has normally been 
somewhat below the 100,000 gallon threshold for vapor balancing, but 
shortly before the January 10, 2011 compliance date, the owner 
discovers that throughput has surpassed the threshold, installing the 
required vapor balance system by the compliance date may be difficult 
or impossible. Thus, EPA expected that owners and operators would begin 
keeping throughput records as far in advance of the compliance date as 
possible so that they could be in compliance with applicable controls 
by the compliance date. However, because the final rules do not 
specifically state when a facility should start keeping these 
throughput records, we are proposing to clarify the rules by adding 
such a requirement. For existing sources, we are proposing that 
facilities begin keeping records and calculating throughput as of 
January 10, 2008 (the date of promulgation of the final rules).
    For new sources constructed, or for existing sources reconstructed, 
after November 9, 2006, we are proposing that recordkeeping must begin 
upon startup of the affected facility. Since the new sources will 
commence construction after the area source rules are proposed, (see 
CAA section 112(a)(4)), we intended that they comply with all 
recordkeeping requirements from their startup date based on the amount 
of throughput expected in their business plan for operating the new 
source or the capacity of equipment installed.
4. Multiple Tanks at Multiple Locations at Affected Source
    Stakeholders, including the Alliance in separate follow-up 
conversations and correspondence unrelated to their petition for 
reconsideration, described a situation where a plant site, such as a 
military base or large private company property, has multiple gasoline 
storage tanks in multiple locations, and questioned whether it was 
EPA's intent that the monthly throughput at such a facility would be 
the ``total volume of gasoline that is loaded into all gasoline storage 
tanks,'' as specified in the definition of monthly throughput in 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart CCCCCC. These stakeholders questioned whether subpart 
CCCCCC applies to each area source individually or to the entire 
facility collectively. One stakeholder pointed out that the rule text 
in Sec.  63.11111(a) states ``each GDF that is located at an area 
source,'' thus inferring that you can have multiple GDF at one 
location.
    We agree with the stakeholders that subpart CCCCCC requires 
clarification regarding our intent for how the rule should be applied 
to the situation they describe. As one stakeholder pointed out, Sec.  
63.11111(a) states: ``The affected source to which this subpart applies 
is each GDF that is located at an area source.'' This indicates our 
understanding that an area source may contain multiple GDF. 
Additionally, the section titles for the applicable controls based on a 
GDF's monthly throughput threshold state that these are ``Requirements 
for facilities with monthly throughput'' meeting or exceeding a certain 
threshold. We deliberately used the word ``facilities'' in the titles 
to refer to the individual gasoline dispensing ``facilities'' within 
the area source, not to an entire area source or plant site. Thus, we 
intended that the monthly throughput and the corresponding monthly 
throughput thresholds would be calculated and applied to each 
individual GDF located at a single location within an area source. 
Further, the environmental and cost analyses examined the impacts based 
on groupings of gasoline storage tanks at a single location, not on 
tanks located far apart. Thus, it is appropriate that a single area 
source may have multiple GDF located within its exterior boundaries and 
that each GDF be treated as a separate affected source. To clarify 
these questions in the rule, we are proposing to add a new paragraph 
(h) in Sec.  63.11111 as follows: ``(h) Monthly throughput is the total 
volume of

[[Page 66480]]

gasoline loaded into, or dispensed from, all the gasoline storage tanks 
located at a single affected GDF. If an area source has two or more GDF 
at separate locations within the area source, each GDF is treated as a 
separate affected source.''

C. Rule Clarifications

1. Recordkeeping For Continuous Compliance Monitoring
    API requested (issue 2 in their petition and issue 
3 in the May 8, 2008 letter) that EPA delete a requirement for 
the automatic recording of shutdown events in the alternative 
monitoring provisions for control devices used on loading racks that 
use automated shutdown systems. API explained that automated shutdown 
systems are frequently relied upon at facilities which have periods 
during which loading occurs when there are no operating personnel 
present on site. API also stated that when an automatic shutdown occurs 
during such unmanned operations, the units are not returned to service 
until personnel return to the facility to restart the unit. Thus, the 
automated systems are used to shut down the systems in the event of a 
malfunction, but are not equipped to provide a ``record'' of the 
shutdown. API stated that, while it is understandable that the shutdown 
of the system should be automatic during unmanned activities, no 
environmental benefit would accrue from requiring recordkeeping to be 
automated. They further stated that it should be acceptable to allow 
that a manual record of the shutdown event be entered into the log book 
when an operator restarts the unit.
    The intent of the provision in the rule was to ensure that a record 
of a shutdown of the system is generated. So long as the loading of 
cargo tanks at a loading rack cannot be performed while the control 
device is in a shutdown mode, and a record of the event is generated to 
document that loading has not occurred, it does not matter whether the 
record is generated automatically or manually. Thus, we are proposing 
to revise the verification sentences in Sec.  
63.11092(b)(1)(i)(B)(2)(ii) and (b)(1)(iii)(B)(2)(ii) to read as 
follows: ``Verification shall be through visual observation or through 
an automated alarm or shutdown system that monitors and records system 
operation. A manual or electronic record of the start and end of a 
shutdown event may be used.''
    API also stated that the requirement in section 
63.11092(b)(1)(iii)(B)(2)(ii) to ``verify, during each day of operation 
of the loading rack, the proper operation of the assist-air blower, the 
vapor line valve, and the emergency shutdown system'' should not 
include the phrase ``and the emergency shutdown system.'' They stated 
that the emergency shutdown system is a manually operated ``switch'' 
that is only used to shut down the loading rack and vapor processor in 
the case of an emergency. API also stated that, in discussions with EPA 
regarding the monitoring systems in use within the industry, the terms 
``emergency shutdown system'' and ``automatic shutdown system'' had 
been inadvertently used interchangeably by API. API further stated that 
the automatic shutdown system is ``an electronic system that may be 
used to monitor the components that are critical to the combustion 
process (i.e., presence of a pilot flame, vapor line valve, and assist-
air blower).'' API then stated that, because neither the emergency 
shutdown system nor the automatic shutdown system are components that 
are involved in the combustion efficiency of a thermal oxidizer, 
neither should be included in the daily check of critical components. 
API requested that the reference to the emergency shutdown system be 
removed from the text of the subject paragraph.
    Based on discussions with API regarding the function of the 
emergency shutdown system versus the automatic shutdown system, we 
agree that the rule text should be amended. However, we believe that it 
is necessary that the automatic alarm or shutdown system be monitored. 
As API noted, the use of an automatic alarm or shutdown system is an 
allowed alternative to the visual monitoring of the critical components 
of the vapor processor system. We believe that if the automated 
monitoring system alternative is used, it is important to ensure that 
if the automatic alarm or shutdown system receives a signal that 
another component (such as the vapor line valve or the assist-air 
blower) has malfunctioned, the system will prevent any further loading 
of gasoline. Thus, we believe that monitoring of the automatic alarm or 
shutdown system is needed. In follow-up discussions with API, we 
discussed this need to check the automatic alarm or shutdown systems. 
Given these are electronic switches and less subject to failure, they 
would be best checked during the semi-annual preventative maintenance 
inspection required in the current rule (Sec.  
63.11092(b)(1)(iii)(B)(2)(ii)). Thus, we are proposing to remove the 
phrase ``emergency shutdown system'' from the items to be checked daily 
under Sec.  63.11092(b)(1)(iii)(B)(2)(ii) and add the phrase 
``automated alarm or shutdown system'' as part of the semi-annual 
inspection required under Sec.  63.11092(b)(1)(iii)(B)(2)(iii). Also, 
the alternative monitoring provisions for carbon adsorption systems 
have similar provisions, so we are proposing a parallel change to add 
the phrase ``automated alarm or shutdown system'' as part of the semi-
annual inspection required under Sec.  63.11092 (b)(1)(i)(B)(2)(iii).
2. Submerged Fill Drop Tube Measurements and Alternatives
    One stakeholder questioned whether the distance from the submerged 
fill pipe to the bottom of the tank (for determining compliance with 
the 6 or 12 inch submerged fill requirement) would be measured from the 
bottom or the top edge of a horizontal fill pipe. The stakeholder also 
explained that the ends of most vertical submerged fill pipes are cut 
on a 45-degree angle to properly distribute product; thus, the bottom 
and top edges of the end of the fill pipe are different distances from 
the bottom of the tank. Other stakeholders also mentioned that it is 
industry practice, and some States require, that the measurement be 
taken at the longest distance.
    Another stakeholder asked whether an existing facility whose 
submerged fill pipe is more than the 12 inch maximum distance from the 
bottom of the tank could be considered to be in compliance with the 
rule if they keep records that demonstrate that the level of gasoline 
in the tank never dropped below the end of the fill pipe.
    The primary mechanism by which submerged fill reduces emissions 
during the filling of a storage tank is the reduction in the formation 
of airborne droplets of gasoline formed by the ``splashing'' of the 
gasoline as it is pumped into the tank. As such, the entire opening of 
the submerged fill pipe should be below the liquid level in the tank as 
soon as possible when loading occurs. For either vertical or horizontal 
fill pipes, this would mean that the point in the opening of the pipe 
that is the greatest distance from the bottom of the tank is the point 
where the measurement should be made. Many State agency and industry 
personnel use this approach to measure submerged fill tubes, and we are 
proposing to add this requirement to Sec.  63.11086(a) and Sec.  
63.11117(b).
    However, because the goal of submerged filling is simply to reduce 
splashing, we are proposing to revise the applicable sections of each 
rule to allow existing storage tanks to have fill pipes that are 
further from the bottom of the tank if the owner can demonstrate

[[Page 66481]]

that at all times the level of the liquid in the tank is above the 
entire opening of the fill pipe, provided adequate recordkeeping is 
performed and records are maintained. We are proposing to add a new 
paragraph (3) to Sec.  63.11086(a) and Sec.  63.11117(b), which reads: 
``(3) Submerged fill pipes not meeting the specifications of paragraphs 
(1) or (2) are allowed if the owner or operator can demonstrate that 
the liquid level in the tank is always above the entire opening of the 
fill pipe. Documentation providing such demonstration must be made 
available for inspection by the Administrator's delegated 
representative during the course of a site visit.''
3. Continuous Compliance Monitoring of all Vapor Processors
    Stakeholders stated that the vapor processor monitoring 
requirements of Sec.  63.11092(b) were unclear. One stakeholder 
believes that continuous compliance monitoring is required for all 
vapor processors; however, the rule text is inconsistent in its 
presentation of continuous parameter monitoring requirements. The 
introductory paragraph to the continuous monitoring Sec.  63.11092(b) 
states that the section is applicable ``For each performance test 
conducted under paragraph (a)(1) of this section.* * *'' However, 
within section (b), paragraph (b)(5) specifies requirements for 
monitoring ``if you have chosen to comply with the performance testing 
alternatives provided under paragraph (a)(2) or paragraph (a)(3) or 
this section.* * *'' Paragraph (a)(2) allows sources that are operating 
in compliance with an enforceable State, local, or tribal rule or 
permit that requires loading racks to meet an emission limit of 80 
milligrams per liter of gasoline loaded to submit a statement by a 
responsible official of the facility certifying the compliance status 
of the loading rack in lieu of the test required under paragraph 
(a)(1). Paragraph (a)(3) allows sources to submit test reports for 
tests performed within 5 years prior to January 10, 2008, in lieu of 
performing a new test under paragraph (a)(1). Thus, the stakeholder 
contends that the rule text, as structured, is unclear on whether the 
requirements in Sec.  63.11092(b) apply to all vapor processors or only 
those that must conduct a new performance test under Sec.  
63.11092(a)(1).
    Another stakeholder pointed out that the rule requires in paragraph 
(b) that the operator determine a monitored operating parameter value, 
but that in (b)(1)(iii)(B)(1) it allows for monitoring to indicate the 
presence of a pilot flame. The stakeholder further stated that if they 
choose to use presence of pilot flame monitoring, they do not have a 
``monitored operating parameter,'' as required by Sec.  63.11092(b). 
The stakeholder then questioned whether EPA's intent was to allow that 
the presence of a pilot flame be continuously confirmed as an 
alternative to having to meet the requirement to monitor an operating 
parameter. Other stakeholders have also questioned how they were to 
determine an ``operating parameter value'' if they choose to use the 
option of monitoring for the presence of a pilot flame.
    We agree with the stakeholders that the intent was to provide that 
all vapor processors required in Table 2 item 1(b) for gasoline loading 
rack(s) at a bulk gasoline terminal with gasoline throughput of 250,000 
gallons per day, or greater, must have continuous compliance monitoring 
under Sec.  63.11092(b). We also agree the rule text in Sec.  63.11092 
should be clear and we are proposing clarifications to the rule text by 
restructuring paragraphs (b) and (b)(1) as explained below.
    In the proposed rule text, revised paragraph (b) is the 
introductory language that requires subject facilities to monitor vapor 
processors. Revised paragraph (b)(1) lists the specific monitoring 
requirements for: Carbon adsorption systems (paragraph (b)(1)(i)); 
condenser systems (paragraph (b)(1)(ii)); thermal oxidation systems 
(paragraph (b)(1)(iii)); and alternative monitoring or control systems, 
other than those listed above (paragraph (b)(1)(iv)).
    The second stakeholder is correct that paragraph (b)(1)(iii)(B)(1) 
allows monitoring to indicate the presence of a pilot flame in a 
thermal oxidation system as an alternative to a continuous parameter 
monitoring system that measures operating temperature. However, the 
stakeholder's statements imply that he does not consider the presence 
(or absence) of a pilot flame to be an ``operating parameter'' for a 
thermal oxidizer. We believe that the presence of a pilot flame is a 
key operating parameter for a thermal oxidizer and it is our intent 
that the monitoring for the presence of a pilot flame meets the 
requirements for monitoring an operating parameter. In addition, it is 
our intent that when monitoring for the presence of a pilot flame there 
are two possible parameter ``values'' that could be returned. The first 
possible outcome of the monitoring is a positive parameter value to 
indicate that there is a pilot flame. The second possible outcome of 
the monitoring is a negative parameter value to indicate that there is 
no pilot flame. We are proposing to clarify our intent regarding the 
monitoring for the presence of a pilot flame by adding a sentence to 
paragraph (b)(1)(iii)(B)(1) reading as follows: ``The monitor shall 
show a positive parameter value to indicate that the pilot flame is on 
or a negative parameter value to indicate that the pilot flame is 
off.''
4. Secondary Rim Seal Requirements Specified Under 40 CFR Part 63, 
Subpart WW
    API stated (issue 9 in the May 8, 2008 letter) that 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart BBBBBB did not adequately accomplish EPA's stated goal 
of requiring that ``internal floating roof tanks have a primary seal 
but not a secondary seal.'' API pointed out that the final rule 
excludes the secondary seal requirements found in 40 CFR part 60, 
subpart Kb when that rule is chosen as the compliance option, but 
failed to exclude the secondary seal requirements found in 40 CFR part 
63, subpart WW when that rule is the compliance option. API further 
stated that Table 1, item 2(d) should include the phrase ``except for 
the secondary seal requirements for internal floating roofs under Sec.  
63.1063(a)(1)(i)(C) and (D).''
    We agree with API that our intent is to exclude the secondary seal 
requirements found in 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb and 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart WW from the requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB and 
that we incorrectly listed only the requirements of subpart Kb as not 
being required. We are proposing to revise the rule to correct this 
error by adding the phrase ``except for the secondary seal requirements 
for internal floating roofs under Sec.  63.1063(a)(1)(i)(C) and (D)'' 
to the Table 1, item 2(d) entry.
5. Monitoring of Submerged Fill Loading Racks
    API requested (issue 11 in the May 8, 2008 letter) that 
the loading rack portion of 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB be revised 
to clarify that the testing and monitoring provisions of Sec.  63.11092 
would not apply to facilities with throughputs below the threshold 
value of 250,000 gallons per day because these facilities are only 
required to use submerged fill. API pointed out that it is not clearly 
stated that the testing and monitoring requirements of Sec.  63.11092 
apply only to those facilities that are required to control loading 
rack emissions with a control device.
    API is correct that the bulk terminal loading rack testing and 
monitoring provisions of Sec.  63.11092(a) through (d) apply only to 
loading racks at facilities with throughputs of 250,000 gallons per day 
or more that are complying with the 80 milligram per liter emission 
limit in

[[Page 66482]]

item 1(b) of Table 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB. We are 
proposing to revise the introductory text in Sec.  63.11092(a) to read 
as follows: ``Each owner or operator of a bulk gasoline terminal 
subject to the emission standard in item 1(b) of Table 2 to this 
subpart must comply with the requirements in paragraphs (a) through (d) 
of this section.''
6. Initial Notifications
    One stakeholder stated that because EPA is proposing changes to 
certain definitions and the applicability sections in 40 CFR part 63, 
subparts BBBBBB and CCCCCC, it is likely that some facilities may now 
be covered by a different subpart than the subpart for which an Initial 
Notification was submitted, or may no longer be subject to the revised 
rules. The stakeholder also stated that many facilities that previously 
were not subject to either subpart may now be subject to one of the 
subparts. The stakeholder recommended that EPA clarify how such 
facilities should proceed with submitting Initial Notifications and 
whether Initial Notifications for the original rulemaking must be 
resubmitted.
    EPA does not believe that revisions to the Initial Notification 
requirements are necessary to account for the proposed changes made in 
this package, but we solicit comment on whether the provisions as 
written, including those in the General Provisions, are sufficient for 
accommodating all facilities who find it necessary to submit a revised 
Notification or a new Notification. While there may be instances where 
a facility submitted an Initial Notification that is no longer 
accurate, or did not submit an Initial Notification when one was 
required because the facility was unsure whether it was subject to 
either subpart, these facilities may now submit new or revised 
Notifications. Specifically, Sec.  63.9(b)(2) states that an owner or 
operator of an affected source ``that has an initial startup before the 
effective date of a relevant standard'' must submit its Initial 
Notification ``not later than 120 calendar days after the effective 
date of the relevant standard (or within 120 calendar days after the 
source becomes subject to the relevant standard).'' Thus, a facility 
has 120 days from the effective date of the final amendments to correct 
a previously submitted Initial Notification or to submit an original 
Initial Notification. In addition, we expect that many facilities that 
now realize that they are subject to 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC as 
a result of the proposed clarifications of the GDF definition or the 
calculation of monthly throughput would be GDF that have a monthly 
throughput of less than 10,000 gallons per month. These facilities 
would be subject to Sec.  63.11116 and would not be required to submit 
notifications or reports. For these reasons, we are not proposing 
revisions to the Initial Notification requirements as they do not seem 
warranted.
7. Notification of Compliance Status (NOCS)
    API (issue 1 in their petition and issue 1 in the 
May 8, 2008 letter) stated that there is currently ambiguity in 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart BBBBBB with respect to when an initial NOCS report is 
due. API stated that Sec.  63.11093(b) invokes Sec.  63.9(h) from the 
General Provisions which stipulates that it applies ``when an affected 
source becomes subject to a relevant standard.'' API stated that this 
suggests that the NOCS report is not applicable until sometime after 
the compliance date of the rule. Section 63.9(h)(2)(ii), however, 
requires notifications to be submitted within 60 days after the 
completion of ``the relevant compliance demonstration activity 
specified in the relevant standard.'' API stated that every emission 
point that is subject to the rule has a relevant compliance 
demonstration activity, and many of the compliance demonstrations will 
occur prior to the compliance date of the rule. API stated that it 
would reduce the burden on the affected facilities as well as 
regulatory agencies if the documentation of these compliance 
demonstrations could be grouped and submitted in a single initial NOCS 
report. API also stated that other standards, such as 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart CC (Refinery MACT), have clarified the NOCS reporting 
requirements by specifying that an initial NOCS report is due 150 days 
after the compliance date specified in the rule. API also provided 
suggested language to be used to revise Sec.  63.11093(b) to accomplish 
their recommended change.
    Contrary to API's assertions, the General Provisions (GP) (40 CFR 
part 63, subpart A) appear adequate for instructing a facility 
regarding the schedule of notifications, as presented in Sec.  63.9(h), 
such that repeating this GP language in subpart BBBBBB, appears 
unnecessary. However, we do agree with API that the compliance dates 
for some storage tank controls may be different than for other control 
equipment compliance dates. The provisions of Sec.  63.11099(a) allow 
for the delegation of authority to implement and enforce this subpart 
to state, local, or tribal agencies, with the exception of the items 
noted in Sec.  63.11099(c). It appears that negotiating an alternative 
schedule for grouping the submittal of the Notification of Compliance 
Status with the delegated authority is not prohibited under Sec.  
63.11099(c); therefore, we propose that a source could negotiate an 
alternative schedule under this provision. We solicit comment on this 
approach.
    We agree with API that once the initial NOCS report is required for 
the facility, and another storage tank comes into compliance due to an 
extended compliance date past the initial NOCS due date, then they can 
consolidate the NOCS report with the next semi-annual compliance report 
under section 63.11095(a). We are proposing to add to Sec.  63.11095(a) 
as follows: ``(4) For storage vessels complying with Sec.  63.11087(b) 
after January 10, 2011, the storage vessel's notice of compliance 
status information can be included in the next semi-annual compliance 
report in lieu of filing a separate Notification of Compliance Status 
report under Sec.  63.11093.''
    Another stakeholder stated that the schedule for submitting the 
NOCS report specified in 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC, Sec.  
63.11124(a)(2) and (b)(2), conflicts with the schedule specified in the 
Table 3 subpart CCCCCC entry for Sec.  63.9(h)(1)-(6). The stakeholder 
stated that Sec.  63.11124, paragraphs (a)(2) and (b)(2), requires the 
submittal of the NOCS report ``by the compliance date specified in 
Sec.  63.11113.'' However, Table 3 indicates that the NOCS should be 
submitted according to the schedule specified in Sec.  63.9(h)(1)-(6), 
which states that the NOCS is due ``on the 60th day following the 
completion of the relevant compliance demonstration activity.'' The 
stakeholder further stated that the language in Sec.  63.11124 could be 
interpreted to require submittal of the NOCS on the date of startup for 
new sources. The stakeholder recommended that Sec.  63.11124 be revised 
to reference only Sec.  63.9 with regard to when the NOCS is due.
    It was not our intent to require submittal of the NOCS on a 
schedule that deviated from the timeframe specified in section 63.9(h) 
of the General Provisions. We agree with the stakeholder that there is 
a contradiction between the requirements of Sec.  63.11124 and the 
Table 3 reference to Sec.  63.9(h). We are proposing to revise the 
language in Sec.  63.11124(a)(2) and (b)(2) to be consistent with the 
60-day timeframe specified in section 63.9(h). In each paragraph, the 
revised text would read as follows: ``You must submit a

[[Page 66483]]

Notification of Compliance Status to the applicable EPA Regional Office 
and the delegated State authority, as specified in Sec.  63.13, in 
accordance with the schedule specified in Sec.  63.9(h).''
8. Storage Tank Inspections
    API stated (issue 2 in the May 8, 2008 letter) that the 
requirements for inspections of storage tanks were not exactly the same 
for 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb and 40 CFR part 63, subpart WW, the two 
alternatives for compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB. API 
explained that both subparts Kb and WW specify up-close inspections of 
an internal floating roof tank prior to the initial filling of the tank 
and then each time the tank is emptied and degassed, but at least once 
every 10 years. The corresponding requirement for an external floating 
roof tank also specifies an up-close inspection each time the tank is 
emptied and degassed, but it does not include the requirement for an 
up-close inspection prior to the initial fill. API also stated that 
subpart Kb does not apply the 10-year frequency requirement to the up-
close inspection of an external floating roof tank. API stated that we 
should recognize those differences and alert compliance inspectors. API 
presented three different scenarios for when the first up-close 
inspection would be required for existing storage tanks. API then 
requested confirmation that the inspection requirements presented for 
the three scenarios is correct.
    API is correct that inspection of storage tank seals could occur at 
different times and require different levels of inspection, depending 
on the standard selected. API is also correct that, because of 
differences in the compliance status of existing storage tanks, there 
are different scenarios for when the initial and subsequent inspections 
must occur. Given all the possible scenarios, API's use of terms not 
matching rule language, and the complexity of seal types and 
monitoring, we cannot respond specifically to the three general 
scenarios presented by API, but we believe the rule text is clear, so 
we are not proposing changes. In discussions with API, another major 
concern is the recognition that while some of these inspections may 
have occurred voluntarily prior to the effective or compliance date of 
the rule, they may not have proper documentation to adequately 
determine if the proper inspection was performed, so some tanks may 
need to be inspected again. We agree that if adequate documentation is 
not available for those voluntary inspections, then those inspections 
cannot be used to satisfy the requirements for an initial inspection 
and to set the date for the next scheduled inspection. In those cases, 
the initial inspection must be conducted according to the requirements 
of the standard selected by the owner or operator.
9. General Provisions Applicability
    Several stakeholders, including API in their petition (issue 
4) and their May 8, 2008 letter (issue 7), stated 
that the General Provision citations in Table 3 of 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart BBBBBB were not consistent in whether a SSM plan is required. 
They pointed out that the SSM requirements in Sec.  63.6(e), (f), and 
(h) were listed as not applying to subpart BBBBBB while some reporting 
and recordkeeping associated with SSM plans under Sec.  63.8(c) and 
Sec.  63.10(b) were listed as applying.
    The stakeholders are correct that the rules are inconsistent in the 
applicability of an SSM plan and the associated recordkeeping and 
reporting. It was our intent that a SSM plan not be required under 
these subparts; therefore, SSM-related recordkeeping and reporting were 
mistakenly required. We are proposing to revise Table 3 to correct this 
error by changing the entry in the ``Applies to subpart BBBBBB'' column 
from ``yes'' to ``no'' for the Sec.  63.8(c) and Sec.  63.10(b) rows.
    API also stated (issue 8 in the May 8, 2008 letter) that 
there were corrections needed to two entries in Table 3 to 40 CFR part 
63, subpart BBBBBB, Applicability of General Provisions. They stated 
that the entry for Sec.  63.7(e)(3) is currently listed as a ``yes'' 
when it should be a ``no.'' API also stated that the entry for Sec.  
63.9(h)(1)-(6) should be revised to read as follows: ``Yes, for the 
initial performance test (if required), however, there are no opacity 
standards. Notification of Compliance Status reports are otherwise due 
as specified in Sec.  63.11093(b).''
    We evaluated API's requests and have decided to propose the 
following revisions to Table 3 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB. For 
entry 63.7(e)(3), we agree with API that the requirement to conduct 
three 1-hour test runs is not applicable to testing conducted on the 
control devices specified in Sec.  63.11092(a). We are proposing to 
revise the entry for Sec.  63.7(e)(3) to read ``yes, except for testing 
conducted under Sec.  63.11092(a).''
    In regard to the timing of the NOCS reports, we are proposing to 
revise the text of Sec.  63.11095(a)(4) to clarify that once the 
initial NOCS report is required for a facility, if another storage tank 
subsequently comes into compliance due to an extended compliance date 
past the initial NOCS date, then the storage tank's notice of 
compliance information can be included with the next semi-annual 
compliance report under Sec.  63.11095(a), in lieu of filing a separate 
NOCS report. Therefore, we are proposing to revise the Table 3 entry 
for Sec.  63.9(h)(1)-(6) to read ``yes, except as specified in Sec.  
63.11095(a)(4).''
    One stakeholder stated that, under Sec.  63.11116(b), owners or 
operators of GDF with throughput of less than 10,000 gallons per month 
are not required to submit notifications or reports. The stakeholder 
then stated that Table 3 indicates that Sec.  63.5 (Preconstruction 
review and notification requirements) does apply to affected sources. 
The stakeholder recommended that the Table 3 entry for Sec.  63.5 be 
revised to state that the requirement to submit preconstruction 
notifications only applies to affected sources that are subject to 
Sec.  63.11117.
    The stakeholder is correct that the requirements of Sec.  63.5 do 
not apply to facilities that are only subject to Sec.  63.11116. The 
only control requirements that these facilities are subject to are the 
Management Practices specified in Sec.  63.11116; therefore, the 
submittal of notifications is not necessary. Facilities that are 
subject to the control requirements of Sec.  63.11117 and Sec.  
63.11118, however, are required to submit the applicable notifications. 
To clarify the notification requirements, we are proposing to amend the 
Table 3 entry for Sec.  63.5 to state that the requirements only apply 
to facilities subject to Sec.  63.11117 and Sec.  63.11118.
    One stakeholder noted that the Table 3 entries for Sec.  
63.10(e)(3)(i)-(iii) and Sec.  63.10(e)(3)(iv)-(v) refer to a Sec.  
63.11130(K) that does not exist in the final rule. The stakeholder 
questioned what EPA's intent was for the applicability of these General 
Provision sections.
    The stakeholder is correct that the Table 3 entries related to 
excess emissions reports contain an erroneous reference. 40 CFR part 
63, subpart CCCCCC does not have any requirement for excess emissions 
reports, so we are proposing to change the Table 3 (fourth column) 
entries to ``No.''
    Additionally, we are proposing to amend Table 3 in both subparts 
BBBBBB and CCCCCC and indicate that we are not incorporating Sec.  
63.7(e)(1) into the rules by changing the ``Yes'' in both Tables 
(fourth column) to a ``No.'' Instead, we propose to include the 
following language regarding conducting performance tests directly

[[Page 66484]]

into the subparts as new paragraphs (g) to Sec.  63.11092 of subpart 
BBBBBB, and (c) to Sec.  63.11120 of subpart CCCCCC: ``Conduct of 
performance tests. Performance tests conducted for this subpart shall 
be conducted under such conditions as the Administrator specifies to 
the owner or operator based on representative performance (i.e., 
performance based on normal operating conditions) of the affected 
source. Upon request, the owner or operator shall make available to the 
Administrator such records as may be necessary to determine the 
conditions of performance tests.''
10. Compliance Testing For GDF
    One stakeholder questioned whether Bay Area ST-30, a test method 
for static pressure testing of a vapor balance system, could be 
accepted as an alternative to the California Air Resources Board (CARB) 
201.3 procedure required by 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC. The 
stakeholder explained that Bay Area ST-30 was listed in Stage II 
vehicle refueling guidance issued by EPA in the early 1990s as a 
recommended static pressure test method and has been incorporated into 
several State and local rules requiring Stage II vapor balance systems. 
The stakeholder pointed out that if Bay Area ST-30 is not an acceptable 
alternative to CARB 201.3, many facilities would be required to do two 
different tests to satisfy the State or local and the subpart CCCCCC 
requirements. The stakeholder also pointed out that Bay Area ST-30 
measures the pressure drop from an initial system pressure of 10 inches 
of water rather than the initial 2 inches of water specified in CARB 
201.3.
    We have analyzed the requirements of Bay Area ST-30 and found that 
the original 1983 version of Bay Area ST-30 did not include procedures 
for testing the integrity of PV valves installed on the storage tanks. 
Because PV valves are a potential leak source, ST-30 cannot be compared 
directly to CARB 201.3, which does measure the integrity of PV valve. 
Therefore, we believe that because the 1983 version of Bay Area ST-30 
is not testing all potential storage tank leak sources, it is not an 
acceptable alternative for the CARB 201.3 testing required by 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart CCCCCC. We request comment on our analysis.
    On December 21, 1994 the Bay Area Air Quality Management District 
amended ST-30 to include the PV valve and the PV valve connections as 
components of the system during testing, and CARB subsequently issued a 
letter of equivalency stating that amended ST-30 was equivalent to CARB 
201.3. Therefore, if amended ST-30 is required by regulatory agencies, 
we are proposing that the testing will be considered to meet the 
requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC. (If facilities have to 
do separate tests to meet the State and Federal requirements, the ST-30 
test should be done first, followed by the CARB 201.3 test. This will 
ensure that the PV vent and connections will be tested after they are 
re-installed following the ST-30 test.)
    One stakeholder said that 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC is unclear 
regarding the performance testing requirements of Sec.  63.11120 (the 
compliance demonstration for vapor balance systems at GDF with a 
gasoline throughput of 100,000 gallons or more). The stakeholder 
questioned whether existing vapor balance systems are required to 
conduct the specified periodic performance testing and, if so, by what 
date it must be completed.
    Periodic testing is required under Sec.  63.11120(a) as follows: 
``Each owner or operator, at the time of installation of a vapor 
balance system required under Sec.  63.11118(b)(1), and every 3 years 
thereafter, must comply with the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) and 
(2) of this section.'' Paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) specify the test 
procedures to follow.
    The rule text for periodic testing only mentions one of the two 
management practice options for vapor balance systems. The first and 
main option is compliance under section 63.11118(b)(1). The vapor 
balance system must meet the management practices specified in Table 1 
to this subpart.\3\ As specified in the rule text in Sec.  63.11120(a), 
owners or operators using this option must demonstrate compliance using 
the periodic testing procedures specified in Sec.  63.11120(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ As an alternative to Table 1 management practices, there is 
a provision (section 63.11120(b)) that allows use of alternative 
management practices that are demonstrated to be equivalent to those 
in Table 1 by testing the vapor balance system to determine if it 
achieves 95-percent emissions reduction using specific test 
procedures. This provision also requires using the periodic tests in 
section 63.11120(b), see section 63.11120(b)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The second option (compliance under Sec.  63.11118(b)(2)) does not 
require the periodic testing in Sec.  63.11120(a), but periodic testing 
may be required under State, local, or tribal rule or permits. The 
second vapor balance compliance option is provided since there are many 
vapor balance systems that were installed prior to this rule under 
State, local, or tribal rules or permits. As a way to compare the 
performance of these systems and ensure continued compliance, these 
systems must meet certain criteria. This second option is only for 
vapor balance systems in compliance prior to January 10, 2008. The 
vapor balance system is considered compliant with 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart CCCCCC if it is required to comply, and complies, with either a 
90-percent reduction in emissions, or uses management practices at 
least as stringent as those in Table 1 under enforceable State, local, 
or tribal rule or permit. Owners or operators of vapor balance systems 
installed prior to January 10, 2008, that choose and comply with the 
compliance option under Sec.  63.11118(b)(2) are not required by 
subpart CCCCCC to conduct the testing specified in Sec.  63.11120(a) 
because Sec.  63.11120(a) states that it is only a requirement for 
sources complying with Sec.  63.11118(b)(1). However, since they are 
required to be in compliance with an enforceable State, local, or 
tribal rule or permit, they may have other or similar periodic testing 
specified by the State, local, or tribal rule or permit to perform and 
remain in compliance with both rules.
    The dates by which owners or operators of affected GDF must comply 
with 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC are specified in Sec.  63.11113. As 
stated in the General Provisions under Sec.  63.7(a)(2), an affected 
source must perform tests within 180 days of its compliance date; thus, 
new sources must test within 180 days after startup and existing 
sources must conduct all performance tests within 180 days after the 
compliance date. While the General Provisions are referenced, the rule 
text in subpart CCCCCC does not provide this text directly. Also, the 
rule text for Sec.  63.11120(a) specifies that the test must be 
performed ``at the time of installation.'' Because the installation of 
a vapor balance system typically involves excavation work, we believe 
that any new vapor balance system installed to comply with subpart 
CCCCCC should be tested at the time it is installed rather than after 
the storage tanks have been recovered and returned to normal service. 
We agree with the stakeholder that the dates by which the periodic 
tests required for systems installed for existing installations, as 
well as new systems for vapor balance systems under Sec.  
63.1118(b)(1), are not explicitly stated in the rule. Therefore, we are 
proposing to add a new paragraph (e) to Sec.  63.11113 to provide the 
dates discussed above for periodic testing. We are also proposing to 
add a reference to the dates specified in this new paragraph (e) to the 
testing and

[[Page 66485]]

monitoring provisions in Sec.  63.11120, paragraph (a).
    Additionally, we are proposing to clarify the requirements for the 
annual certification testing of cargo tanks by adding a new paragraph 
(c) to Sec.  63.11120. In the January 10, 2008 final rule, Table 2 item 
(vi) requires that cargo tanks meet the specifications of EPA Method 
27, but does not specifically state what the maximum allowable pressure 
and vacuum changes are. Proposed paragraph (c) would clarify that the 
maximum allowable pressure and vacuum change, as measured by EPA Method 
27, for all affected gasoline cargo tanks is 3 inches of water, or 
less, in 5 minutes.
11. Definition of Gasoline
    A number of stakeholders have asked what the definition of gasoline 
is for this rule. Additionally, they have asked if E85, E10, denatured 
ethanol, and transmix are considered gasoline and how are they handled 
under this rule.
    The definition of gasoline is the same as the definition developed 
for the NSPS in 40 CFR part 60, subpart XX, Bulk Gasoline Terminals, 
and used in many State Implementation Plans for Ozone Attainment, as 
well as 40 CFR part 63, subpart R, the major source NESHAP for gasoline 
distribution. Gasoline is defined in Sec.  60.501 as follows: 
``Gasoline means any petroleum distillate or petroleum distillate/
alcohol blend having a Reid vapor pressure of 27.6 kilopascals or 
greater which is used as a fuel for internal combustion engines.'' Even 
though the NSPS is cross-referenced in the definitions of 40 CFR part 
63, subparts BBBBBB and CCCCCC, for clarity we are proposing to add the 
definition to these subparts as well.
    Both E85 and E10 are petroleum distillate/alcohol blends of 85- or 
10-percent ethanol, respectively, with gasoline. Ethanol has a Reid 
vapor pressure of about 2 pounds per square inch (psi), but when mixed 
with gasoline at the highest percentage of ethanol (E85), the vapor 
pressure of the blend is 6 to 12 psi for the different volatility 
classes of gasoline. Thus, the vapor pressure of E85 and E10 is over 
the lower limit in the definition of gasoline of 4 psi (27.6 
kilopascals is about 4 psi) and considered gasoline under the 
definition used. Gasoline storage tanks containing E10 and E85 at bulk 
facilities and GDF would be subject to applicable controls.
    The ethanol used in fuel blends is denatured (``poisoned'' to 
prevent human consumption) at the ethanol plant and can contain up to 
5-percent hydrocarbons (gasoline or gasoline-like additives) before 
blending. As discussed earlier, emissions at ethanol plants are already 
subject to and controlled under 40 CFR part 63, subpart VVVVVV. Thus, 
the applicable question becomes how emissions downstream of the ethanol 
plant are addressed. Based on limited information, denatured ethanol 
mixed with normal gasoline appears to have a vapor pressure of about 4 
psi or less. Thus, it is unclear if the mixture meets our vapor 
pressure threshold for the various blends and volatility of gasoline. 
We are requesting information during the comment period as to the vapor 
pressure of denatured ethanol over the full normal range of amount of 
ethanol mixed with the range of gasoline volatilities used for 
denaturing ethanol. Secondly, given that the storage of denatured 
ethanol to mix with additional gasoline normally occurs at gasoline 
bulk terminals, we believe these storage emissions should be addressed 
and controlled whether the liquid meets or does not meet the current 
definition of gasoline criteria of at or above 4 psi. Thus, we are 
proposing that any gasoline mixture with alcohol be considered gasoline 
and be controlled under the current control requirements in subpart 
BBBBBB and CCCCCC. We are asking for comment on including any mixture, 
on whether this level of control is appropriate, and if not, we are 
requesting data on what level of control of those emissions is 
appropriate.
    Another stakeholder asked if transmix (the combined product mix at 
the interface between different products conveyed in the pipeline) is 
considered a regulated gasoline under this standard. This issue was 
discussed in the December 19, 2007, Memorandum, ``Summary of Comments 
and Responses to Public Comments on November 9, 2006 Proposal for 
Gasoline Distribution Area Sources'' (Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0406, 
item 0141) and in the preamble to the final major source NESHAP (59 FR 
64303 (December 14, 1994)). We must set standards for all the gasoline 
operations. The transmix contains various concentrations of gasoline 
and other products to the degree that it would not be feasible to 
specify in advance the percentage and concentration of gasoline in the 
mixture; thus, as discussed in the responses to comment for both 
standards, it should be stored and considered gasoline for the purposes 
of these regulations. Additionally, industry has indicated that many of 
the tanks that store transmix may have low throughputs and that they 
are often smaller tanks, thereby many are in the lesser control option 
of installing a fixed roof and maintaining all openings in a closed 
position at all times when not in use (see item 1 in Table 2 of 40 CFR 
part 63, subpart BBBBBB).
12. Table 1 Requirements for ``New'' Storage Tanks
    Item 2 in Table 1 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC currently 
specifies that dual-point vapor balance systems be used ``For new or 
reconstructed GDF, or new storage tank(s) at an existing affected 
facility subject to Sec.  63.11118.'' As a result of questions 
regarding the construction date that establishes when a tank is 
considered new, we are proposing to amend the text of item 2 to read as 
follows: ``A new or reconstructed GDF, or any storage tank(s) 
constructed after November 9, 2006, at an existing affected facility 
subject to Sec.  63.11118.'' Under Sec.  63.11112(b), an affected 
source constructed after November 9, 2006, is considered to be a new 
source (a new GDF), and we intended that the same date apply for newly 
constructed storage tanks at existing facilities. The proposed text 
would clarify that our intent was for the term ``new storage tank(s)'' 
to refer to storage tanks constructed after the publication date of the 
proposed rule.
13. Requirements for Gasoline Containers
    One stakeholder stated that some plastic gasoline containers that 
do not have gaskets may, nevertheless, meet the stringent emission 
reduction requirements established in the 2007 Mobile Source Air Toxics 
rulemaking (72 FR 8428) and should be allowed as an acceptable 
alternative to the requirements of Sec.  63.11116(a)(3), which requires 
that gasoline containers be covered with a gasketed seal. The 
stakeholder recommended that EPA allow facilities to comply with Sec.  
63.11116(a)(3) by using gasoline containers that meet the evaporative 
emission standards of 40 CFR part 59, subpart F, sections 59.600-
59.699.
    We reviewed the requirements of Sec. Sec.  59.600-59.699 and agree 
with the stakeholder that the 0.3 grams per gallon per day emission 
standard found in Sec.  59.611(a) can only be met through the use of 
tight-fitting closures. We are proposing to add a paragraph (d) to 
Sec.  63.11116 that reads as follows: ``Portable gasoline containers 
that meet the requirements of 40 CFR part 59, subpart F, are considered 
acceptable for compliance with Sec.  63.11116(a)(3).''

[[Page 66486]]

14. Cargo Tank Testing and Documentation
    Stakeholders have raised several questions regarding the GDF rule 
requirement that only ``vapor-tight gasoline cargo tanks'' may be used 
to fill storage tanks at GDF with 100,000 gallons or more per month 
throughput. The GDF rule provision provides the inspector at vapor 
balanced GDF an opportunity to check the cargo tank unloading at these 
facilities to make sure the cargo tank has been tested for vapor 
tightness. Cargo tank vapor tightness is important to ensure that 
vapors are properly vapor balanced. Table 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
CCCCCC states that if you own or operate a gasoline cargo tank, you 
must meet the following requirement: ``(vi) The filling of storage 
tanks at GDF shall be limited to unloading by vapor-tight gasoline 
cargo tanks. Documentation that the cargo tank has met the 
specifications of EPA Method 27 shall be carried on the cargo tank.'' 
In review of the questions raised by the stakeholders, we found that 
this provision of the rule related to the testing of vapor-tight 
gasoline cargo tanks needs clarification on several points.
    First, 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC does not include a definition 
of ``vapor-tight gasoline cargo tank.'' We intended to use the same 
vapor-tight testing requirements as those in the standards for bulk 
facilities (40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB) promulgated at the same 
time as the GDF rule. Subpart BBBBBB contains a definition of ``vapor-
tight gasoline cargo tank'' in that subpart. We found, however, that 
the definition in subpart BBBBBB incorrectly referenced, as part of the 
definition, the definition of ``vapor-tight gasoline tank truck'' found 
in 40 CFR 60.501 (the NSPS for Bulk Gasoline Terminals). The subpart 
BBBBBB definition should have specified the test requirements in Sec.  
63.11092(f) of subpart BBBBBB,\4\ since it provides the test method and 
parameters for vapor tight gasoline cargo tanks for subpart BBBBBB, and 
they are different than those specified in the Bulk Gasoline Terminal 
NSPS. Therefore, we are proposing to revise the definition of ``vapor-
tight gasoline cargo tank'' in subpart BBBBBB to correct the reference 
to the appropriate vapor tightness test requirements. We are also 
proposing to include the same definition in 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
CCCCCC to add clarity. The proposed definition would read as follows: 
``vapor-tight gasoline cargo tank means a gasoline cargo tank which has 
demonstrated within the 12 preceding months that it meets the annual 
certification test requirements in Sec.  63.11092(f).'' Additionally, 
it appears that the subpart CCCCCC definition of ``gasoline cargo 
tank'' requires clarification not only to reference ``loading'' 
gasoline, but to reference ``unloading'' as well, since the definition 
also applies to unloading gasoline at GDF. In today's amendments we are 
proposing a revision of the definition of ``vapor-tight gasoline cargo 
tank'' in subpart BBBBBB, an insertion of the definition of ``vapor-
tight gasoline cargo tank'' into subpart CCCCCC, and a revision of the 
definition of ``gasoline cargo tank'' in subpart CCCCCC as described 
above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 40 CFR 63.11092(f). ``The annual certification test for 
gasoline cargo tanks shall consist of the test methods specified in 
paragraphs (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this section. (1) EPA Method 27, 
Appendix A-8, 40 CFR part 60. Conduct the test using a time period 
(t) for the pressure and vacuum tests of 5 minutes. The initial 
pressure (Pi) for the pressure test shall be 460 millimeters (mm) of 
water (18 inches of water), gauge. The initial vacuum (Vi) for the 
vacuum test shall be 150 mm of water (6 inches of water), gauge. The 
maximum allowable pressure and vacuum changes ([Delta] p, [Delta] v) 
for all affected gasoline cargo tanks is 3 inches of water, or less, 
in 5 minutes. (2) Railcar bubble leak test procedures.* * *''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The second question that has been raised relates to the statement 
in Table 2 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC that ``Documentation that 
the cargo tank has met the specifications of EPA Method 27 shall be 
carried on the cargo tank.'' Stakeholders have pointed out that it is 
impractical to require that documentation be ``on'' the cargo tank 
because most cargo tanks are not equipped for the weatherproof storage 
of paper documents. It was our intent that the documentation of vapor 
tightness testing would be carried in the cab of the truck rather than 
actually ``on the cargo tank.'' In today's amendments, we are proposing 
to amend the wording of the phrase to state that documentation shall be 
carried ``with the cargo tank.''
    Another question that has been raised relates to the length of time 
that cargo tank owners or operators must retain testing documentation 
with the cargo tank. We specified in Table 3 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
CCCCCC that Sec.  63.10(b)(1), the general recordkeeping requirements 
in the General Provisions, is applicable and requires all records to be 
readily available and be kept for 5 years. We still believe that 5 
years of records is necessary and appropriate. However, we believe, in 
this case, that records for only the current year need to be available 
with the cargo tank since the inspector is checking on current 
compliance. The other 4 years of records can be kept at the cargo tank 
owner's office as long as the records are readily available. In Sec.  
63.11094(c), we specified that records kept at remote locations must be 
instantly available (e.g., via e-mail or facsimile) for inspection by 
the Administrator's delegated representative during the course of a 
site visit or within a mutually agreeable time frame. The record must 
be an exact duplicate image of the original paper record with 
certifying signatures. In subpart CCCCCC, we are proposing to clarify 
the rule text by adding Sec.  63.11125(c), which contains the following 
requirements: (1) Cargo tank owners or operators must keep 
documentation of vapor tightness testing for 5 years, but documentation 
of only the most recent test must be carried with the cargo tank; (2) 
if the owner or operator of the cargo tank chooses to keep only the 
current documentation with the cargo tank, documentation for the 
previous 4 years must be kept at the owner's or operator's office; (3) 
such office records must be instantly available (e.g., via e-mail or 
facsimile) to the Administrator's delegated representative during the 
course of a site visit or within a mutually agreeable time frame; and 
(4) such records must be an exact duplicate image of the original paper 
record with certifying signatures.
    Also, note that we are working with DOT to resolve questions 
related to allowing certain new DOT testing requirements \5\ as an 
alternative to vapor-tight testing and documentation in this subpart. 
Currently we are working with DOT to discuss and resolve questions 
related to whether the required records of testing have the equivalent 
content, availability, and retention time requirements. DOT is 
currently considering revising their standards to make the test 
documentation equal to this 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC, and 40 CFR 
part 63, subparts R and BBBBBB for terminals, and the new source 
terminal standards under 40 CFR part 60, subpart XX.\6\ That effort has 
not progressed to

[[Page 66487]]

the degree that we can propose additional changes or alternatives to 
subpart CCCCCC in today's proposed amendments. Once DOT has finalized 
the changes to their cargo tank testing standards we will consider 
those changes and whether any changes are needed in our standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ On April 18, 2003, (68 FR 19258) a final DOT rule (49 CFR 
180.407(h)(2) and 180.415(b)(3)(vii)) was issued specifying a new 
DOT uniform marking for cargo tanks using and passing the Method 27 
test. The uniform cargo tank marking is ``K-EPA27'' and includes the 
date (month and year) that the cargo tank passed the Method 27 test.
    \6\ The DOT testing limit requirements for a ``K-EPA27'' marking 
are at least equivalent to Method 27 testing under Reasonably 
Available Control Technology guidance, NSPS (40 CFR 60, subpart XX) 
and air toxics rules (40 CFR part 63, subparts R, BBBBBB, and 
CCCCCC). The DOT rules would be equivalent to contents of the test 
documentation for all the above subparts if test location and cargo 
tank owner's address were added to the DOT documentation 
requirements. The DOT requirements for owner or operator retention 
of test documentation would be equivalent for the proposed 
requirements for subpart CCCCCC if test documentation is kept for 1 
year with cargo tank and immediately available for 4 previous years 
at the owner or operator's office. Under subparts XX, R, and BBBBBB, 
the terminal checks the current documentation and keeps the 
documentation for 5 years. The DOT requirement is currently for 1-
year retention at the owner's address. Reasonably Available Control 
Technology requirements for record retention and location vary by 
State and local rules and permits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the 
terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is, 
therefore, not subject to review under the Executive Order.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden. 
The proposed amendments clarify, but do not add requirements increasing 
the collection burden. The information collection requirements 
contained in the existing regulations at 40 CFR part 63, subparts 
BBBBBB and CCCCCC were sent to the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) for approval under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 
44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq. OMB approved Information Collection Request 
(ICR) 2237.02--NESHAP for Source Categories: Gasoline Distribution Bulk 
Terminals, Bulk Plants, and Pipeline Facilities; and Gasoline 
Dispensing Facilities (40 CFR part 63, subparts BBBBBB and CCCCCC) 
(Final Rule) and assigned OMB control number 2060-0620. This ICR was 
approved by OMB without change. The OMB control numbers for EPA 
regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. We are proposing to 
amend 40 CFR part 9 to add the OMB control number for these rules.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (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 proposed 
amendments on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small 
business as defined by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) 
regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction 
that is a government of a city, county, town, school district or 
special district with a population of less than 50,000; or (3) a small 
organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of these proposed amendments 
on small entities, I certify that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
The proposed amendments will not impose any new requirement on small 
entities that are not currently required by the final rules (i.e., 
minimizing gasoline spills and evaporation). We continue to be 
interested in the potential impacts of the proposed rule on small 
entities and welcome comments on issues related to such impacts.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This rule does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in 
expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any one year. 
These proposed amendments clarify certain provisions and correct 
typographical errors in the rule text for a rule EPA previously 
determined did not include a Federal mandate that may result in an 
estimated cost of $100 million or more (69 FR 5061, February 3, 2004). 
Thus, the proposed amendments are not subject to the requirements of 
sections 202 or 205 of UMRA.
    The proposed amendments are also not subject to the requirements of 
section 203 of UMRA because they contain no regulatory requirements 
that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The 
proposed amendments clarify certain provisions and correct 
typographical errors in the rule text; thus, they should not affect 
small governments.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    These proposed 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. They provide 
clarification and correct typographical errors. These changes do not 
modify existing or create new responsibilities among EPA Regional 
Offices, States, or local enforcement agencies. Thus, Executive Order 
13132 does not apply to these proposed amendments.
    In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA 
policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local 
governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed action 
from State and local officials.

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

    These proposed amendments do not have tribal implications, as 
specified in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 
They will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on 
the relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
government and Indian tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 
apply to these proposed amendments.
    Nonetheless, EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this 
proposed action from tribal officials.

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

    EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) 
as applying to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety 
risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the 
Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This 
action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is based 
solely on technology performance.

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

    These proposed amendments are not subject to Executive Order 13211 
(66 FR 18355, May 22, 2001) because they are not a ``significant energy 
action'' under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its 
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or

[[Page 66488]]

otherwise impractical. VCS are technical standards (e.g., materials 
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business 
practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. NTTAA directs 
EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency 
decides not to use available and applicable VCS.
    This action does not involve any new technical standards that were 
not already included in the final rules. Therefore, EPA did not 
consider the use of any other VCS in these proposed amendments.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes 
Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high 
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies, and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    EPA has determined that these proposed amendments will not have 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not 
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the 
environment. These proposed amendments do not relax the control 
measures on sources regulated by the rule and will not cause emissions 
increases from these sources.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

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

    Dated: December 7, 2009.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, parts 9 and 63 of title 
40, chapter I, of the Code of Federal Regulations are proposed to be 
amended as follows:

PART 9--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 9 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  7 U.S.C. 135, et seq., 136-136y; 15 U.S.C. 2001, 
2003, 2005, 2006, 2601-2671; 21 U.S.C. 331j, 346a, 348; 31 U.S.C. 
9701; 33 U.S.C. 1251, et seq., 1311, 1313d, 1314, 1321, 1326, 1330, 
1344, 1345(d) and (e), 1361; E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243, 3 CFR 1971-
1975 Comp., p. 973; 42 U.S.C. 241, 242b, 243, 246, 300f, 300g, 300g-
1, 300g-2, 300g-3, 300g-4, 300g-5, 300g-6, 300j-1, 300j-2, 300j-3, 
300j-4, 300j-9, 1857, et seq., 6901-6992k, 7401-7671q, 7542, 9601-
9657, 11023, 11048.

    2. The table in Sec.  9.1 is amended by adding the following 
entries in numerical order under the undesignated center heading 
``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source 
Categories'' to read as follows:


Sec.  9.1  OMB approvals under the Paperwork Reduction Act.

* * * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             OMB control
                      40 CFR citation                            No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                * * * * *
   National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source
                             Categories.\3\
 
                                * * * * *
63.11080-63.11100.........................................     2060-0620
63.11110-63.11132.........................................     2060-0620
 
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The ICRs referenced in this section of the table encompass the
  applicable general provisions contained in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A,
  which are not independent information collection requirements.

* * * * *

PART 63--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart BBBBBB--[Amended]

    4. Section 63.11081 is amended by adding paragraphs (c) through (j) 
to read as follows:


Sec.  63.11081  Am I subject to the requirements in this subpart?

* * * * *
    (c) Gasoline storage tanks that are located at affected sources 
identified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) of this section, and 
that are used only for dispensing gasoline in a manner consistent with 
tanks located at a gasoline dispensing facility as defined in Sec.  
63.11132, are not subject to any of the requirements in this subpart. 
These tanks must comply with subpart CCCCCC of this part.
    (d) The loading of aviation gasoline into storage tanks at 
airports, and the subsequent transfer of aviation gasoline within the 
airport, is not subject to this subpart.
    (e) The loading of gasoline into marine tank vessels at bulk 
facilities is not subject to this subpart.
    (f) If your affected source's throughput ever exceeds an applicable 
throughput threshold in the definition of ``bulk gasoline terminal'' or 
in item 1 in Table 2 to this subpart, the affected source will remain 
subject to the requirements for sources above the threshold even if the 
affected source throughput later falls below the applicable throughput 
threshold.
    (g) For the purpose of determining gasoline throughput, as used in 
the definition of bulk gasoline plant and bulk gasoline terminal, the 
20,000 gallons per day threshold throughput is the maximum calculated 
design throughout for any day and is not an average.
    (h) Storage tanks that are used to load gasoline into a cargo tank 
for the on-site redistribution of gasoline to another storage tank are 
subject to this subpart.
    (i) For any affected source subject to the provisions of this 
subpart and another Federal rule, you may elect to comply only with the 
more stringent provisions of the applicable subparts. You must consider 
all provisions of the rules, including monitoring, recordkeeping, and 
reporting. You must identify the affected source and provisions with 
which you will comply in your Notification of Compliance Status (NOCS) 
required under Sec.  63.11093. You also must demonstrate in your NOCS 
that each provision with which you will comply is at least as stringent 
as the otherwise applicable requirements in this subpart. You are 
responsible for making accurate determinations concerning the more 
stringent provisions; noncompliance with this rule is not excused if it 
is later determined that your determination was in error and, as a 
result, you are violating this subpart. Compliance with this rule is 
your responsibility and the NOCS does not alter or affect that 
responsibility.
    (j) For new or reconstructed affected sources, as specified in 
Sec.  63.11082(b) and (c), recordkeeping to document applicable 
throughput must begin upon startup of the affected source. For existing 
sources, as specified in Sec.  63.11082(d), recordkeeping to document 
applicable throughput must begin on January 10, 2008. Records required 
under this paragraph shall be kept for a period of 5 years.
    5. Section 63.11083 is amended by revising paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.11083  When do I have to comply with this subpart?

* * * * *

[[Page 66489]]

    (c) If you have an existing affected source that becomes subject to 
the control requirements in this subpart because of an increase in the 
daily throughput, as specified in option 1 of Table 2 to this subpart, 
you must comply with the standards in this subpart no later than 3 
years after the affected source becomes subject to the control 
requirements in this subpart.
    6. Section 63.11086 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) 
to read as follows:


Sec.  63.11086  What requirements must I meet if my facility is a bulk 
gasoline plant?

* * * * *
    (a) Except as specified in paragraph (b) of this section, you must 
only load gasoline into storage tanks and cargo tanks at your facility 
by utilizing submerged filling, as defined in Sec.  63.11100, and as 
specified in paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), or (a)(3) of this section. The 
applicable distances in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section shall 
be measured from the point in the opening of the submerged fill pipe 
that is the greatest distance from the bottom of the storage tank.
    (1) Submerged fill pipes installed on or before November 9, 2006, 
must be no more than 12 inches from the bottom of the tank.
    (2) Submerged fill pipes installed after November 9, 2006, must be 
no more than 6 inches from the bottom of the tank.
    (3) Submerged fill pipes not meeting the specifications of 
paragraphs (a)(1) or (2) of this section are allowed if the owner or 
operator can demonstrate that the liquid level in the tank is always 
above the entire opening of the fill pipe. Documentation providing such 
demonstration must be made available for inspection by the 
Administrator's delegated representative during the course of a site 
visit.
    (b) Gasoline storage tanks with a capacity of less than 250 gallons 
are not required to comply with the control requirements in paragraph 
(a) of this section, but must comply only with the requirements in 
paragraph (d) of this section.
* * * * *
    7. Section 63.11092 is amended as follows:
    a. By revising paragraph (a) introductory text;
    b. By revising paragraph (b) introductory text;
    c. By revising paragraph (b)(1) introductory text;
    d. By revising paragraph (b)(1)(i)(B)(2)(ii);
    e. By revising paragraph (b)(1)(i)(B)(2)(iii);
    f. By revising paragraph (b)(1)(iii)(B)(1);
    g. By revising paragraph (b)(1)(iii)(B)(2)(ii);
    h. By revising paragraph (b)(1)(iii)(B)(2)(iii); and
    i. By adding a new paragraph (g) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.11092  What testing and monitoring requirements must I meet?

    (a) Each owner or operator of a bulk gasoline terminal subject to 
the emission standard in item 1(b) of Table 2 to this subpart must 
comply with the requirements in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this 
section.
* * * * *
    (b) Each owner or operator of a bulk gasoline terminal subject to 
the provisions of this subpart shall install, calibrate, certify, 
operate, and maintain, according to the manufacturer's specifications, 
a continuous monitoring system (CMS) while gasoline vapors are 
displaced to the vapor processor systems, as specified in paragraphs 
(b)(1) through (5) of this section.
    (1) For each performance test conducted under paragraph (a)(1) of 
this section, the owner or operator shall determine a monitored 
operating parameter value for the vapor processing system using the 
procedures specified in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (iv) of this 
section. During the performance test, continuously record the operating 
parameter as specified under paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (iv) of this 
section.
* * * * *
    (i) * * *
    (B) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) The owner or operator shall verify, during each day of 
operation of the loading rack, the proper valve sequencing, cycle time, 
gasoline flow, purge air flow, and operating temperatures. Verification 
shall be through visual observation or through an automated alarm or 
shutdown system that monitors system operation. A manual or electronic 
record of the start and end of a shutdown event may be used.
    (iii) The owner or operator shall perform semi-annual preventive 
maintenance inspections of the carbon adsorption system, including the 
automated alarm or shutdown system for those units so equipped, 
according to the recommendations of the manufacturer of the system.
* * * * *
    (iii) * * *
    (B) * * *
    (1) The presence of a thermal oxidation system pilot flame shall be 
monitored using a heat-sensing device, such as an ultraviolet beam 
sensor or a thermocouple, installed in proximity of the pilot light to 
indicate the presence of a flame. The monitor shall show a positive 
parameter value to indicate that the pilot flame is on, or a negative 
parameter value to indicate that the pilot flame is off.
* * * * *
    (2) * * *
    (ii) The owner or operator shall verify, during each day of 
operation of the loading rack, the proper operation of the assist-air 
blower and the vapor line valve. Verification shall be through visual 
observation or through an automated alarm or shutdown system that 
monitors system operation. A manual or electronic record of the start 
and end of a shutdown event may be used.
    (iii) The owner or operator shall perform semi-annual preventive 
maintenance inspections of the thermal oxidation system, including the 
automated alarm or shutdown system for those units so equipped, 
according to the recommendations of the manufacturer of the system.
* * * * *
    (g) Conduct of performance tests. Performance tests conducted for 
this subpart shall be conducted under such conditions as the 
Administrator specifies to the owner or operator based on 
representative performance (i.e., performance based on normal operating 
conditions) of the affected source. Upon request, the owner or operator 
shall make available to the Administrator such records as may be 
necessary to determine the conditions of performance tests.
    8. Section 63.11095 is amended by adding a new paragraph (a)(4) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  63.11095  What are my reporting requirements?

    (a) * * *
    (4) For storage vessels complying with Sec.  63.11087(b) after 
January 10, 2011, the storage vessel's Notice of Compliance Status 
information can be included in the next semi-annual compliance report 
in lieu of filing a separate Notification of Compliance Status report 
under Sec.  63.11093.
* * * * *
    9. Section 63.11100 is amended by:
    a. Adding, in alphabetical order, new definitions of ``gasoline,'' 
``gasoline storage tank or vessel,'' and ``surge control tank or 
vessel''; and
    b. Revising the definitions of ``bulk gasoline plant'' and ``vapor-
tight gasoline cargo tank'' to read as follows:

[[Page 66490]]

Sec.  63.11100  What definitions apply to this subpart?

* * * * *
    Bulk gasoline plant means any gasoline storage and distribution 
facility that receives gasoline by pipeline, ship or barge, or cargo 
tank and subsequently loads the gasoline into gasoline cargo tanks for 
transport to gasoline dispensing facilities, and has a gasoline 
throughput of less than 20,000 gallons per day. Gasoline throughput 
shall be the maximum calculated design throughput as may be limited by 
compliance with an enforceable condition under Federal, State, or local 
law and discoverable by the Administrator and any other person.
* * * * *
    Gasoline means any petroleum distillate or petroleum distillate/
alcohol blend having a Reid vapor pressure of 27.6 kilopascals or 
greater which is used as a fuel for internal combustion engines.
* * * * *
    Gasoline storage tank or vessel means each tank, vessel, reservoir, 
or container used for the storage of gasoline, but does not include:
    (1) Frames, housing, auxiliary supports, or other components that 
are not directly involved in the containment of gasoline or gasoline 
vapors; or
    (2) Subsurface caverns or porous rock reservoirs.
* * * * *
    Surge control tank or vessel means, for the purposes of this 
subpart, those tanks or vessels used only for controlling pressure in a 
pipeline system during surges or other variations from normal 
operations.
* * * * *
    Vapor-tight gasoline cargo tank means a gasoline cargo tank which 
has demonstrated within the 12 preceding months that it meets the 
annual certification test requirements in Sec.  63.11092(f).
    10. Table 1 to Subpart BBBBBB of Part 63 is revised to read as 
follows:

 Table 1 to Subpart BBBBBB of Part 63--Applicability Criteria, Emission
           Limits, and Management Practices for Storage Tanks
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  If you own or operate . . .              Then you must . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. A gasoline storage tank      Equip each gasoline storage tank with a
 meeting either of the           fixed roof that is mounted to the
 following conditions: (i) a     storage tank in a stationary manner,
 capacity of less than 75        and maintain all openings in a closed
 cubic meters (m\3\); or (ii)    position at all times when not in use.
 a capacity of less than 151
 m\3\ and a gasoline
 throughput of 480 gallons per
 day or less. Gallons per day
 is calculated by summing the
 current day's throughput,
 plus the throughput for the
 previous 364 days, and then
 dividing that sum by 365.
2. A gasoline storage tank      Do the following: (a) Reduce emissions
 with a capacity of greater      of total organic HAP or TOC by 95
 than or equal to 75 m\3\ and    weight-percent with a closed vent
 not meeting any of the          system and control device as specified
 criteria specified in item 1.   in Sec.   60.112b(a)(3) of this
 of this Table.                  chapter; or
                                (b) Equip each internal floating roof
                                 gasoline storage tank according to the
                                 requirements in Sec.   60.112b(a)(1) of
                                 this chapter, except for the secondary
                                 seal requirements under Sec.
                                 60.112b(a)(1)(ii)(B), Sec.
                                 60.112b(a)(1)(iv) through (ix), and
                                 Sec.   63.1063(a)(1)(i)(C) and (D) of
                                 this chapter; and
                                (c) Equip each external floating roof
                                 gasoline storage tank according to the
                                 requirements in Sec.   60.112b(a)(2) of
                                 this chapter, except that the
                                 requirements of Sec.
                                 60.112b(a)(2)(ii) of this chapter shall
                                 only be required if such storage tank
                                 does not currently meet the
                                 requirements of Sec.   60.112b(a)(2)(i)
                                 of this chapter; or
                                (d) Equip and operate each internal and
                                 external floating roof gasoline storage
                                 tank according to the applicable
                                 requirements in Sec.   63.1063(a)(1)
                                 and (b), and equip each external
                                 floating roof gasoline storage tank
                                 according to the requirements of Sec.
                                 63.1063(a)(2) if such storage tank does
                                 not currently meet the requirements of
                                 Sec.   63.1063(a)(1).
3. A surge control tank.......  Equip each surge control tank with a
                                 fixed roof that is mounted to the tank
                                 in a stationary manner and with a
                                 pressure/vacuum vent with a positive
                                 cracking pressure of no less than 0.50
                                 inches of water. Maintain all openings
                                 in a closed position at all times when
                                 not in use.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    11. Table 2 to Subpart BBBBBB of Part 63 is revised to read as 
follows:

 Table 2 to Subpart BBBBBB of Part 63--Applicability Criteria, Emission
           Limits, and Management Practices for Loading Racks
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  If you own or operate . . .              Then you must . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. A bulk gasoline terminal     (a) Equip your loading rack(s) with a
 loading rack(s) with a          vapor collection system designed to
 gasoline throughput (total of   collect the TOC vapors displaced from
 all racks) of 250,000 gallons   cargo tanks during product loading; and
 per day, or greater. Gallons   (b) Reduce emissions of TOC to less than
 per day is calculated by        or equal to 80 mg/l of gasoline loaded
 summing the current day's       into gasoline cargo tanks at the
 throughput, plus the            loading rack; and
 throughput for the previous    (c) Design and operate the vapor
 364 days, and then dividing     collection system to prevent any TOC
 that sum by 365.                vapors collected at one loading rack
                                 from passing to another loading rack;
                                 and
                                (d) Limit the loading of gasoline into
                                 gasoline cargo tanks that are vapor
                                 tight using the procedures specified in
                                 Sec.   60.502(e) through (j) of this
                                 chapter. For the purposes of this
                                 section, the term ``tank truck'' as
                                 used in Sec.   60.502(e) through (j) of
                                 this chapter means ``cargo tank'' as
                                 defined in Sec.   63.11100.

[[Page 66491]]

 
2. A bulk gasoline terminal     (a) Use submerged filling with a
 loading rack(s) with a          submerged fill pipe that is no more
 gasoline throughput (total of   than 6 inches from the bottom of the
 all racks) of less than         cargo tank.
 250,000 gallons per day.       (b) Make records available within 24
 Gallons per day is calculated   hours of a request by the Administrator
 by summing the current day's    to document your gasoline throughput.
 throughput, plus the
 throughput for the previous
 364 days, and then dividing
 that sum by 365.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    12. Table 3 to Subpart BBBBBB of Part 63 is amended by revising the 
entries for Sec. Sec.  63.7(e)(1), 63.7(e)(3), 63.8(c)(1), 63.9(h), and 
63.10(b)(2) to read as follows:

                    Table 3 to Subpart BBBBBB of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           Applies to subpart
          Citation                     Subject                 Brief description                 BBBBBB
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
63.7(e)(1)..................  Conditions for Conducting  Performance test must be       No, Sec.   63.11092(g)
                               Performance Tests.         conducted under                specifies conditions
                                                          representative conditions.     for conducting
                                                                                         performance tests.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Sec.   63.7(e)(3)...........  Test Run Duration........  Must have three test runs of   Yes, except for testing
                                                          at least 1 hour each;          conducted under Sec.
                                                          compliance is based on         63.11092(a).
                                                          arithmetic mean of three
                                                          runs; conditions when data
                                                          from an additional test run
                                                          can be used.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Sec.   63.8(c)(1)(i)-(iii)..  Operation and maintenance  Must maintain and operate      No.
                               of continuous monitoring   each CMS as specified in
                               systems.                   Sec.   63.6(e)(1); must keep
                                                          parts for routine repairs
                                                          readily available; must
                                                          develop a written startup,
                                                          shutdown, and malfunction
                                                          plan for CMS as specified in
                                                          Sec.   63.6(e)(3).
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Sec.   63.9(h)(1)-(6).......  Notification of            Contents due 60 days after     Yes, except as specified
                               Compliance Status.         end of performance test or     in Sec.
                                                          other compliance               63.11095(a)(4); also,
                                                          demonstration, except for      there are no opacity
                                                          opacity/VE, which are due 30   standards.
                                                          days after; when to submit
                                                          to Federal vs. State
                                                          authority.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Sec.   63.10(b)(2)(i)-(iv)..  Records Related to SSM...  Occurrence of each for         No.
                                                          operations (process
                                                          equipment); occurrence of
                                                          each malfunction of air
                                                          pollution control equipment;
                                                          maintenance on air pollution
                                                          control equipment; actions
                                                          during SSM.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Sec.   63.10(d)(5)..........  SSM Reports..............  Contents and submission......  No.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subpart CCCCCC--[Amended]

    13. Section 63.11111 is amended as follows:
    a. By revising paragraph (e);
    b. By revising paragraph (g); and
    c. By adding new paragraphs (h) through (k) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.11111  Am I subject to the requirements in this subpart?

* * * * *
    (e) An affected source shall, upon request by the Administrator, 
demonstrate that their monthly throughput is less than the 10,000-
gallon or the 100,000-gallon threshold level, as applicable. For new or 
reconstructed affected sources, as specified in Sec.  63.11112(b) and 
(c), recordkeeping to document monthly throughput must begin upon 
startup of the affected source. For existing sources, as specified in 
Sec.  63.11112(d), recordkeeping to document monthly throughput must 
begin on January 10, 2008. Records required under this paragraph shall 
be kept for a period of 5 years.
* * * * *
    (g) The loading of aviation gasoline into storage tanks at 
airports, and the subsequent transfer of aviation gasoline within the 
airport, is not subject to this subpart.
    (h) Monthly throughput is the total volume of gasoline loaded into, 
or dispensed from, all the gasoline storage tanks located at a single 
affected GDF. If an area source has two or more GDF at separate 
locations within the area source, each GDF is treated as a separate 
affected source.
    (i) If your affected source's throughput ever exceeds an applicable 
throughput threshold, the affected source will remain subject to the 
requirements for sources above the threshold even if the affected 
source throughput later falls below the applicable throughput 
threshold.

[[Page 66492]]

    (j) The dispensing of gasoline from a fixed gasoline storage tank 
at a GDF into a portable gasoline tank for the on-site delivery and 
subsequent dispensing of the gasoline into the fuel tank of a motor 
vehicle or other gasoline-fueled engine or equipment used at the area 
source is subject to Sec.  63.11116 of this subpart.
    (k) For any affected source subject to the provisions of this 
subpart and another Federal rule, you may elect to comply only with the 
more stringent provisions of the applicable subparts. You must consider 
all provisions of the rules, including monitoring, recordkeeping, and 
reporting. You must identify the affected source and provisions with 
which you will comply in your Notification of Compliance Status (NOCS) 
required under Sec.  63.11124. You also must demonstrate in your NOCS 
that each provision with which you will comply is at least as stringent 
as the otherwise applicable requirements in this subpart. You are 
responsible for making accurate determinations concerning the more 
stringent provisions, and noncompliance with this rule is not excused 
if it is later determined that your determination was in error and, as 
a result, you are violating this subpart. Compliance with this rule is 
your responsibility and the NOCS does not alter or affect that 
responsibility.
    14. Section 63.11113 is amended by revising paragraph (c) and 
adding a new paragraph (e) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.11113  When do I have to comply with this subpart?

* * * * *
    (c) If you have an existing affected source that becomes subject to 
the control requirements in this subpart because of an increase in the 
monthly throughput, as specified in Sec.  63.11111(c) or (d), you must 
comply with the standards in this subpart no later than 3 years after 
the affected source becomes subject to the control requirements in this 
subpart.
* * * * *
    (e) The initial compliance demonstration test required under Sec.  
63.11120(a)(1) and (2) must be conducted as specified in paragraphs 
(e)(1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) If you have a new or reconstructed affected source, you must 
conduct the initial compliance test upon installation of the complete 
vapor balance system.
    (2) If you have an existing affected source, you must conduct the 
initial compliance test as specified in paragraphs (e)(2)(i) or 
(e)(2)(ii) of this section.
    (i) For vapor balance systems installed on or before December 15, 
2009, you must test no later than 180 days after the applicable 
compliance date specified in paragraphs (b) or (c) of this section.
    (ii) For vapor balance systems installed after December 15, 2009, 
you must test upon installation of the complete vapor balance system.
    15. Section 63.11116 is amended by adding a new paragraph (d) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  63.11116  Requirements for facilities with monthly throughput of 
less than 10,000 gallons of gasoline.

* * * * *
    (d) Portable gasoline containers that meet the requirements of 40 
CFR part 59, subpart F, are considered acceptable for compliance with 
paragraph (a)(3) of this section.
    16. Section 63.11117 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  63.11117  Requirements for facilities with monthly throughput of 
10,000 gallons of gasoline or more.

* * * * *
    (b) Except as specified in paragraph (c) of this section, you must 
only load gasoline into storage tanks at your facility by utilizing 
submerged filling, as defined in Sec.  63.11132, and as specified in 
paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), or (b)(3) of this section. The applicable 
distances in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) shall be measured from the point 
in the opening of the submerged fill pipe that is the greatest distance 
from the bottom of the storage tank.
    (1) Submerged fill pipes installed on or before November 9, 2006, 
must be no more than 12 inches from the bottom of the tank.
    (2) Submerged fill pipes installed after November 9, 2006, must be 
no more than 6 inches from the bottom of the tank.
    (3) Submerged fill pipes not meeting the specifications of 
paragraphs (b)(1) or (2) of this section are allowed if the owner or 
operator can demonstrate that the liquid level in the tank is always 
above the entire opening of the fill pipe. Documentation providing such 
demonstration must be made available for inspection by the 
Administrator's delegated representative during the course of a site 
visit.
* * * * *
    17. Section 63.11120 is amended by revising paragraph (a) 
introductory text and by adding a new paragraph (c) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.11120  What testing and monitoring requirements must I meet?

    (a) Each owner or operator, at the time of installation, as 
specified in Sec.  63.11113(e), of a vapor balance system required 
under Sec.  63.11118(b)(1), and every 3 years thereafter, must comply 
with the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section.
* * * * *
    (c) Conduct of performance tests. Performance tests conducted for 
this subpart shall be conducted under such conditions as the 
Administrator specifies to the owner or operator based on 
representative performance (i.e., performance based on normal operating 
conditions) of the affected source. Upon request, the owner or operator 
shall make available to the Administrator such records as may be 
necessary to determine the conditions of performance tests.
    18. Section 63.11124 is amended by revising the first sentence in 
paragraph (a)(2) and the first sentence in (b)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  63.11124  What notifications must I submit and when?

    (a) * * *
    (2) You must submit a Notification of Compliance Status to the 
applicable EPA Regional Office and the delegated State authority, as 
specified in Sec.  63.13, in accordance with the schedule specified in 
Sec.  63.9(h), unless you meet the requirements in paragraph (a)(3) of 
this section. * * *
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) You must submit a Notification of Compliance Status to the 
applicable EPA Regional Office and the delegated State authority, as 
specified in Sec.  63.13, in accordance with the schedule specified in 
Sec.  63.9(h). * * *
* * * * *
    19. Section 63.11125 is amended by adding a new paragraph (c) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  63.11125  What are my recordkeeping requirements?

* * * * *
    (c) Each owner or operator of a gasoline cargo tank subject to the 
management practices in Table 2 to this subpart must keep records 
documenting vapor tightness testing for a period of 5 years. 
Documentation must include each of the items specified in Sec.  
63.11094(b)(i) through (viii). Records of vapor tightness testing must 
be retained as specified in either paragraph (c)(1) or paragraph (c)(2) 
of this section.
    (1) The owner or operator must keep all vapor tightness testing 
records with the cargo tank.
    (2) As an alternative to keeping all records with the cargo tank, 
the owner or operator may comply with the requirements of paragraphs 
(c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section.

[[Page 66493]]

    (i) The owner or operator may keep records of only the most recent 
vapor tightness test with the cargo tank and keep records for the 
previous 4 years at their office or another central location.
    (ii) Vapor tightness testing records that are kept at a location 
other than with the cargo tank must be instantly available (e.g., via 
e-mail or facsimile) to the Administrator's delegated representative 
during the course of a site visit or within a mutually agreeable time 
frame. Such records must be an exact duplicate image of the original 
paper copy record with certifying signatures.
    20. Section 63.11132 is amended as follows:
    a. By adding, in alphabetical order, the definitions of 
``gasoline,'' ``motor vehicle,'' ``nonroad engine,'' ``nonroad 
vehicle,'' and ``vapor-tight gasoline cargo tank''; and
    b. By revising, in alphabetical order, the definitions of 
``gasoline cargo tank,'' ``gasoline dispensing facility,'' and 
``monthly throughput'' to read as follows:


Sec.  63.11132  What definitions apply to this subpart?

* * * * *
    Gasoline means any petroleum distillate or petroleum distillate/
alcohol blend having a Reid vapor pressure of 27.6 kilopascals or 
greater which is used as a fuel for internal combustion engines.
    Gasoline cargo tank means a delivery tank truck or railcar which is 
loading or unloading gasoline or which has loaded or unloaded gasoline 
on the immediately previous load.
    Gasoline dispensing facility (GDF) means any stationary facility 
which dispenses gasoline into the fuel tank of a motor vehicle, motor 
vehicle engine, nonroad vehicle, or nonroad engine, including a nonroad 
vehicle or nonroad engine used solely for competition. These facilities 
include, but are not limited to, facilities that dispense gasoline into 
on- and off-road, street, or highway motor vehicles, lawn equipment, 
boats, test engines, landscaping equipment, generators, pumps, and 
other gasoline-fueled engines and equipment.
    Monthly throughput means the total volume of gasoline that is 
loaded into, or dispensed from, all gasoline storage tanks at each GDF 
during a month. Monthly throughput is calculated by summing the volume 
of gasoline loaded into, or dispensed from, all gasoline storage tanks 
at each GDF during the current day, plus the total volume of gasoline 
loaded into, or dispensed from, all gasoline storage tanks at each GDF 
during the previous 364 days, and then dividing that sum by 12.
    Motor vehicle means any self-propelled vehicle designed for 
transporting persons or property on a street or highway.
    Nonroad engine means an internal combustion engine (including the 
fuel system) that is not used in a motor vehicle or a vehicle used 
solely for competition, or that is not subject to standards promulgated 
under section 7411 of this title or section 7521 of this title.
    Nonroad vehicle means a vehicle that is powered by a nonroad engine 
and that is not a motor vehicle or a vehicle used solely for 
competition.
* * * * *
    Vapor-tight gasoline cargo tank means a gasoline cargo tank which 
has demonstrated within the 12 preceding months that it meets the 
annual certification test requirements in Sec.  63.11092(f) of this 
part.
    21. Table 1 to Subpart CCCCCC of Part 63 is amended by adding a 
footnote 1 to the heading, and by revising entry 2. to read as follows:

    Table 1 to Subpart CCCCCC of Part 63--Applicability Criteria and
  Management Practices for Gasoline Dispensing Facilities With Monthly
          Throughput of 100,000 Gallons of Gasoline or More \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      If you own or operate . . .              Then you must . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                              * * * * * * *
2. A new or reconstructed GDF, or any    Equip your gasoline storage
 storage tank(s) constructed after        tanks with a dual-point vapor
 November 9, 2006, at an existing         balance system, as defined in
 affected facility subject to Sec.        Sec.   63.11132, and comply
 63.11118.                                with the requirements of item
                                          1 in this Table.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The management practices specified in this Table are not applicable
  if you are complying with the requirements in Sec.   63.11118(b)(2),
  except that if you are complying with the requirements in Sec.
  63.11118(b)(2)(i)(B), you must operate using management practices at
  least as stringent as those listed in this Table.

    22. Table 2 to Subpart CCCCCC of Part 63 is amended by revising 
entry (vi) to read as follows:

[[Page 66494]]



    Table 2 to Subpart CCCCCC of Part 63--Applicability Criteria and
   Management Practices for Gasoline Cargo Tanks Unloading at Gasoline
   Dispensing Facilities With Monthly Throughput of 100,000 Gallons of
                            Gasoline or More
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      If you own or operate . . .              Then you must . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                              * * * * * * *
                                         (vi) The filling of storage
                                          tanks at GDF shall be limited
                                          to unloading from vapor-tight
                                          gasoline cargo tanks.
                                          Documentation that the cargo
                                          tank has met the
                                          specifications of EPA Method
                                          27 shall be carried with the
                                          cargo tank, as specified in
                                          Sec.   63.11125(c).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    23. Table 3 to Subpart CCCCCC of Part 63 is amended by revising the 
entries for Sec. Sec.  63.5, 63.7(e)(1), 63.8(c)(1), 63.10(d)(5), 
63.10(e)(3)(i)-(iii), and 63.10(e)(3)(iv)-(v) to read as follows:

                    Table 3 to Subpart CCCCCC of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                            Applies to subpart
             Citation                       Subject               Brief description               CCCCCC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Sec.   63.5.......................  Construction/            Applicability;               Yes, except that these
                                     Reconstruction.          applications; approvals.     notifications are not
                                                                                           required for
                                                                                           facilities subject to
                                                                                           Sec.   63.11116.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
63.7(e)(1)........................  Conditions for           Performance test must be     No, Sec.   63.11120(c)
                                     Conducting Performance   conducted under              specifies conditions
                                     Tests.                   representative conditions.   for conducting
                                                                                           performance tests.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Sec.   63.8(c)(1)(i)-(iii)........  Operation and            Must maintain and operate    No.
                                     maintenance of           each CMS as specified in
                                     continuous monitoring    Sec.   63.6(e)(1); must
                                     systems.                 keep parts for routine
                                                              repairs readily available;
                                                              must develop a written
                                                              startup, shutdown, and
                                                              malfunction plan for CMS
                                                              as specified in Sec.
                                                              63.6(e)(3).
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Sec.   63.10(d)(5)................  SSM Reports............  Contents and submission....  No.
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Sec.   63.10(e)(3)(i)-(iii).......  Reports................  Schedule for reporting       No.
                                                              excess emissions.
Sec.   63.10(e)(3)(iv)-(v)........  Excess Emissions         Requirement to revert to     No.
                                     Reports.                 quarterly submission if
                                                              there is an excess
                                                              emissions and parameter
                                                              monitor exceedances (now
                                                              defined as deviations);
                                                              provision to request
                                                              semiannual reporting after
                                                              compliance for 1 year;
                                                              submit report by 30th day
                                                              following end of quarter
                                                              or calendar half; if there
                                                              has not been an exceedance
                                                              or excess emissions (now
                                                              defined as deviations),
                                                              report contents in a
                                                              statement that there have
                                                              been no deviations; must
                                                              submit report containing
                                                              all of the information in
                                                              Sec.  Sec.   63.8(c)(7)-
                                                              (8) and 63.10(c)(5)-(13).
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. E9-29570 Filed 12-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P