Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for Power Plants Electronic Reporting Revisions

Federal RegisterApr 10, 2020

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0794; FRL-10007-27-OAR]

RIN 2060-AU70

Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for Power Plants Electronic Reporting Revisions

AGENCY:

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION:

Proposed rule.

SUMMARY:

The U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing amendments to the electronic reporting requirements for the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units (also known as the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS)). This proposed action would revise and streamline the electronic data reporting requirements of MATS and increase data transparency by requiring use of one electronic reporting system, instead of two separate systems, and provide enhanced access to MATS data. No new continuous monitoring requirements would be imposed by this proposed action; instead, this action would reduce reporting burden, increase MATS data flow and usage, make it easier for inspectors and auditors to assess compliance, and encourage wider use of continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS) for MATS compliance. In addition, this proposed action would extend the current deadline for alternative electronic data submission via portable document format (PDF) files through December 31, 2023.

DATES:

Comments.

Comments must be received on or before May 11, 2020.

Public hearing.

If anyone contacts us requesting a public hearing on or before April 15, 2020, we will hold a hearing. Additional information about the hearing, if requested, will be posted at

https://www.epa.gov/mats/regulatory-actions-final-mercury-and-air-toxics-standards-mats-power-plants.

See

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

for information on requesting and registering for a public hearing.

ADDRESSES:

You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0794, by any of the following methods:

•

Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov/

(our preferred method). Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.

•

Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.

Include Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0794 in the subject line of the message.

Instructions:

All submissions received must include the Docket ID No. for this rulemaking. Comments received may be posted without change to

https://www.regulations.gov/,

including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document.

Out of an abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, the EPA Docket Center and Reading Room will be closed to public visitors beginning at the close of business on March 31, 2020 (4:30 p.m.) to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19. Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. We encourage the public to submit comments via

https://www.regulations.gov/

or email, as there will be a delay in process mail and no hand deliveries will be accepted. For further information on EPA Docket Center services, please visit us online at

https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Barrett Parker, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D243-05), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-5635; email address:

parker.barrett@epa.gov.

For general information concerning MATS, contact Ms. Mary Johnson, Sector Policies and Programs Division (D243-01), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone number: (919) 541-5025. For questions concerning the Emissions Collection and Monitoring Plan System (ECMPS) Client Tool and its implementation, contact Mr. Christopher Worley, Clean Air Markets Division, Mail Code 6204M, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 343-9531; email address:

worley.christopher@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The information in this preamble is organized as follows:

Table of Contents

I. Public Participation

II. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

B. What action is the Agency taking?

C. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

D. What are the incremental costs and benefits of this action?

III. Background

IV. What is the scope of these proposed amendments?

V. What specific amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU, are proposed by this action?

A. Proposed Revisions to the Reporting Requirements of MATS

B. Revisions to Appendix A

C. Revisions to Appendix B

D. Addition to Appendix C

E. Addition to Appendix D

F. Addition to Appendix E

VI. Proposed Revisions to Other Rule Text

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

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

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

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

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

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

I. Public Participation

Public hearing.

Please contact Ms. Adrian Gates at (919) 541-4860 or by email at

gates.adrian@epa.gov

to request a public hearing, to register to speak at the public hearing, or to inquire as to whether a public hearing will be held.

Docket.

The EPA has established a docket for this rulemaking under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0794. All documents in the docket are listed in

Regulations.gov

. Although listed, some information is not publicly available,

e.g.,

Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet. Publicly available docket materials are available electronically in

Regulations.gov

The EPA is temporarily suspending its Docket Center and Reading Room for public visitors to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19. Written

comments submitted by mail will be delayed and no hand deliveries will be accepted. Our Docket Center staff will continue to provide remote customer service via email, phone, and webform. We encourage the public to submit comments via

https://www.regulations.gov/.

For further information and updates on EPA Docket Center services, please visit us online at

https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

The EPA continues to carefully and continuously monitor information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, local area health departments, and our Federal partners so we can respond rapidly as conditions change regarding COVID-19.

Instructions.

Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0794. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at

https://www.regulations.gov/,

including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through

https://www.regulations.gov/

or email. This type of information should be submitted by mail as discussed below.

The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (

i.e.,

on the Web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

The

https://www.regulations.gov/

website allows you to submit your comment anonymously, which means the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through

https://www.regulations.gov/,

your email 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, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any digital storage media you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should not include special characters or any form of encryption and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about the EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at

https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

Submitting CBI.

Do not submit information containing CBI to the EPA through

https://www.regulations.gov/

or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on any digital storage media that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the digital storage media as CBI and then identify electronically within the digital storage media the specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comments that includes information claimed as CBI, you must submit a copy of the comments that does not contain the information claimed as CBI directly to the public docket through the procedures outlined in

Instructions

above. If you submit any digital storage media that does not contain CBI, mark the outside of the digital storage media clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and the EPA's electronic public docket without prior notice. Information marked as CBI will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 2. Send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the following address: OAQPS Document Control Officer (C404-02), OAQPS, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0794. Note that written comments containing CBI and submitted by mail will be delayed and no hand deliveries will be accepted.

II. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

Categories and entities potentially affected by this proposed action include:

Category

NAICS code

Examples of potentially regulated entities

Industry

221112

Fossil fuel-fired electric utility steam generating units (EGUs).

Federal government

221122

Fossil fuel-fired EGUs owned by the Federal government.

State/local/tribal government

221122

Fossil fuel-fired EGUs owned by municipalities.

921150

Fossil fuel-fired EGUs in Indian country.

North American Industry Classification System.

Federal, state, or local government-owned and operated establishments are classified according to the activity in which they are engaged.

This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this action. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now aware could potentially be regulated by this action. Other types of entities not listed in the table could also be regulated. To determine whether your entity is regulated by this proposed action, you should carefully examine the applicability criteria in 40 CFR 63.9981 of the rule. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult either the air permitting authority for the entity or your EPA Regional representative as listed in 40 CFR 63.13.

B. What action is the Agency taking?

The EPA proposes this rule to streamline the electronic data reporting requirements of MATS; to increase data transparency by making more of the MATS data available in Extensible Markup Language (XML) format; and to amend the reporting and recordkeeping requirements associated with performance stack tests, particulate matter (PM) and hydrogen chloride (HCl) CEMS, and PM continuous parameter monitoring systems (CPMS).

C. What is the Agency's authority for taking this action?

The Agency's authority for taking this action is found at 42 U.S.C. 7401

et seq.

D. What are the incremental costs and benefits of this action?

As discussed in section VII.C of this preamble, this action is expected to

reduce overall annual source burden by 11,000 hours per year, which when monetized is $15,079,000.

III. Background

These proposed amendments would revise the recordkeeping and reporting requirements of the MATS rule, in response to concerns raised by the regulated community. The MATS rule originally required affected EGU owners or operators to report MATS rule emissions and compliance information electronically using two data systems. See 40 CFR 63.10031 (77 FR 9304, February 16, 2012). Paragraph (a) of 40 CFR 63.10031 required EGU owners or operators that demonstrate compliance by continuously monitoring mercury (Hg) and/or HCl and/or hydrogen fluoride (HF) emissions to use the Emissions Collection and Monitoring Plan System (ECMPS) Client Tool to submit monitoring plan information, quality assurance test results, and hourly emissions data in accordance with appendices A and B to subpart UUUUU of 40 CFR part 63. Paragraph (f) of 40 CFR 63.10031 required performance stack test results, performance evaluations of Hg, HCl, HF, sulfur dioxide (SO

), and PM CEMS, 30-boiler operating day rolling average values for certain parameters, Notifications of Compliance Status, and semiannual compliance reports to be submitted to the EPA's WebFIRE database via the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI).

Subsequent to the publication of the MATS rule, stakeholders suggested to the EPA that the MATS rule electronic reporting burden could be significantly reduced if all of the required information were reported to one data system instead of two. The stakeholders also suggested that using one data system would benefit the EPA and the public in their review of MATS rule data, because the information would be reported in a consistent format. In view of these considerations, the stakeholders urged the EPA to consider amending the MATS rule to require all of the data to be reported through the ECMPS, a familiar data system that most EGU owners or operators have been using since 2009 to meet the electronic reporting requirements of the Acid Rain Program.

After careful consideration of the stakeholders' recommendations, the EPA concluded that the increased transparency of the emissions data and the reduction in reporting burden that could be achieved through the use of a single data system are consistent with Agency priorities. As a result, late in 2014 the EPA decided to take the necessary steps to require all of the electronic reports required by the MATS rule to be submitted through the ECMPS Client Tool. Those steps would include revising the MATS rule, modifying the ECMPS Client Tool, creating a detailed set of reporting instructions, and beta testing the modified software. Recognizing that insufficient time was available to complete these tasks before the initial compliance date for the MATS rule (April 16, 2015), the Agency embarked on a two-phased approach to complete them.

The first phase was completed when the EPA published a final rule requiring EGU owners or operators to suspend temporarily (until April 16, 2017) the use of the CEDRI interface as the means of submitting the reports described in 40 CFR 63.10031(f) introductory text and (f)(1), (2), and (4), and to use the ECMPS Client Tool to submit PDF versions of these reports on an interim basis (see 80 FR 15510, March 24, 2015). The specific reports required to be submitted as PDF files included: Performance stack test reports containing enough information to assess compliance and to demonstrate that the testing was done properly; relative accuracy test audit (RATA) reports for SO

, HCl, HF, and Hg CEMS; RATA reports for Hg sorbent trap monitoring systems; response correlation audit (RCA) and relative response audit (RRA) reports for PM CEMS; 30-boiler operating day rolling average reports for PM CEMS, PM CPMS, and approved hazardous air pollutants (HAP) metals CEMS; Notifications of Compliance Status; and semiannual compliance reports. Title 40 CFR 63.10031(f)(6) of the March 24, 2015, final rule required each PDF version of a submitted interim report to include information that identifies the facility (name and address), the EGU(s) to which the report applies, the applicable rule citations, and other information. The rule further specified that in the event that implementation of the single data system initiative was not completed by April 16, 2017, the electronic reporting of MATS data would revert to the original two systems approach on and after that date.

In the preamble to the March 24, 2015, final rule, the EPA outlined the second phase of the single data system initiative, to be executed during the interim PDF reporting period. In phase two: (1) The Agency would publish a direct final rule, requiring MATS-affected sources to use the ECMPS Client Tool to submit all required reports; and (2) a detailed set of reporting instructions would be developed and ECMPS would be modified to receive and process the data.

Considering the magnitude of the rule changes that would be required to execute phase two, coupled with the need to specify data elements to be reported electronically for PM CEMS, PM CPMS, and HCl CEMS, the Agency decided to provide stakeholders an opportunity to review and comment on the proposed changes. The EPA issued the proposed rule on September 29, 2016.

The comment period for the 2016 proposal (or previous proposal) was scheduled to close on October 31, 2016, but it was subsequently extended until November 15, 2016, in response to requests from several stakeholders for an extension.

81 FR 67062, September 29, 2016.

Commenters were generally supportive of the initiative to simplify and streamline the MATS reporting requirements and to use the ECMPS Client Tool as the single MATS rule reporting system. However, they expressed serious concerns about the proposal to extend the interim PDF reporting process from April 16, 2017, to December 31, 2017. Although they favored an extension of the PDF reporting, they were unanimous in asserting that the proposed end date of December 31, 2017, would not allow enough time to finalize the rule, develop the necessary XML reporting formats and reporting instructions, and reprogram the ECMPS Client Tool. In addition, two data acquisition and handling system vendors stated that more time would be needed for them to adapt to the proposed changes and to develop the reporting software for their customers. Some of the commenters recommended that the EPA should extend the interim PDF reporting process through calendar year 2019; others suggested that the process should be extended for 6 to 8 calendar quarters after finalization of the rule.

In view of these considerations, on April 6, 2017, the EPA published a final rule extending the interim PDF file reporting process through June 30, 2018 (82 FR 16736). Technical corrections to appendix A were also included in the rule package. The rule went into effect on April 6, 2017. As the Agency was unable to compete the e-reporting provisions, another extension to the interim PDF file reporting process—through June 30, 2020—was promulgated on July 2, 2018 (83 FR 30879). This action proposes to further extend the interim PDF reporting process through December 31, 2023, and proposes the remaining needed amendments to the MATS rule on

electronic reporting. Note that these proposed amendments were developed after consideration of the comments received on the September 29, 2016, proposal.

IV. What is the scope of these proposed amendments?

This proposed action would amend the reporting requirements in 40 CFR 63.10031 of the MATS regulation, and, for consistency with those changes, would amend related text in 40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU; specifically, 40 CFR 63.10000, 63.10005, 63.10009, 63.10010, 63.10011, 63.10020, 63.10021, 63.10030, 63.10032, 63.10042, and Tables 3, 8, and 9. The recordkeeping and reporting sections of appendices A and B are also proposed to be amended

and three new appendices are proposed to be added to the rule,

i.e.,

appendices C, D, and E. Instead of using the electronic reporting tool (ERT) to submit some of the MATS data via CEDRI and submitting the remainder through the ECMPS Client Tool, as was required by the original MATS rule, this proposed action would allow EGU owners or operators to use the ECMPS Client Tool to report all of the required information in XML and PDF files.

In 2015, the EPA published a technology-neutral performance specification and associated quality assurance (QA) test procedures for HCl monitors (see Performance Specification 18 (PS 18) and Quality Assurance Procedure 6 (Procedure 6) in 80 FR 38628, July 7, 2015). That rule added certification and QA test requirements for sources electing to monitor HCl according to PS 18 and Procedure 6. This proposed action would require the results of the appendix B certification and QA tests to be reported electronically for periods beginning on January 1, 2024.

V. What specific amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU, are proposed by this action?

The proposed amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU, are discussed in detail in the paragraphs below.

A. Proposed Revisions to the Reporting Requirements of MATS

The reporting requirements of MATS are proposed to be amended as follows:

(1) The ECMPS Client Tool would be used as the exclusive data system for MATS reporting, in lieu of using both ECMPS and the CEDRI.

(2) The interim PDF reporting process described in 40 CFR 63.10031(f) would be further extended through December 31, 2023, to allow sufficient time for software development, programming, and testing. Until then, compliance with the emissions and operating limits would continue to be assessed based on the various PDF report submittals described in 40 CFR 63.10031(f) and data from Hg, HCl, HF, and SO

CEMS and sorbent trap monitoring systems, as reported through the ECMPS Client Tool. On and after January 1, 2024, compliance with the emissions and operating limits would be assessed based on: (1) Quarterly compliance reports; (2) hourly data from all continuous monitoring systems (CMS) (including PM CEMS and PM CPMS) in XML format; (3) detailed reference method information for stack tests and CMS performance evaluations in XML format and PDF files; (4) Notifications of Compliance Status (if any), in PDF files; and, (5) if applicable, supplementary data in PDF files for EGUs using paragraph (2) of the definition of “startup” in 40 CFR 63.10042. The ECMPS Client Tool would be used to submit all of these reports and notifications.

(3) In order to properly close out the interim PDF reporting process, 40 CFR 63.10031(f)(6) would state that PDF submittals will still be accepted as necessary for the reports required under paragraph (f) introductory text, (f)(1), (2), or (4) if the deadlines for submitting those reports extend beyond December 31, 2023. As an example, the last semiannual compliance report under the interim PDF reporting process would cover the period from July 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023; the deadline for submitting this report would be January 30, 2024, and the report would be submitted using the interim PDF reporting process.

(4) Revised paragraph (f)(2) of 40 CFR 63.10031 would expand the quarterly reporting of 30- or 90-boiler operating day rolling average emission rates to include units monitoring Hg, HCl, HF, and/or SO

emissions, and units using emissions averaging. This change is consistent with 40 CFR 63.10031(f)(2) of the current rule, which requires quarterly reporting of 30-boiler operating day rolling averages for EGUs using PM CEMS, PM CPMS, and approved HAP metals CEMS. Therefore, starting with the first quarter of 2024, the 30- or 90-boiler operating day rolling averages (or, if applicable, rolling weighted average emission rates (WAERs) if emissions averaging is used) would be reported quarterly in XML format for all parameters (including Hg, HF, HCl, and SO

). However, instead of providing these rolling averages in separate, stand-alone reports, they would be incorporated into the quarterly compliance reports required under 40 CFR 63.10031(g) (see section IV.A.(9) of this preamble, below).

(5) Revised paragraphs (a)(1), (2), and (5) of 40 CFR 63.10031 would clarify the electronic reporting requirements for the Hg, HCl, HF, SO

, and auxiliary CMS. Specifically:

(i) Paragraph (a)(1) would require the electronic reporting requirements of appendix A to be met if Hg CEMS or sorbent trap monitoring systems are used.

(ii) Paragraph (a)(2) would require the electronic reporting requirements of appendix B to be met, with one important qualification, if HCl or HF monitoring systems are used. Until December 31, 2023, if Performance Specification (PS) 18 in part 60, appendix B, is used to certify an HCl monitor and Procedure 6 in part 60, appendix F, is used for on-going quality assurance (QA) of the monitor, EGU owners or operators would temporarily report only data that the existing programming of ECMPS is able to accommodate,

i.e.,

hourly HCl emissions data and the results of daily calibration drift tests and RATAs; records would have to be kept of all of the other required certification and QA tests and supporting data. The reason for this temporary, limited reporting is that PS 18 and Procedure 6 were not published until July 7, 2015; therefore, it was not possible to specify recordkeeping and reporting requirements for them in the original version of appendix B. Now that PS 18 and Procedure 6 have been finalized, this rule would add the necessary recordkeeping and reporting requirements, and the interim reporting for HCl would be discontinued as of January 1, 2024 (for further discussion, see section IV.C of this preamble).

(iii) Paragraph (a)(5) would clarify the electronic reporting requirements for the SO

CEMS and the auxiliary monitoring systems under MATS. Sources currently reporting SO

mass emissions under the Acid Rain Program or Cross-State Air Pollution Rule already meet these requirements, except for paragraphs (a)(5)(iii)(C) and (E), which would require, respectively, quarterly reporting of an hourly SO

emission rate data stream in units of the applicable MATS standard (

i.e.,

pounds per British thermal units (lb/MMBtu) or pounds per megawatt hours (lb/MWh)) and certification statements from the responsible official. Separate certification statements would be required for the 40 CFR part 75 programs and MATS. (

Note:

For consistency with the changes described in items (i) through (iii), immediately above, 40 CFR 63.10031(f)(3) would be removed and reserved).

(6) Paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of 40 CFR 63.10031 would be amended to recognize that some EGUs may have received extensions of their compliance

date under 40 CFR 63.6(i)(4). References to postmark dates for submittal of semiannual compliance reports paragraphs would be removed from paragraphs (b)(2) and (4); these reports currently are, and would continue to be, submitted electronically through ECMPS as PDF files, until they are superseded by quarterly compliance reports, starting in the first quarter of 2024.

(7) The provision in 40 CFR 63.10031(b)(5), which allowed affected EGU owners or operators to follow alternate submission schedules for semiannual compliance reports would be removed. The uniform submission schedule described in 40 CFR 63.10031(b)(1) through (4) would be required for all affected EGUs, so that compliance with this reporting requirement can easily be tracked.

(8) Revised 40 CFR 63.10031(b)(5) would require EGU owners or operators to discontinue submission of semiannual compliance reports when the interim PDF reporting period ends. The final semi-annual compliance report would cover the period from July 1, 2023, through December 31, 2023.

(9) EGU owners or operators would submit quarterly compliance reports in lieu of the semiannual compliance reports, starting with reports covering the first quarter of 2023 (see 40 CFR 63.10031(g)). The quarterly compliance reports would retain many features of the semiannual reports and consolidate them with other reports that were originally required to be submitted separately on different schedules. These compliance reports would be due within 60 days after the end of each calendar quarter, which would allow sufficient time to receive the results of stack tests (particularly PM, HCl, and HF tests) performed at or near the end of a calendar quarter. Each quarterly compliance report would include the applicable data elements listed in sections 2 through 13 of appendix E.

The owner or operator's MATS compliance strategy determines which of the data elements in sections 2-13 of appendix E would be included in the quarterly compliance reports. If continuous emission monitoring were used to demonstrate compliance on a 30- or 90-boiler operating day rolling average basis, the quarterly compliance reports would include all of the 30- or 90-day averages calculated during the quarter. If emissions averaging were used, EGU owners or operators would report all of the 30- or 90-group boiler operating day WAERs calculated during the quarter. If periodic stack testing for compliance were performed (including Hg Low-Emitting EGU (LEE) tests and PM tests to set operating limits for PM CPMS), the EGU owner or operator would report a summary of each test completed during the calendar quarter and indicate whether the test has a special purpose (

i.e.,

if it were to be used to establish LEE status or for emissions averaging).

The quarterly compliance reports would retain and incorporate the following features of the semiannual compliance reports: (1) Boiler tune-up dates; (2) monthly fuel usage data; (3) process and control equipment malfunction information; (4) reporting of deviations; and (5) emergency bypass information, for certain EGUs that qualify for and elect to use the LEE compliance option for Hg. However, for EGU owners or operators who elect to (or are required to) use CMS to demonstrate compliance, these quarterly reports, to some extent, would move away from traditional “exception only” reporting. Currently, reporting of the excess emissions and monitor downtime information described in 40 CFR 63.10(e)(3)(v) and (vi) in PDF files has been required as part of the semiannual compliance reports. That information includes, among other things, identification of excess emissions periods, identification of periods when the monitoring system was inoperative or out of control, the reasons for the excess emission and monitor downtime periods, corrective actions or preventative measures taken, description of repairs or adjustments to inoperative or out-of-control CMS, the total amount of source operating time in the reporting period, and the excess emissions and monitor downtime, expressed as percentages of the source operating time. As explained above, rather than this traditional exception-only reporting, these proposed amendments would require all of the 30- (or 90-) boiler operating day rolling averages or WAERs for all parameters to be included in the quarterly compliance reports. In addition, the following elements of the excess emissions summary, with slight modifications, are proposed to be included in the quarterly compliance reports: (1) The total number of source operating hours in the quarter and (2) the total number of hours of monitoring system downtime for various causes (known and unknown).

As previously noted, the requirement to report deviations would be retained in the quarterly compliance reports. Specifically, the revisions to 40 CFR 63.10031(d) would require the applicable data elements in section 13 of appendix E to be reported, which include the nature of the deviation (section 13.2), a description of the deviation (section 13.3), and any corrective actions taken (section 13.4). Section 13.3 further specifies the minimum amount of information that would be reported in the description of certain deviations (

i.e.,

unmonitored bypass stack usage, emissions or operating limit exceedances, monitoring system outages, and missed or late performance stack tests).

We believe that consolidating information in quarterly compliance reports, as described above, rather than requiring separate submittals of 30- (or 90-) boiler operating day rolling average reports, excess emissions reports, and semiannual compliance reports that come in separately at different times during the year, greatly simplifies reporting and will make it easier for inspectors and auditors to assess compliance with the standards. Also, quarterly, as opposed to semiannual, reporting is advantageous because it shortens significantly the interval between the time that deviation or exceedance reporting on a term longer than quarterly occurs. Draft reporting instructions for the quarterly compliance reports are provided in the rule docket and on the OAQPS and Clean Air Markets Division (CAMD) websites. In response to comments received, these instructions have been modified from a previous draft version.

(10) A new paragraph, (c)(10), is being proposed to be added to § 63.10031 and would require malfunction information to be included in the semiannual compliance reports. This is not a new requirement; it was previously found in paragraph (g). However, as explained above, revised paragraph (g) would require quarterly compliance reports to be submitted, starting in 2024. Therefore, to avoid losing the requirement to report malfunction information in the semiannual compliance reports, the former paragraph (g) would be renamed as paragraph (c)(10) and would be added to the list of information that must be included in the semiannual reports. The introductory text of paragraph (c) would also be amended, to recognize the addition of paragraph (c)(10).

(11) For consistency with the reporting requirements for the other CMS, the Agency is not proposing a requirement for sources using PM CPMS to submit separate quarterly excess emission summary reports in addition to the quarterly compliance reports. After careful consideration of comments on a previous proposal, we are persuaded that sufficient information to assess compliance with the operating limits of a PM CPMS would be provided

by: (1) The hourly PM CPMS response data reported in appendix D; (2) the quarterly compliance reports, which specify the operating limit of the PM CPMS, require deviations from the operating limit and monitoring requirements to be reported, and include summarized results of the PM tests used to develop the operating limits; and (3) the applicable reference method data for the PM tests required to be reported under sections 17-30 of appendix E.

We are proposing to amend Table 9 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU, as follows to reflect the transition away from exception-only reporting. The applicability of the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for excess emission and monitor downtime summary reporting in 40 CFR 63.10(c)(7), 63.7(c)(8), and 63.10(e)(3) would end on December 31, 2023, with the phase-out of the semiannual compliance reports.

(12) One commenter on the previous proposal brought to light some inconsistencies in the rule; regarding the way in which periods of monitor downtime should be regarded and reported,

i.e.,

whether or not they are reportable deviations. The commenter pointed out that 40 CFR 63.10020(d) exempts monitoring equipment malfunctions and out-of-control periods from being reported as deviations, whereas 40 CFR 63.10010(h)(6)(i), (i)(5)(i)(A) and (B), and (j)(4)(i)(A) and (B) appear to say the opposite, requiring these downtime incidents to be included in “annual deviation reports.” The EPA never intended to exempt these particular monitor outages from being reported as deviations; the Agency meant for the exemption to apply only to routine QA and maintenance activities.

Therefore, 40 CFR 63.10020(d) would be clarified, and the statements in 40 CFR 63.10010(h)(6)(i), (i)(5)(i)(A) and (B), and (j)(4)(i)(A) and (B) more closely represent the Agency's position. But even there, the text is problematic, because deviations are currently required to be reported in the semiannual compliance reports (not in “annual deviation reports”) and will continue to be reported in the quarterly compliance reports when the transition to quarterly reporting occurs. To address the inconsistencies in 40 CFR 63.10020(d) and 63.10010(h)(6)(i), (i)(5)(i)(A) and (B), and (j)(4)(i)(A) and (B), the proposed rule would amend these rule sections by clarifying that monitor outages due to monitoring equipment malfunctions and out-of-control periods are deviations, and, therefore, would be reported as such in the compliance reports.

The following statement from the preamble of the original MATS rule makes this clear: “Hours when a monitoring system is out of service would be counted as hours of monitor down-time and may be a deviation from the monitoring requirements of this rule unless the rule provides an exception for routine quality control and maintenance activities.” (77 FR 9375, February 16, 2012).

The same commenter further asserted that there are other incorrect statements in 40 CFR 63.10010(h)(6)(i), (i)(5)(i)(A), and (j)(4)(i)(A) and (B), regarding the reporting of quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) activities for PM CPMS, PM CEMS, and HAP metals CEMS. These rule sections all require the QA/QC activities to be reported “per the requirements of 40 CFR 63.10031(b).” However, the reference to 40 CFR 63.10031(b), which provides the schedule for submitting semiannual compliance reports, appears to be a typographical error. The commenter recommended replacing it with a more general reference to 40 CFR 63.10031. The EPA agrees with the commenter that the reference to 40 CFR 63.10010(b) is inappropriate; but the comment led to examination of inconsistencies between language in 40 CFR 63.10010(h)(6)(i), (i)(5)(i)(A), and (j)(4)(i)(A) and (B) and language in 40 CFR 63.10010(h)(7), (i)(5)(ii), and (j)(4)(ii). The former sections require QA/QC activities for PM CPMS, PM CEMS, and HAP metals CEMS to be reported, while the latter sections state that the results of monitoring system performance audits must only be made available “upon request.” The Agency maintains reporting of QA test results is mandatory for all CMS. In view of this, the EPA proposes the following amendments. First, the reference to 40 CFR 63.10010(b) in the last sentence in paragraphs (h)(6)(i) and (j)(4)(i)(A) and (B) would be removed. Second, paragraphs (h)(7) and (j)(4)(ii) would be revised to require the monitoring system performance evaluations of PM CPMS and HAP metals CEMS to be reported. Third, a new paragraph, (k), would be added to 40 CFR 63.10031, and would require the QA/QC activities for PM CPMS and HAP metals CEMS to be reported quarterly in PDF files; these reports would be due within 60 days after the end of each calendar quarter, starting with a report for the first quarter of 2024 or, if the methodology is not in use by the source owner or operator in the first quarter of 2024, starting with the first calendar quarter in which the PM CPMS or HAP metals CEMS methodology is used. Reporting as PDF files is appropriate because there are no standardized QA test procedures for these CMS in the CFR; their QA test requirements are found only in source-specific MATS monitoring plans and will likely vary from source-to-source. Finally, 40 CFR 63.10010(i) would be revised in light of the addition of appendix C; paragraph (i) now simply cross-references the appropriate sections of appendix C, regarding the certification, operation, maintenance, on-going QA, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements for PM CEMS.

(13) In all cases in which periodic stack tests (including Hg LEE tests and PM tests that are used to develop PM CPMS operating limits) are performed to demonstrate compliance, the proposal would retain the requirement for the EGU owner or operator to provide the applicable reference method data in appendix E (

i.e.,

sections 17

et seq.

) for each stack test that is performed to demonstrate compliance. Each of these submittals would be required to accompany the quarterly compliance report that covers the calendar quarter in which the test was completed. For PM tests that are used to develop PM CPMS operating limits, you would also be required to include the information in 40 CFR 63.10023(b)(2)(vi) as part of the Test Comment data element found in section 17.25 of appendix E.

(14) The applicable reference method data in sections 17 through 30 of appendix E would also be provided in XML format, starting with tests completed on or after January 1, 2024, for each RATA of an Hg, SO

, HCl, or HF monitoring system, and for each RRA, RCA, or correlation test of a PM CEMS. The information in section 31 of appendix E would also be provided in a PDF file for each test. The appendix E information would be submitted concurrently with the summarized electronic test results submitted to ECMPS under appendix A, B, or C, or 40 CFR part 75 (for SO

RATAs).

(15) The ECMPS Client Tool would also be used to make the following submittals in PDF files:

(i) A detailed report of the current, active PS 11 correlation test, if the EGU owner or operator is using a certified PM CEMS to demonstrate compliance. For correlation tests completed prior to [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE

FEDERAL REGISTER

], the report would be due no later than 60 days after that date. For correlation tests completed on or after [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE

FEDERAL REGISTER

], but prior to January 1, 2024, the report would be due within 60 days after the date on which the test is completed. (

Note:

For correlations completed on and after January 1, 2024,

in lieu of a PDF report, the test results would be submitted electronically according to section 7.2.4 of appendix C, together with the applicable reference method data required under sections 17 through 31 of appendix E);

(ii) Any initial Notification of Compliance Status issued on or after January 1, 2024; and

(iii) The information specified in 40 CFR 63.10031(c)(5)(ii) and 63.10020(e) for startup and shutdown incidents, if you are relying on paragraph (2) of the definition of “startup” in 40 CFR 63.10042. Starting with a report covering the first calendar quarter of 2024, this information would be submitted along with the quarterly compliance report. Note that 40 CFR 63.10031(c)(5)(iii) through (v), which require the semiannual compliance reports to include the hourly CEMS and operating parameter data recorded during startup and shutdown events have not been carried over to this PDF report because this information is duplicative of the hourly data reported electronically in the quarterly emissions reports. Startup and shutdown hours are flagged in the emissions reports and are identifiable for auditing purposes.

(16) To accommodate the required PDF reports, the applicable data elements in 40 CFR 63.10031(f)(6)(i) through (xii) would be proposed to be entered into the ECMPS Client Tool at the time of submission of each PDF file. Note that the amendment to data element (xii) would replace the word “conducted” with the word “completed.”

(17) Although the ECMPS Client Tool would be used to submit the required reports and notifications described in revised 40 CFR 63.10031 and Table 8, ECMPS would not evaluate any of the PDF submittals or any of the XML-formatted reference method data from sections 17 through 31 of appendix E. Instead, these reports and notifications would be transmitted directly through the EPA's Central Data Exchange using CEDRI unaltered. ECMPS would, however, perform electronic checking of the hourly PM CEMS data and the summarized RATAs, PM CEMS correlation tests, RRAs, and RCAs that are submitted in XML format, in a manner that is consistent with the way that certification and QA test results are evaluated under the Acid Rain and Cross-State Air Pollution Rule programs. ECMPS would use the results of these evaluations to assess the quality-assured status of the Hg, HCl, HF, SO

, or PM emissions data. In addition, ECMPS would perform basic checks of the information in the quarterly compliance reports,

e.g.,

checking for completeness and proper formatting, but would leave compliance assessment to those who review the reports. The EPA intends for all of these various data submissions to work together in a complementary fashion to enable meaningful compliance determinations. It is essential that any problems with the data identified by the reviewers are communicated to all involved and resolved appropriately. For example, if, for a particular Hg RATA, a review of the reference method data shows that the method was not done properly, the RATA would be invalidated. If, at the time of this discovery, the deadline for performing the RATA has passed and the allowable grace period has also expired, this would result in invalidation of hourly emissions data, from the expiration of the grace period until a valid RATA is performed and passed. Consequently, resubmission of quarterly emissions reports, recalculation of 30-day compliance averages, and resubmission of quarterly compliance reports may become necessary.

B. Revisions to Appendix A

We are proposing to amend four sections of appendix A,

i.e.,

sections 7.1.3.3, 7.1.4.3, 7.1.8.2 and 7.2.3.1, based on comments received. The requirement in sections 7.1.3.3, 7.1.4.3, and 7.1.8.2 to report Hg concentrations and emission rates to 3 significant figures would be revised so that Hg concentrations in micrograms per standard cubic meter (μg/scm) and Hg emission rates in pounds per trillion British Thermal Units or pounds per gigawatt-hour (lb/TBtu or lb/GWh) would be reported with one leading non-zero digit and one decimal place, in scientific notation. Conventional rounding would be used,

i.e.,

The requirement in section 7.2.3.1 to submit monitoring plan information at least 21 days before the applicable compliance date in 40 CFR 63.9984 would be revised. For new units or units that install Hg monitoring systems in order to switch from another MATS-compliant methodology to Hg monitoring, the monitoring plan information would be submitted at least 21 days prior to the date on which certification testing begins. However, for units implementing Hg monitoring with a previously-certified Hg monitoring system, the monitoring plan could be submitted prior to or concurrent with the first quarterly emissions report—provided that the monitoring plan would be in place when the first emissions report is submitted so that the ECMPS Client Tool would be able to evaluate the data.

C. Revisions to Appendix B

For affected source owners or operators desiring to continuously monitor HCl emissions, the original version of appendix B required the monitoring system to be certified according to PS 15 in appendix B to 40 CFR part 60. However, PS 15 applies only to Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy monitoring systems; therefore, the use of other viable HCl monitoring technologies was excluded. In view of this, the EPA regarded the requirement to use PS 15 exclusively as a temporary measure, until a technology-neutral PS for HCl monitors could be developed and published. In section 3.1 of appendix B, the Agency stated its intention to publish such a PS in the near future together with appropriate on-going QA requirements and to amend appendix B to accommodate their use. This additional PS, (PS 18 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B), and the on-going QA test requirements (Procedure 6 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix F) were published on July 7, 2015 (80 FR 38628, July 7, 2015).

Now that technology-neutral certification and QA test requirements for HCl monitors have been promulgated, EGU owners or operators may use any viable HCl monitoring technology that can meet the PS. However, in order for ECMPS to accommodate all of the tests required under PS 18 and Procedure 6, additional time must be allotted for software development. In view of this, we are proposing to revise 40 CFR 63.10031(a)(2), as previously noted, to require only information that is compatible with the existing programming of ECMPS to be reported electronically through December 31, 2023; this includes hourly HCl emissions data and the results of daily calibration drift tests and RATAs. In the interim, EGU owners or operators would be required to keep records of all of the other certification and QA tests, which would be reported starting in 2024.

We are proposing to revise the title to section 2.3 of appendix B by deleting the reference to FTIR-only monitoring systems. In addition, the recordkeeping and reporting sections of appendix B (

i.e.,

sections 10 and 11) would be amended. Based on comments received, sections 10.1.3.3 and 10.1.7.2, HCl and

HF concentrations (µg/scm) and emission rates (lb/MMBtu or lb/MWh) would be reported with one leading non-zero digit and one decimal place, in scientific notation, rather than reporting the concentrations and rates to 3 significant figures. Conventional rounding would be used,

i.e.,

if the digit immediately following the first decimal place is 5 or greater, the digit in the first decimal place would be rounded upward (increased by one); if the digit immediately following the first decimal place is 4 or less, the digit in the first decimal place would remain unchanged. Sections 10 and 11 also specify the data elements that would be recorded and reported for each of the tests required by PS 18 and Procedure 6. The revisions would make a clear distinction between the tests required for FTIR monitors that are following PS 15 and the test requirements of PS 18 and Procedure 6. Some of the tests in PS 18 and Procedure 6 are similar to tests for which ECMPS programming exists. For example, the “measurement error test” required for initial certification of the HCl monitor is structurally the same as a 40 CFR part 75 linearity check. Other tests have no counterpart in 40 CFR part 75 and would require special software development and reporting instructions. Note that electronic reporting of these tests through ECMPS would have been required if PS 18 and Procedure 6 had been in place when the original MATS rule was published. In view of this, for source owners or operators electing to use HCl CEMS, the amendments to section 11 of appendix B would introduce no unnecessary reporting burden. The results of certification and on-going QA tests would be reported electronically for all CEMS required under this rule in order for ECMPS to assess the quality-assured status of the emissions data. The Agency also notes that not all of the tests described in section 11 of appendix B would be required for all HCl monitors. For example, some of the tests (

i.e.,

beam intensity, temperature, and pressure verifications) are specific to Integrated Path—Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems (IP-CEMS), and Procedure 6 would offer a choice among three different types of audits (

i.e.,

cylinder gas audits, relative accuracy audits, or dynamic spiking audits) for the required quarterly QA tests. In addition, based on comments received, the reporting requirements for the interference check (which is not necessarily performed on each individual analyzer) would be reduced.

For each RATA of HCl CEMS that are completed on and after January 1, 2024, the applicable reference method data in sections 17 through 31 of appendix E would be submitted along with the electronic summary of results required under section 11 of appendix B. To the extent practicable, these data would be submitted prior to or concurrent with the relevant quarterly electronic emissions report. However, as previously noted, this may not always be possible, particularly when the RATA is done near the end of a calendar quarter. The EPA test Methods 26 and 26A, unlike instrumental test methods, require laboratory analyses of the collected samples and cannot provide test results while the test team is on-site. In view of this, section 11.4 of appendix B would allow the test results to be submitted up to 60 days after the test completion date. “Provisional” status may be claimed for the emissions data affected by the test, starting from the date and hour in which the test was completed, and continuing until the date and hour in which the test results are submitted. If the test is successful, the status of the data in that time period would change from provisional to quality-assured, and no further action is required. However, if the test is unsuccessful, the provisional data would be invalidated and resubmission of the affected emissions report(s) would be required.

Because a technology-neutral PS for HCl CEMS was not available prior to April 16, 2015 (which was the compliance date for many of the existing EGUs), EGU owners or operators interested in monitoring HCl either had to use an FTIR system and follow PS 15 or implement another compliance option (

e.g.,

quarterly emission testing) while awaiting publication of PS 18 and Procedure 6. In light of this, the EPA proposes to revise and restructure section 11.5.1 of appendix B to clarify when electronic reporting of hourly HCl emissions data begins. There are two possibilities. In the first case, the monitor is used for the initial compliance demonstration. This could either apply to a certified FTIR monitor following PS 15 or to a certified monitor following PS 18, if the owner or operator of the EGU received an extension of the compliance date. In this case, EGU owners or operators would begin reporting hourly HCl emissions through ECMPS with the first operating hour of the initial compliance demonstration. In the second case, another option, such as stack testing, is used for the initial compliance demonstration and continuous monitoring is implemented at a later time. In that case, EGU owners or operators would begin reporting hourly HCl emissions reporting through ECMPS with the first operating hour after successfully completing all required certification tests of the CEMS. In either case, the first quarterly emissions report submittal would be for the calendar quarter in which emissions reporting begins.

The requirement in section 11.3.1 to submit monitoring plan information at least 21 days before the applicable compliance date in 40 CFR 63.9984 would be revised. For new units or units that install HCl and/or HF monitoring systems in order to switch from another MATS-compliant methodology to HCl and/or HF monitoring, the monitoring plan information would be submitted at least 21 days prior to the date on which certification testing begins. However, for units implementing HCl and/or HF monitoring with a previously-certified monitoring system, the monitoring plan could be submitted prior to or concurrent with the first quarterly emissions report.

D. Addition of Appendix C

A new appendix,

i.e.,

appendix C, would been added to subpart UUUUU of 40 CFR part 63. Appendix C sets forth the continuous monitoring and reporting requirements for filterable PM. Appendix C is structurally similar to appendices A and B, but there is one notable difference. Appendix C would include provisions for installation and certification of the PM CEMS, and for on-going QA of the data from the CEMS. The monitoring system would be certified according to PS 11 in 40 CFR part 60, appendix B, and for the on-going QA tests, Procedure 2 to 40 CFR part 60, appendix F, would be required.

After consideration of comments received, the EPA has concluded that all PM concentrations should be reported in units of measure that are consistent with the PM CEMS correlation. For example, if the PM CEMS measures in units of milligrams per actual cubic meter (mg/acm) and the concentrations used to derive the correlation curve are in those same units, then the hourly PM concentrations would be recorded and reported in mg/acm. Section 7.1.9.5 of appendix C would also require the reference method readings and the PM CEMS responses obtained in the RRAs and RCAs to be reported in the same units of measure as the PM CEMS correlation curve.

Sections 7.1.3.3 and 7.1.7.2 would require PM concentrations and emission rates (lb/MMBtu or lb/MWh) to be reported with one leading non-zero digit and one decimal place, in scientific notation, rather than reporting the

concentrations and rates to three significant figures. Conventional rounding would be used,

i.e.,

The proposed frequencies for the on-going QA tests and the rules for data validation are presented in Section 5 of appendix C. In response to numerous requests from commenters, the frequency and data validation rules for the RCAs and RRAs are similar, but not identical to, provisions of 40 CFR part 75. The frequency of these tests would follow the familiar calendar quarter and grace period reporting plan. An RRA would be required once every four calendar quarters and an RCA would be required once every 12 calendar quarters. A grace period would be provided (

i.e.,

720 operating hours or one calendar quarter, whichever comes first), to cover cases where circumstances beyond the control of the owner or operator prevent the required test from being completed on schedule. In addition, as explained in detail below, section 7.2.4 of appendix C would allow the use of provisional data for up to 60 days after completion of an RRA, RCA, or PM CEMS correlation test.

The proposed procedures for calculating the PM emission rates in units of the emission standard are found in section 6. These calculation methods are basically the same as those used for Hg monitoring systems and for HCl and HF CEMS in appendices A and B. The proposed recordkeeping and reporting requirements are found in section 7. Section 7.1 proposed that monitoring plan records and hourly records of operating parameters, PM concentration, diluent gas concentration, stack gas flow rate and moisture content, and PM emission rate would be kept. Sections 7.2.3 and 7.2.4, respectively, would require monitoring plan information and the results of certification, recertification, and QA tests to be reported electronically. For consistency with these revisions to appendices A and B, section 7.2.3.1 would specify that for new units or units installing PM CEMS in order to switch from another MATS-compliant methodology to PM monitoring, the electronic monitoring plan information would be submitted at least 21 days prior to the commencement of certification testing. However, for units with previously-certified PM CEMS that elect to implement PM monitoring, the monitoring plan information could be submitted prior to or concurrent with the first quarterly emissions report. Section 7.2.5 would require quarterly electronic emissions reports to be submitted within 30 days after the end of each calendar quarter. All electronic reports would be submitted using the ECMPS Client Tool. However, for EGUs that have begun using the PM CEMS compliance option prior to January 1, 2024, electronic reporting of monitoring plan information, certification and on-going QA test results, hourly PM emissions data, and the applicable reference method data in appendix E would not begin until January 1, 2024, to allow time for software development and beta testing. Until then, records of the required information and tests would be kept. For EGUs that certify and begin using PM CEMS on or after January 1, 2024, reporting of hourly PM emissions data would begin with the first operating hour after successful completion of the initial PM CEMS correlation test.

For PM CEMS correlations, RRAs, and RCAs that are completed on and after January 1, 2024, the applicable reference method data in sections 17 through 31 of appendix E would be submitted along with the electronic test summary required under section 7.2.4 of appendix C. To the extent practicable, the electronic test results and the appendix E reference method data would be submitted prior to or concurrent with the relevant quarterly electronic emissions report. However, the EPA recognizes that this is not always possible, particularly when an RRA or RCA is done near the end of a calendar quarter. The EPA test Methods 5 and 5D, unlike instrumental test methods, require laboratory analyses of the collected samples and generally cannot provide test results while the test team is on-site. In view of this, section 7.2.4 of appendix C would allow the test results to be submitted up to 60 days after the test completion date. “Provisional” status could be claimed for the emissions data affected by the test, starting from the date and hour in which the test was completed, and continuing until the date and hour in which the test results are submitted. If the test is successful, the status of the data in that time period would change from provisional to quality-assured, and no further action is required. However, if the test is unsuccessful, the provisional data would be invalidated, and resubmission of the affected emission report(s) would be required.

E. Addition of Appendix D

We are proposing a second new appendix,

i.e.,

appendix D, be added to subpart UUUUU of 40 CFR part 63. Appendix D would set forth the monitoring and reporting requirements for EGU owners or operators who elect to use a PM CPMS to demonstrate continuous compliance. Structurally, appendix D would be similar to appendices A, B, and C. However, the criteria for system design and performance, the procedures for determining operating limits, data reduction, and compliance assessment, and certain recordkeeping requirements are not detailed in the appendix; rather, the applicable sections of the MATS rule are cross-referenced (see sections 2.1 through 2.4, 3.1 introductory text, and section 3.1.1.1 of the appendix).

Section 3.1.1.2 would require the ECMPS Client Tool to be used to create and maintain an electronic monitoring plan. The PM CPMS would be defined as a monitoring system with a unique system ID number. The monitoring plan would also include the current operating limit (with units of measure), the make, model, and serial number of the PM CPMS, the analytical principle of the monitoring system, and monitor span and range information.

We are proposing to require operating parameter records for each hour of operation of the affected EGUs, including the date and hour, the EGU or stack operating time, and a flag to identify exempt startup and shutdown hours. Hourly average PM CPMS output values would be reported for each hour in which a valid value of the output parameter is obtained, in units of milliamps, PM concentration, or other units of measure, including the instrument's digital signal output equivalent. A special code would be required to indicate operating hours in which valid data are not obtained. The percent monitor data availability would also be calculated in the manner established for SO

, carbon dioxide (CO

), oxygen (O

), or moisture monitoring systems in 40 CFR 75.32.

Sections 3.2.2 and 3.2.3, respectively, would require notifications (to be provided in accordance with section 63.10030) and electronic monitoring plan submittals at specified times. For units using the PM CPMS compliance option prior to January 1, 2024, the electronic monitoring plan information would be submitted prior to or concurrent with the first quarterly report. For units switching to the PM CPMS compliance option on or after January 1, 2024, the electronic monitoring plan would be submitted no

later than 21 days prior to the PM test that establishes the initial operating limit. Section 3.2.4 would require the electronic quarterly reports to be submitted within 30 days after the end of each calendar quarter. Reporting of hourly responses from the PM CPMS would begin either with the first operating hour of 2024 or the first operating hour after completion of the stack test that establishes the initial operating limit, whichever is later. Each quarterly report would include a compliance certification with a statement by a responsible official that to the best of his or her knowledge, the report is true, accurate, and complete.

In addition to the electronic quarterly reports, we are proposing to require reporting of deviations from the operating limit in the quarterly compliance reports required under 40 CFR 63.10031(g). Further, section 3.2.5 of appendix D would require the results of each performance stack test for PM that is used to establish an operating limit to be reported electronically in the relevant quarterly compliance report. For PM tests completed on and after January 1, 2024, the applicable appendix E reference method data would also be submitted along with the relevant quarterly compliance report.

F. Addition of Appendix E

We are proposing to add a third new appendix,

i.e.,

appendix E, to subpart UUUUU of 40 CFR part 63. Sections 2 through 13 of appendix E list the data elements that would be reported in XML format in the quarterly compliance reports required under 40 CFR 63.10031(g), starting with reports covering the first quarter of 2024.

The MATS compliance strategy (

e.g.,

whether the EGU owner or operator elects to perform periodic stack testing, continuous monitoring, or to use emissions averaging) and the events that occur during each calendar quarter determine which data elements in sections 2 through 13 would be included in the quarterly compliance reports. As noted in section V.A.(9), updated reporting instructions for these compliance reports are found in the rule docket and are posted on the CAMD and MATS websites.

For reasons stated in the previous proposal's Response to Comments document (which is available in the rule docket

), we are proposing to retain the basic provisions of proposed sections 14 through 21 of appendix E, requiring details of the reference methods used for performance stack tests and continuous monitoring system performance evaluations to be reported in XML format. The rule would also retain the proposed requirement in section 22 of appendix E to provide reference method test information that is incompatible with electronic reporting as PDF files, although it has been renumbered as section 31 and modified to include a cross-reference to 40 CFR 63.7(g), which describes the contents of a performance test report. The applicable reference method information in appendix E would be provided for each stack test; each RATA of a Hg, HCl, HF, or SO

monitoring system; and each RRA, RCA, or correlation test of a PM CEMS that is completed on and after January 1, 2024.

See EPA-HQ-OAR-2018-0794 at

https://www.regulations.gov/.

To address concerns raised by the commenters about portions of the 2016 proposed rule

(the previous proposal), specifically, the reporting requirements in sections 17 through 21 of proposed appendix E, the Agency proposes to revise and reformat the data element lists to correspond to the compliance options described in section 16 of appendix E. Explicitly, sections 17 through 30 would replace previously proposed sections 17 through 21. Commenters pointed out, and the Agency concurs, that some of the previously proposed data elements are either unnecessary, inapplicable to MATS, or duplicative of information in other MATS reports; these elements are proposed to be removed from the lists and include:

As mentioned in footnote 1, see 81 FR 67062 from September 29, 2016.

• Previously proposed 7.1.3.3.1 of appendix C to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 7.1.3.3.2 of appendix C to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 7.1.3.3.3 of appendix C to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 7.1.3.4 of appendix C to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 10.4 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 10.5.1 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 10.5.2 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 10.5.7 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 17.28 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 17.30 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 17.37 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 18.21 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 19.29 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 20.4 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 20.15 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 20.17 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 20.21 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 20.25 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 20.30 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 20.36 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 20.37 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 20.41 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 20.42 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 20.44 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 20.46 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 20.52 of appendix E to this subpart;

• Previously proposed 21.14 of appendix E to this subpart; and

• Previously proposed 21.28 of appendix E to this subpart.

Reporting instructions for sections 17 through 30 have been developed. These proposed, draft example instructions are included in the rule docket and are posted on the MATS and CAMD websites.

The reorganized data element lists and corresponding instructions clarify which data elements are proposed to be reported for each compliance option and explain how the data are to be reported. Several new data elements are proposed for the lists, to enable the ECMPS Client Tool to be used, to enhance the quality of the data, and to facilitate compliance. As mentioned in VI.C of this preamble, this proposed action is expected to reduce overall annual source burden. The Agency believes that the proposed addition of these data elements is offset by the proposed removal of others, the proposed change to a consistent submission frequency, and the proposed merger of separate electronic reporting systems into just one electronic reporting system such that overall annual source reporting burden is reduced by 11,000 hours. The proposed new data elements to be reported are as follows:

• “Part.” The previous proposal would only have required the “Subpart” to be reported. To avoid any possible confusion with other EPA regulations, both the CFR part (63) and subpart (UUUUU) need to be included in the reports.

• “APS Flags.” For 3-level pre-test calibrations, system bias, and drift checks, instrumental EPA test Methods

3A and 6C require certain acceptance criteria to be met. For each of these tests, there is a main PS and an alternative specification. The main PS is expressed as a percentage of span, while the alternative specification is the absolute difference between a reference value and the measured value. In view of this, it is important to know which specification has been applied to ascertain whether the test was successful or not. Therefore, alternative performance specification (APS) flags are proposed to be added for the pre- and post-test calibrations, bias checks, and drift checks. An APS flag of “0” indicates that the reported test result is based on the main performance specification, whereas an APS flag of “1” means that the reported result is based on the alternative specification.

• “Test Comment.” This text field is proposed to be added to allow the affected sources to provide additional, pertinent information about a particular test.

• “Run Begin Date” and “Run End Date.” These two data elements are proposed to replace the previous proposed element “Run Date” to cover cases where a test run begins on one day and ends on another (

e.g.,

if a run begins late at night and ends early the next morning).

• “Converted Concentration and Units of Measure.” These proposed data elements apply to correlation tests and performance audits (RRAs and RCAs) of PM CEMS. The reference method used for these tests is EPA test Method 5 (or, if applicable, 5D). The PM concentrations obtained from EPA test Method 5 or 5D are expressed in units of grams per dry standard cubic meter (g/dscm). However, consistent with section 8.6 of PS 11, appendix C of MATS proposes to require all PM concentrations to be reported in units of measure that are consistent with the PM CEMS correlation curve. Most PM CEMS measure concentration in units of milligrams per actual cubic meter (mg/acm); others may measure at a certain temperature (

e.g.,

mg/acm at 160 °Celsius), and still others may measure on a dry basis. Therefore, in addition to reporting the EPA test Method 5 test results in units of g/dscm, the converted PM concentrations would be reported in units consistent with the PM CEMS correlation curve.

• “Average Sampling Rate and Units of Measure.” These proposed data elements are specific to EPA test Method 30B. That EPA test Method 30B requires a post-test leak check of each sampling train. The leakage rate must not exceed 4 percent of the average sampling rate. Therefore, to assess compliance with this specification, both the leakage rate and the average sampling rate would be reported. The previous proposed rule only required the leakage rate to be reported.

• “Control Device Code.” This proposed data element refers to the control device code or control technology National Emission Inventory (NEI) code associated with the EGU (or group of EGUs sharing a common stack). Providing this data element would help in EGU categorization and emission factor development.

• “Corresponding Reference Method(s), if applicable.” This proposed data element allows pollutant reference method run data to be associated with concurrent measurements of the stack gas flow rate using EPA test Method 2, and/or CO

or O

concentration using EPA test Method 3A, and/or stack gas moisture content using EPA test Method 4. Reporting this data element is necessary to ensure test methods were conducted properly so that emission rates can be calculated.

• “Corresponding Reference Method(s) Run Number, if applicable.” This proposed data element provides the run number of concurrent reference method tests. The assigned run number of the EPA test Method 1 through 4 or EPA test Method 3A tests conducted at the same time as a reference method test needs to be reported in order to ensure the methods were conducted properly so that emission rates can be calculated.

• “Pollutant Concentration Units of Measure.” This proposed data element provides the appropriate units of measure code for the pollutant or analyte concentration, and reporting it is necessary for comparison to the standard.

• “Pollutant Emission Rate.” This proposed data element is the pollutant emission rate expressed in the units of the standard, and reporting it is necessary for comparison with the standard.

• “Pollutant Emission Rate Units of Measure (in units of the standard).” This proposed data element is the units of the standard specified in Table 1 or 2 of this subpart. Reporting it is necessary for comparison to the standard.

• “Process Parameter Units of Measure.” This proposed data element identifies the process rate parameter unit of measure: GWh/h, MWh/h, TBtu/h, or MMBTU/h, and reporting it is necessary to ensure accurate comparisons between runs and for emission factor development purposes.

• “Total Pollutant Mass Trap A” and “Total Pollutant Mass Trap B.” These proposed data elements refer to the total mercury mass measured by Train A and Train B, respectively, in the appropriate units of measure. Reporting these values is necessary for quality assurance purposes and for comparison with the standard.

• “Method Detection Limit (MDL).” This proposed data element refers to the minimum amount of analyte that can be detected and reported. Reporting it is necessary for calculation checks and for emissions factor development purposes.

• “Percent Spike Recovery.” This proposed data element refers to the spike recovery in percent, which is required to be reported by section 8.2.6.2 in EPA test Method 30B using Equation 30B-1.

• “F-Factor (F

).” This proposed data element expands the current F-factor choices to include the carbon F-Factor, which is based on the ratio of CO

to heat content of fuel. Reporting it allows conversion from mass per volume to mass per heat input for those who choose to use emissions testing.

• “Compliance Limit Basis (Heat Input or Electrical Output).” This proposed data element identifies the denominator of the compliance units selected for an existing EGU by its owner or operator. Reporting this decision is necessary for comparison of results with the standard.

• “Heat Input or Electrical Output Unit of Measure.” This proposed data element specifies the denominator of the compliance unit that corresponds to the means of compliance selected for an existing EGU by its owner or operator. Reporting this unit is necessary for comparison of results with the standard and for emission factor development purposes.

• “Pollutant Concentration.” This proposed data element expands the already-existing “Emissions Concentration” data element to include pollutants. Reporting this data element is necessary for comparison of results with the standard and for emission factor development purposes.

• “Stack Gas Flow Rate—dscfm.” This proposed data element clarifies the already-existing “Volumetric Flow Rate—scfm” data element so that reporters will know to report their EGU's dry stack gas flow rate. Reporting this data element is necessary for calculation purposes. Several commenters

on the September 29, 2016, proposed rule (

i.e.,

the previous proposal) stated that those proposed revisions included a significant amount of duplicative reporting, which should be eliminated. In response to the

concerns expressed by the commenters, the Agency examined the XML data element lists for stack tests and CMS performance evaluations in order to identify duplicative reporting and eliminate it where possible. The following evaluations were made:

Commenters 20612, 20597, and 20609 on Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234.

First, the data elements in sections 2 through 13 of appendix E (for the quarterly compliance reports) were compared against the data elements in sections 17 through 30 of appendix E (corresponding to the detailed reference method data for stack tests and CMS performance evaluations). The two lists were found to have 20 data elements in common, but at least 9 of these elements (

i.e.,

Source ID (Sampling Location), Test Number, Run Number, Run Begin Date, and a few others) are proposed to be included in both XML schemas to properly link the individual stack test summaries in the compliance report with the corresponding reference method data.

Second, the data elements listed in the reporting sections of appendices A, B, and C of MATS, requiring the results of CMS performance evaluations (

i.e.,

RATAs, RRAs, and RCAs) to be reported using the ECMPS Client Tool, were compared against the corresponding reference method data elements in sections 17 through 30 of appendix E. Only 12 data elements common to the appendix E and ECMPS Client Tool schemas were found. This is not surprising because appendices A, B, and C require only summarized results of CMS performance evaluations—details of the Reference Method tests are not reported. Of the 12 data elements common to the appendix E and ECMPS lists, 10 of them are proposed to be included in both schemas to properly link the CMS test summaries with the corresponding reference method data. In view of these two evaluations, EPA concludes that most of the duplicative reporting found among the various data element lists is necessary to ensure that the results of stack tests and CMS performance evaluations summarized in the quarterly compliance reports and the QA test submittals to the ECMPS Client Tool can be matched with the corresponding Reference Method data. Further, the remainder of the duplicative reporting is minimal, rather than “significant” as asserted by the commenters. The Agency believes that it is best not to modify the data element lists to eliminate this small amount of duplicate reporting. Although the deadlines for submitting the quarterly compliance reports and the corresponding reference method data are the same (

i.e.,

within 60 days after the end of the quarter), the two XML reports might not be submitted concurrently. So, if, for instance, the compliance report is submitted prior to the reference method data, and certain data elements are found only in the reference method report, a thorough assessment of compliance may not be possible until the reference method report is received. Similar considerations apply to the summarized CMS performance evaluations in the ECMPS Client Tool and the corresponding reference method data, if the two XML reports are not submitted concurrently.

VI. Proposed Revisions to Other Rule Text

The revisions to 40 CFR 63.10031 necessitate changes to other sections of the rule to ensure that the rule is internally consistent. Based on comments received, revisions have also been made to clarify certain reporting requirements, to rectify inadvertent omissions, and to correct inconsistencies. The affected rule sections are as follows:

(a) We are proposing to revise the introductory text of paragraphs (a)(2) and (b) of 40 CFR 63.10005. The amendment to paragraph (a)(2) would clarify that Hg compliance may either be determined on either a 30- or 90-boiler operating day rolling average basis. For consistency with appendix E, revised paragraph (b) notes that when auxiliary stack gas flow rate or moisture data are needed to supplement a performance stack test conducted with an isokinetic method such as EPA test Method 5 or EPA test Method 26A, separate EPA test Method 2 or EPA Method 4 tests are not needed to satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR 63.10007 and Table 5. Data from the isokinetic method can be used to determine the stack gas flow rate and moisture content.

(b) We are proposing to amend 40 CFR 63.10009 as follows. The second and third sentences in paragraph (a)(2) would be revised to clarify the types of data that may be used to determine WAERs. Data from Hg CEMS, sorbent trap monitoring systems, but not LEE tests, may be used for Hg emissions averaging. For other pollutants, both CEMS data and stack test data may be used. The last sentence of paragraph (a)(2) would be amended to clarify that if any EGU in an averaging group operates on

any

of the days in a 30- or 90-group boiler operating day compliance period (regardless of how many or how few), the emissions data from that EGU on those days must be included in the weighted average. Since averaging of Hg emissions is permitted on a 30-group boiler operating day basis, Equations 2a and 2b in 40 CFR 63.10009 apply to Hg as well as other pollutants. Therefore, the words “for pollutants other than Hg” would be removed from the introductory text of paragraph (b)(2), and in the nomenclature of Equation 2a, the words “or sorbent trap monitoring” would be added after the words “unit i's CEMS” in the definition of the term “Her

.” Finally, for completeness, Equations 3a and 3b would be amended by removing the terms that pertain to quarterly stack testing. Equations 3a and 3b apply

only

to the 90-group boiler operating day Hg WAER limit for coal-fired units. Coal-fired EGUs do not have the option to use quarterly stack testing to demonstrate compliance; if a coal unit does not qualify as a LEE, Hg emissions must be continuously monitored.

(c) As explained in section IV.A(11) above, we are proposing to revise paragraphs (h)(6) and (7), (i), and (j)(4)(i) and (ii) of 40 CFR 63.10010 to resolve inconsistencies in the text.

(d) We are proposing to revise 40 CFR 63.10011(e) to require Notifications of Compliance Status for initial compliance demonstrations to include the information specified in 40 CFR 63.10030(e), and to be submitted in accordance with 40 CFR 63.10031(f)(4) or (h), as applicable. This proposed change is necessary to cover initial Notifications of Compliance Status for both new and existing EGUs. The interim reporting process described in 40 CFR 63.10031(f)(4) and the on-going reporting process in 40 CFR 63.10031(h) require these Notifications to be submitted as PDF files, through ECMPS.

(e) We are proposing to revise 40 CFR 63.10011(g)(3), 40 CFR 63.10021(i), and two sentences in Items 3 and 4 of Table 3 to be consistent with 40 CFR 63.10031(i) and Table 8. For EGU owners or operators relying on paragraph (2) of the definition of “startup” in 40 CFR 63.10042, 40 CFR 63.10031(i) retains the requirement for the parametric data and other information in 40 CFR 63.10031(c)(5) to be included in the semiannual compliance reports, for startup and shutdown incidents that occur during the interim reporting period. However, in view of the proposed phase-out of the semiannual compliance reports, for startup and shutdown incidents that occur during each subsequent calendar quarter, starting with the first quarter of 2024, the supplementary information in 40 CFR 63.10031(c)(5)(ii) and 63.10020(e) would be required to be provided as a separate PDF submittal, along with the quarterly compliance report. As previously noted, the requirements in 40 CFR

63.10031(c)(5)(iii), (iv), and (v) to report hourly average CEMS and operating parameter values for startup and shutdown events are not proposed to be incorporated into this PDF report because they are duplicative of the hourly values reported under appendices A through D. Startup and shutdown hours are flagged in the quarterly emissions reports and can be identified for auditing purposes.

(f) We are proposing revisions to paragraphs (e)(9), (f), and (h)(3) of 40 CFR 63.10021 as follows. Paragraph (e)(9) is unchanged from the previous proposal, except that the December 31, 2017, and January 1, 2018, transition dates are replaced with December 31, 2023, and January 1, 2024, respectively. We are proposing to remove references to the EPA's ERT and the CEDRI interface from paragraph (f) and replace it with a general statement requiring all applicable notifications and reports to be submitted through the ECMPS Client Tool. We are proposing to add three statements at the end of paragraph (f). The first statement, regarding a submission deadline that occurs on a weekend or Federal holiday, extends the deadline to the next business day. The second statement addresses a submission deadline that occurs when the ECMPS system is offline for maintenance; in that case, the deadline is extended until the first business day after the system outage. The third statement clarifies that using the ECMPS Client Tool to submit a required MATS report or notification satisfies the requirement in 40 CFR 63.13 of the General Provisions to submit that same report or notification (or the information contained in it) to the appropriate EPA Regional office or state agency whose delegation request has been approved. Finally, we are proposing to remove paragraph (h)(3) because it is redundant with paragraph (i) and, therefore, unnecessary.

(g) We are proposing to remove 40 CFR 63.10030(e)(7)(i) for the following reasons. The requirement in the current rule for an initial Notification of Compliance Status to include summarized results of annual and triennial performance tests which have not been done yet is in an incorrect location. The requirement to submit these test summaries belongs in 40 CFR 63.10031, not 40 CFR 63.10030. Text similar to 40 CFR 63.10030(e)(7)(i) does, in fact, exist in 40 CFR 63.10031. Specifically, 40 CFR 63.10031(c)(7) requires the annual and triennial test results to be summarized in the semiannual compliance reports. Note, however, that when the semiannual compliance reports are phased out in 2024, the requirement to provide summarized results of these tests does not end; the test summaries must be included in the quarterly compliance reports under 40 CFR 63.10031(g).

We are proposing to amend 40 CFR 63.10030(e)(7)(iii) to rectify an inadvertent oversight. In the 2016 Technical Corrections rule package, the EPA proposed a set of conditions that would allow an EGU owner or operator to submit a request for permission to switch from a heat input-based standard to an output-based standard. One of the proposed conditions, in paragraph (e)(7)(iii)(A)(

) required a demonstration of compliance with both emission limits, based on “performance stack test results completed within 30 days prior to” the request. A commenter objected to limiting this demonstration to “stack test” data and asked the EPA to allow any data collected up to 45 days prior to the request, including CEMS data, to be used. In the Response to Comments document, the EPA agreed with these commenters, but did not make the necessary changes to paragraph (e)(7)(iii)(A)(

) in the final rule. This rule corrects this oversight. In addition, we are proposing to add a note to paragraph (e)(7)(iii) to clarify that requests to switch from one standard to the other are made subsequent to, and are not part of, the initial Notification of Compliance Status.

(h) We are proposing to amend 40 CFR 63.10032(a) to include references to the recordkeeping required under new appendices C (for PM CEMS), D (for PM CPMS), and E (for quarterly compliance reports and reference method test data). Also, in view of the move away from semiannual compliance reporting to quarterly reporting, we are proposing to replace the term “semiannual compliance report” with references to both semiannual and quarterly compliance reports in paragraph (a)(1).

(i) We are proposing to remove the words “or out of control period” from 40 CFR 63.10042, from the definition of “monitoring system malfunction or out of control period” because that definition does not describe an out of control period. We are proposing to add a separate definition of “out-of-control period,” and that definition is similar with the definition provided in the Acid Rain Program definitions at 40 CFR 72.2.

(j) We are proposing to revise Table 8 to subpart UUUUU of 40 CFR part 63 to be consistent with the amendments to 40 CFR 63.10031 and the proposed addition of appendices C, D, and E.

(k) Finally, we are proposing to revise the recordkeeping and reporting requirements in Table 9 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU, as follows. First, we are proposing changes to the requirement to provide the information in 40 CFR 63.10030(e)(1) through (8),

i.e.,

it only applies to

initial

Notifications of Compliance Status; subsequent notifications are not required. Second, in keeping with the earlier discussion provided in section IV.A of this preamble, we are proposing to add a statement to clarify that the excess emissions recordkeeping and reporting requirements of 40 CFR 63.10(c)(7) and (8) and (e)(3)(v) and (vi) apply through December 31, 2023, when the semiannual compliance reports are phased out. On and after January 1, 2024, all relevant information will be provided in quarterly, as opposed to semiannual, reports.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Additional information about these statutes and Executive orders can be found at

https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

This action is not a significant regulatory action and was, therefore, not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs

This action is considered an Executive Order 13771 deregulatory action. Details on the estimated cost savings of this proposed rule can be found in the EPA's analysis of the potential costs and benefits associated with this action.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

The information collection activities in this proposed rule have been submitted for approval to OMB under the PRA. The Information Collection Request (ICR) document that the EPA prepared has been assigned EPA ICR number 2137.09. You can find a copy of the ICR in the docket for this proposed rule, and it is briefly summarized here.

Respondents/affected entities:

The respondents are owners or operators of fossil fuel-fired EGUs. The United States Standard Industrial Classification code for respondents affected by the rule is 4911 (Electric Services). The corresponding NAICS code is 2211100 (Electric Power Generation, Transmission, and Distribution).

Respondent's obligation to respond:

Mandatory per 42 U.S.C. 7414

et seq.

Estimated number of respondents:

1,414.

Frequency of response:

Quarterly for compliance reports.

Total estimated burden:

Reduction of 11,000 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).

Total estimated cost:

Savings of $15,079,000 (per year), includes $0 annualized capital or operation and maintenance costs.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

Submit your comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden to the EPA using the docket identified at the beginning of this rule. You may also send your ICR-related comments to OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs via email to

OIRA_submission@omb.eop.gov,

Attention: Desk Officer for the EPA. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 days after receipt, OMB must receive comments no later than May 11, 2020. The EPA will respond to any ICR-related comments in the final rule.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no net burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small entities subject to the rule. For purposes of assessing the impacts of this rule on small entities, the EPA considered small entities to be defined as: (1) A small business that is an electric utility producing 4 billion kilowatt-hours or less as defined by NAICS codes 221122 (fossil fuel-fired electric utility steam generating units) and 921150 (fossil fuel-fired electric utility steam generating units in Indian country); (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school district, or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field. As required by the RFA, the EPA proposed using this alternative definition in the

Federal Register

of May 3, 2011, 76 FR 25083, sought public comment, consulted with the Small Business Administration and finalized the alternative definition in the

Federal Register

of February 16, 2012, 77 FR 9433. As stated in that document, the alternative definition would apply to this regulation. This action reduces annual burden on small and large entities. We have, therefore, concluded that this action will relieve regulatory burden for all directly regulated small entities.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect small governments.

As described earlier, this action reduces annual burden on governments already subject to MATS; as a result, we have determined that this action will not result in any “significant” adverse economic impact for small governments.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

This action does not have federalism implications. It 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.

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

This action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. As described earlier, this action has no substantial direct effect on Indian tribes already subject to MATS, since this action reduces their annual burden. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

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

The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the definition of “covered regulatory action” in section 2-202 of the Executive order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental health risk or safety risk.

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

This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)

This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

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

The EPA believes that this proposed action is not subject to Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) because it would not establish an environmental health or safety standard. This proposed regulatory action revises the way in which information is reported to the Agency, increasing submission frequency and making adaptions so that just one reporting system can be used, but reducing overall burden; this regulatory action does not have any impact on human health or the environment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

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

Andrew Wheeler,

Administrator.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, EPA proposes to amend 40 CFR part 63 as follows:

PART 63—NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS FOR SOURCE CATEGORIES

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

Authority:

42 U.S.C. 7401

et seq.

Subpart UUUUU—National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units

§ 63.10000

[Amended]

2. In § 63.10000, paragraph (d)(5)(vi) is amended by adding the words “, where appropriate,” immediately after the words “CMS that is out of control consistent with § 63.8(c)(7)(i)”.

3. Section 63.10005 is amended by:

a. Revising the first sentence in paragraph (a)(2) introductory text; and

b. Revising paragraph (b) introductory text.

The revisions read as follows:

§ 63.10005

What are my initial compliance requirements and by what date must I conduct them?

(a) * * *

(2) To demonstrate initial compliance using either a CMS that measures HAP concentrations directly (

i.e.,

an Hg, HCl, or HF CEMS, or a sorbent trap monitoring system) or an SO

or PM CEMS, the initial performance test shall consist of 30- or, if applicable for Hg, 90-boiler operating days. * * *

(b)

Performance testing requirements.

If you choose to use performance testing to demonstrate initial compliance with the applicable emissions limits in Tables 1 and 2 to this subpart for your EGUs, you must conduct the tests according to § 63.10007 and Table 5 to this subpart. Notwithstanding the requirements in this subpart, when Table 5 specifies the use of isokinetic EPA test Method 5, 5D, 26A, or 29 in appendices A-3 and A-8 to part 60 of this chapter for a stack test, if concurrent measurement of the stack gas flow rate or moisture content is needed to convert the pollutant concentrations to units of the standard, separate determination of these parameters using EPA test Method 2 or EPA test Method 4 in appendices A-1 and A-3 to part 60 of this chapter is not necessary. Instead, the stack gas flow rate and moisture content can be determined from data that are collected during the EPA test Method 5, 5D, 6, 26A, or 29 test (

e.g.,

pitot tube (delta P) readings, moisture collected in the impingers, etc.). For the purposes of the initial compliance demonstration, you may use test data and results from a performance test conducted prior to the date on which compliance is required as specified in § 63.9984, provided that the following conditions are fully met:

4. Section 63.10009 is amended by:

a. Revising in paragraph (a)(2) the second, third, and last sentences;

b. In paragraph (b)(2):

i. In the introductory text, removing the words “for pollutants other than Hg”; and

ii. Adding in the definition for “Her

” the words “or sorbent trap monitoring system” after the words “unit i's CEMS”; and

c. Revising “Equation 3a” and “Equation 3b” in paragraph (b)(3).

The revisions read as follows:

§ 63.10009

May I use emissions averaging to comply with this subpart?

(a) * * *

(2) * * * Note that except for the alternate Hg emissions limit from EGUs in the “unit designed for coal ≥ 8,300 Btu/lb” subcategory, the averaging time for emissions averaging for pollutants is 30-group boiler operating days (rolling daily) using data from CEMS and sorbent trap monitoring (for Hg), or a combination of data from CEMS and emissions testing (for other pollutants). The averaging time for emissions averaging for the alternate Hg limit (equal to or less than 1.0 lb/TBtu or 1.1E-2 lb/GWh) from EGUs in the “unit designed for coal ≥ 8,300 Btu/lb” subcategory is 90-group boiler operating days (rolling daily) using data from CEMS, sorbent trap monitoring, or a combination of data from CEMS and sorbent trap monitoring. * * * You must calculate the weighted average emissions rate for the group in accordance with the procedures in this paragraph (a)(2) using the data from all units in the group including any that operate fewer than 30 (or 90) of the preceding 30 (or 90) group boiler operating days.

(b) * * *

(3) * * *

EP10AP20.001

Where:

Her

= Hourly emission rate from unit i's Hg CEMS or Hg sorbent trap monitoring system for the preceding 90-group boiler operating days;

= Hourly heat input or gross output from unit i for the preceding 90-group boiler operating days;

p = Number of EGUs in the emissions averaging group; and

n = Number of hours that hourly rates are collected over the 90-group boiler operating days.

EP10AP20.002

Where:

Her

= Hourly emission rate from unit i's Hg CEMS or Hg sorbent trap monitoring system for the preceding 90-group boiler operating days;

= Steam generation in units of pounds from unit i that uses Hg CEMS or Hg sorbent trap monitoring for the preceding 90-group boiler operating days;

Cfm

= Conversion factor, calculated from the most recent compliance test results, in units of heat input per pound of steam generated or gross output per pound of steam generated, from unit i that uses Hg CEMS or sorbent trap monitoring from the preceding 90-group boiler operating days;

p = Number of EGUs in the emissions averaging group; and

n = Number of hours that hourly rates are collected over the 90-group boiler operating days.

5. Section 63.10010 is amended by revising paragraphs (h)(6) and (7), (i), and (j)(4) to read as follows:

§ 63.10010

What are my monitoring, installation, operation, and maintenance requirements?

(h) * * *

(6) You must use all the data collected during all boiler operating hours in assessing the compliance with your operating limit except:

(i) Any data recorded during periods of monitoring system malfunctions or repairs associated with monitoring system malfunctions. You must report any monitoring system malfunctions as deviations in your compliance reports under § 63.10031(c) or (g) (as applicable);

(ii) Any data recorded during periods when the monitoring system is out-of-control (as specified in your site-specific monitoring plan), repairs associated with periods when the monitoring system is out of control, or required monitoring system quality assurance or quality control activities conducted during out-of-control periods. You must report any such periods as deviations in your compliance reports under § 63.10031(c) or (g) (as applicable);

(iii) Any data recorded during required monitoring system quality assurance or quality control activities that temporarily interrupt the measurement of output data from the PM CPMS; and

(iv) Any data recorded during periods of startup or shutdown.

(7) You must record and report the results of PM CPMS system performance audits, in accordance with § 63.10031(k). You must also record and make available upon request the dates and duration of periods from when the PM CPMS is out of control until completion of the corrective actions necessary to return the PM CPMS to operation consistent with your site-specific monitoring plan.

(i) If you choose to comply with the PM filterable emissions limit in lieu of metal HAP limits, you may choose to install, certify, operate, and maintain a PM CEMS and record and report the output of the PM CEMS as specified in paragraphs (i)(1) through (8) of this section. Compliance with the applicable PM emissions limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart is determined on a 30-boiler operating day rolling average basis.

(1) You must install and certify your PM CEMS according to section 4 of appendix C to this subpart.

(2) You must operate, maintain, and quality-assure the data from your PM CEMS according to section 5 of appendix C to this subpart.

(3) You must reduce the data from your PM CEMS to hourly averages in accordance with section 6.1 of appendix C to this subpart.

(4) You must collect data using the PM CEMS at all times the process unit is operating except for periods of monitoring system malfunctions, out-of-control periods, repairs associated with monitoring system malfunctions or out-of-control periods, and required monitoring system quality assurance, quality control, or maintenance activities.

(5) You must use all the data collected during all boiler operating hours in assessing the compliance with your emissions limit except:

(i) Any data recorded during periods of monitoring system malfunctions and repairs associated with monitoring system malfunctions. You must report any monitoring system malfunctions as deviations in your compliance reports under § 63.10031(c) or (g) (as applicable);

(ii) Any data recorded during periods when the monitoring system is out-of-control (as specified in appendix C to this subpart), repairs associated with periods when the monitoring system is out of control, or required monitoring system quality assurance or quality control activities conducted during out-of-control periods. You must report any such periods as deviations in your compliance reports under § 63.10031(c) or (g) (as applicable);

(iii) Any data recorded during required monitoring system quality assurance, quality control, or maintenance activities that temporarily interrupt the measurement of emissions (

e.g.,

calibrations, certain audits, routine probe maintenance); and

(iv) Any data recorded during periods of startup or shutdown.

(6) You must keep records and report data from your PM CEMS in accordance with section 7 of appendix C to this subpart.

(7) You must record and make available upon request the dates and duration of periods when the PM CEMS is out-of-control to completion of the corrective actions necessary to return the PM CEMS to operation consistent with your site-specific monitoring plan.

(8) You must calculate each 30-boiler operating day rolling average PM emission rate in units of the applicable emissions limit in Table 1 or 2 to this subpart, in accordance with section 6.2.4 of appendix C to this subpart.

(j) * * *

(4) You must collect data using the HAP metals CEMS at all times the process unit is operating and at the intervals specified in paragraph (a) of this section, except for periods of monitoring system malfunctions, out-of-control periods, repairs associated with monitoring system malfunctions or out-of-control periods, and required monitoring system quality assurance, quality control, or maintenance activities.

(i) You must use all the data collected during all boiler operating hours in assessing the compliance with your emission limit except:

(A) Any data collected during periods of monitoring system malfunctions and repairs associated with monitoring system malfunctions. You must report any monitoring system malfunctions as deviations in your compliance reports under § 63.10031(c) or (g) (as applicable);

(B) Any data collected during periods when the monitoring system is out of control as specified in your site-specific monitoring plan, repairs associated with periods when the monitoring system is out of control, or required monitoring system quality assurance or quality control activities conducted during out-of-control periods. You must report any out of control periods as deviations in your compliance reports under § 63.10031(c) or (g) (as applicable);

(C) Any data recorded during required monitoring system quality assurance or quality control activities that temporarily interrupt the measurement of emissions (

e.g.,

calibrations, certain audits, routine probe maintenance); and

(D) Any data recorded during periods of startup or shutdown.

(ii) You must record and report the results of HAP metals CEMS system performance audits, in accordance with § 63.10031(k) You must also record and make available upon request the dates and duration of periods when the HAP metals CEMS is out of control to completion of the corrective actions necessary to return the HAP metals CEMS to operation consistent with your site-specific performance evaluation and quality control program plan.

6. Section 63.10011 is amended by revising paragraphs (e) and (g)(3) to read as follows:

§ 63.10011

How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emissions limits and work practice standards?

(e) You must submit a Notification of Compliance Status in accordance with § 63.10031(f)(4) or (h), as applicable, containing the results of the initial compliance demonstration, as specified in § 63.10030(e).

(g) * * *

(3) You must report the emissions data recorded during startup and

shutdown. If you are relying on paragraph (2) of the definition of “startup” in § 63.10042, then for startup and shutdown incidents that occur on or prior to December 31, 2023, you must also report the applicable supplementary information in § 63.10031(c)(5) in the semiannual compliance report. For startup and shutdown incidents that occur on or after January 1, 2024, you must provide the applicable information in §§ 63.10031(c)(5)(ii) and 63.10020(e) quarterly, in PDF files, in accordance with § 63.10031(i).

§ 63.10020

[Amended]

7. In § 63.10020, paragraph (b) is amended by removing the words “(see § 63.8(c)(7) of this part)”.

8. Section 63.10021 is amended by:

a. Revising paragraphs (e)(9) and (f);

b. Removing and reserving paragraph (h)(3); and

c. Revising paragraph (i).

The revisions read as follows:

§ 63.10021

How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission limitations, operating limits, and work practice standards?

(e) * * *

(9) Prior to January 1, 2024, report the tune-up date electronically, in a PDF file, in your semiannual compliance report, as specified in § 63.10031(f)(4) and (6) and, if requested by the Administrator, in hard copy, as specified in § 63.10031(f)(5). On and after January 1, 2024, report the tune-up date electronically in your quarterly compliance report, in accordance with § 63.10031(g) and section 10.2 of appendix E to this subpart. The tune-up report date is the date when tune-up requirements in paragraphs (e)(6) and (7) of this section are completed.

(f) You must submit the applicable reports and notifications required under § 63.10031(a) through (k) to the Administrator electronically, using EPA's Emissions Collection and Monitoring Plan System (ECMPS) Client Tool. If the final date of any time period (or any deadline) for any of these submissions falls on a weekend or a Federal holiday, the time period shall be extended to the next business day. Moreover, if the EPA Host System supporting the ECMPS Client Tool is offline and unavailable for submission of reports for any part of a day when a report would otherwise be due, the deadline for reporting is automatically extended until the first business day on which the system becomes available following the outage. Use of the ECMPS Client Tool to submit a report or notification required under this subpart satisfies any requirement under subpart A of this part to submit that same report or notification (or the information contained in it) to the appropriate EPA Regional Office or State agency whose delegation request has been approved.

(i) If you are relying on paragraph (2) of the definition of “startup” in § 63.10042, you must provide reports concerning activities and periods of startup and shutdown that occur on or prior to January 1, 2024, in accordance with § 63.10031(c)(5), in your semiannual compliance report. For startup and shutdown incidents that occur on and after January 1, 2024, you must provide the applicable information referenced in §§ 63.10031(c)(5)(ii) and 63.10020(e) quarterly, in PDF files, in accordance with § 63.10031(i).

8. Section 63.10030 is amended by:

a. Revising the last sentence in paragraph (e) introductory text and paragraph (e)(7) introductory text;

b. Removing and reserving paragraph (e)(7)(i);

c. Revising paragraphs (e)(7)(iii) introductory text and (e)(7)(iii)(A)(

);

d. Adding in paragraph (e)(7)(iii)(B) the word “must” after the word “You”; and

e. Adding in paragraph (e)(7)(iii)(C) the word “must” after the word “you”.

The revisions read as follows:

§ 63.10030

What notifications must I submit and when?

(e) * * * The Notification of Compliance Status report must contain all of the information specified in paragraphs (e)(1) through (8) of this section that applies to your initial compliance strategy.

(7) Except for requests to switch from one emission limit to another, as provided in paragraph (e)(7)(iii) of this section, your initial notification of compliance status shall also include the following information:

(iii) For each of your existing EGUs, identification of each emissions limit specified in Table 2 to this subpart with which you plan to comply initially. (

Note:

If, at some future date, you wish to switch from the limit specified in your initial notification of compliance status, you must follow the procedures and meet the conditions of paragraphs (e)(7)(iii)(A) through (C) of this section.)

(A) * * *

(

) Your request includes performance stack test results or valid CMS data, obtained within 45 days prior to the date of your submission, demonstrating that each EGU or EGU emissions averaging group is in compliance with both the mass per heat input limit and the mass per gross output limit;

9. Section 63.10031 is amended by:

a. Revising paragraphs (a), (b) introductory text, (b)(1), (2), (4), and (5), and (c) introductory text;

b. Removing paragraphs (c)(5)(iii), (iv), and (v);

c. Adding paragraph (c)(10);

d. Revising paragraphs (d), (e), (f) introductory text, and (f)(1) and (2);

e. Removing and reserving paragraph (f)(3);

f. Revising paragraphs (f)(4), (f)(6) introductory text, (f)(6)(vii) and (xi), and (g); and

g. Adding paragraphs (h) through (k).

The revisions and additions read as follows:

§ 63.10031

What reports must I submit and when?

(a) You must submit each report in this section that applies to you.

(1) If you are required to (or elect to) monitor Hg emissions continuously, you must meet the electronic reporting requirements of appendix A to this subpart.

(2) If you elect to monitor HCl and/or HF emissions continuously, you must meet the electronic reporting requirements of appendix B to this subpart. Notwithstanding the requirement in this paragraph (a)(2), if you opt to certify your HCl monitor according to Performance Specification 18 in appendix B to part 60 of this chapter and to use Procedure 6 in appendix F to part 60 of this chapter for on-going QA of the monitor, then, on and prior to December 31, 2023, report only hourly HCl emissions data and the results of daily calibration drift tests and RATAs performed on or prior to that date; keep records of all of the other required certification and QA tests and report them, starting in 2024.

(3) If you elect to monitor filterable PM emissions continuously, you must meet the electronic reporting requirements of appendix C to this subpart. Electronic reporting of hourly PM emissions data shall begin with the later of: The first operating hour on or after January 1, 2024; or the first operating hour after completion of the initial PM CEMS correlation test.

(4) If you elect to demonstrate continuous compliance using a PM CPMS, you must meet the electronic reporting requirements of appendix D to this subpart. Electronic reporting of the hourly PM CPMS output shall begin

with the later of: The first operating hour on or after January 1, 2024; or the first operating hour after completion of the initial performance stack test that establishes the operating limit for the PM CPMS.

(5) If you elect to monitor SO

emission rate continuously as a surrogate for HCl, you must use the ECMPS Client Tool to submit the following information to EPA (except where it is already required to be reported or has been previously provided under the Acid Rain Program or another emissions reduction program that requires the use of part 75 of this chapter):

(i) Monitoring plan information for the SO

CEMS and for any additional monitoring systems that are required to convert SO

concentrations to units of the emission standard, in accordance with §§ 75.62 and 75.64(a)(4) of this chapter;

(ii) Certification, recertification, quality-assurance, and diagnostic test results for the SO

CEMS and for any additional monitoring systems that are required to convert SO

concentrations to units of the emission standard, in accordance with § 75.64(a)(5) of this chapter; and

(iii) Quarterly electronic emissions reports. You must submit an electronic quarterly report within 30 days after the end of each calendar quarter, starting with a report for the calendar quarter in which the initial 30 boiler operating day performance test begins. Each report must include the following information:

(A) The applicable operating data specified in § 75.57(b) of this chapter;

(B) An hourly data stream for the unadjusted SO

concentration (in ppm, rounded to one decimal place), and separate unadjusted hourly data streams for the other parameters needed to convert the SO

concentrations to units of the standard. (

Note:

If a default moisture value is used in the emission rate calculations, an hourly data stream is not required for moisture; rather, the default value must be reported in the electronic monitoring plan.);

emission rate data stream, in units of the standard (

i.e.,

lb/MMBtu or lb/MWh, as applicable), calculated according to § 63.10007(e) and (f)(1), rounded to the same precision as the emission standard (

i.e.,

with one leading non-zero digit and one decimal place), expressed in scientific notation. Use the following rounding convention: If the digit immediately following the first decimal place is 5 or greater, round the first decimal place upward (increase it by one); if the digit immediately following the first decimal place is 4 or less, leave the first decimal place unchanged;

(D) The results of all required daily quality-assurance tests of the SO

monitor and the additional monitors used to convert SO

concentration to units of the standard, as specified in appendix B to part 75 of this chapter; and

(E) A compliance certification, which includes a statement, based on reasonable inquiry of those persons with primary responsibility for ensuring that all SO

emissions from the affected EGUs under this subpart have been correctly and fully monitored, by a responsible official with that official's name, title, and signature, certifying that, to the best of his or her knowledge, the report is true, accurate, and complete. You must submit such a compliance certification statement in support of each quarterly report.

(b) You must submit semiannual compliance reports according to the requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this section.

(1) The first compliance report must cover the period beginning on the compliance date that is specified for your affected source in § 63.9984 (or, if applicable, the extended compliance date approved under § 63.6(i)(4)) and ending on June 30 or December 31, whichever date is the first date that occurs at least 180 days after the compliance date that is specified for your source in § 63.9984 (or, if applicable, the extended compliance date approved under § 63.6(i)(4)).

(2) The first compliance report must be submitted electronically no later than July 31 or January 31, whichever date is the first date following the end of the first calendar half after the compliance date that is specified for your source in § 63.9984 (or, if applicable, the extended compliance date approved under § 63.6(i)(4)).

(4) Each subsequent compliance report must be submitted electronically no later than July 31 or January 31, whichever date is the first date following the end of the semiannual reporting period.

(5) The final semiannual compliance report shall cover the reporting period from July 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023. Quarterly compliance reports shall be submitted thereafter, in accordance with paragraph (g) of this section, starting with a report covering the first calendar quarter of 2024.

(c) The semiannual compliance report must contain the information required in paragraphs (c)(1) through (10) of this section.

(10) If you had any process or control equipment malfunction(s) during the reporting period, you must include the number, duration, and a brief description for each type of malfunction which occurred during the semiannual reporting period which caused or may have caused any applicable emission limitation to be exceeded.

(d) For EGUs whose owners or operators rely on a CMS to comply with an emissions or operating limit, the semiannual compliance reports described in paragraph (c) of this section must include the excess emissions and monitor downtime summary report described in § 63.10(e)(3)(vi). However, starting with the first calendar quarter of 2024, reporting of the information under § 63.10(e)(3)(vi) (and under paragraph (e)(3)(v), if the applicable excess emissions and/or monitor downtime threshold is exceeded) is discontinued for all CMS, and you must, instead, include in the quarterly compliance reports described in paragraph (g) of this section the applicable data elements in section 13 of appendix E to this subpart for any “deviation” (as defined in § 63.10042 and elsewhere in this subpart) that occurred during the calendar quarter. If there were no deviations, you must include a statement to that effect in the quarterly compliance report.

(e) Each affected source that has obtained a title V operating permit pursuant to part 70 or 71 of this chapter must report all deviations as defined in this subpart in the semiannual monitoring report required by 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A). If an affected source submits a semiannual compliance report pursuant paragraphs (c) and (d) of this section, or two quarterly compliance reports covering the appropriate calendar half pursuant to paragraph (g) of this section, along with, or as part of, the semiannual monitoring report required by 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 71.6(a)(3)(iii)(A), and the compliance report(s) includes all required information concerning deviations from any emission limit, operating limit, or work practice requirement in this subpart, submission of the compliance report(s) satisfies any obligation to report the same deviations in the semiannual monitoring report. Submission of the compliance report(s) does not otherwise affect any obligation the affected source may have to report deviations from permit requirements to the permit authority.

(f) For each performance stack test completed prior to January 1, 2024 (including 30- (or 90-) boiler operating day Hg LEE demonstration tests and PM

tests to establish operating limits for PM CPMS), you must submit a PDF test report in accordance with paragraph (f)(6) of this section, no later than 60 days after the date on which the testing is completed. For each test completed on or after January 1, 2024, in accordance with § 63.10031(g), submit the applicable reference method information in sections 17 through 31 of appendix E to this subpart along with the quarterly compliance report for the calendar quarter in which the test was completed.

(1) For each relative accuracy test audit (RATA) of an Hg, HCl, HF, or SO

monitoring system completed prior to January 1, 2024, and for each PM CEMS correlation test, each relative response audit (RRA) and each response correlation audit (RCA) of a PM CEMS completed prior to that date, you must submit a PDF test report in accordance with paragraph (f)(6) of this section, no later than 60 days after the date on which the test is completed. For each SO

or Hg RATA completed on or after January 1, 2024, you must submit the applicable reference method information in sections 17 through 31 of appendix E to this subpart prior to or concurrent with the relevant quarterly emissions report. For HCl or HF RATAs, and for correlation tests, RRAs, and RCAs of PM CEMS that are completed on or after January 1, 2024, submit the appendix E reference method information together with the summarized electronic test results, in accordance with section 11.4 of appendix B to this subpart or section 7.2.4 of appendix C to this part, as applicable.

(2) If, for a particular EGU or a group of EGUs serving a common stack, you have elected to demonstrate compliance using a PM CEMS, an approved HAP metals CEMS, or a PM CPMS, you must submit quarterly PDF reports in accordance with paragraph (f)(6) of this section, which include all of the 30-boiler operating day rolling average emission rates derived from the CEMS data or the 30-boiler operating day rolling average responses derived from the PM CPMS data (as applicable). The quarterly reports are due within 60 days after the reporting periods ending on March 31st, June 30th, September 30th, and December 31st. Submission of these quarterly reports in PDF files shall end with the report that covers the fourth calendar quarter of 2023. Beginning with the first calendar quarter of 2024, the compliance averages shall no longer be reported separately, but shall be incorporated into the quarterly compliance reports described in paragraph (g) of this section. In addition to the compliance averages for PM CEMS, PM CPMS, and/or HAP metals CEMS, the quarterly compliance reports described in paragraph (g) of this section must also include the 30- (or, if applicable 90-) boiler operating day rolling average emission rates for Hg, HCl, HF, and/or SO

, if you have elected to (or are required to) continuously monitor these pollutants. Further, if your EGU or common stack is in an averaging plan, your quarterly compliance reports must identify all of the EGUs or common stacks in the plan and must include all of the 30- (or 90-) group boiler operating day rolling weighted average emission rates (WAERs) for the averaging group.

(4) You must submit semiannual compliance reports as required under paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section, ending with a report covering the semiannual period from July 1 through December 31, 2023, and Notifications of Compliance Status as required under § 63.10030(e), as PDF files. Quarterly compliance reports shall be submitted in XML format thereafter, in accordance with paragraph (g) of this section, starting with a report covering the first calendar quarter of 2024.

(6) All reports and notifications described in paragraphs (f) introductory text and (f)(1), (2), and (4) of this section shall be submitted to the EPA in the specified format and at the specified frequency, using the ECMPS Client Tool. Each PDF version of a stack test report, CEMS RATA report, PM CEMS correlation test report, RRA report, and RCA report must include sufficient information to assess compliance and to demonstrate that the reference method testing was done properly. Note that EPA will continue to accept, as necessary, PDF reports that are being phased out at the end of 2023, if the submission deadlines for those reports extend beyond December 31, 2023. The following data elements must be entered into the ECMPS Client Tool at the time of submission of each PDF file:

(vii) An indication of the type of PDF report or notification being submitted;

(xi) The date the performance test was completed (if applicable) and the test number (if applicable); and

(g) Starting with a report for the first calendar quarter of 2024, you must use the ECMPS Client Tool to submit quarterly electronic compliance reports. Each quarterly compliance report shall include the applicable data elements in sections 2 through 13 of appendix E to this subpart. For each stack test summarized in the compliance report, you must also submit the applicable reference method information in sections 17 through 31 of appendix E to this subpart. The compliance reports and associated appendix E information must be submitted no later than 60 days after the end of each calendar quarter.

(h) On and after January 1, 2024, initial Notifications of Compliance Status (if any) shall be submitted in accordance with § 63.9(h)(2)(ii), as PDF files, using the ECMPS Client Tool. The applicable data elements in paragraphs (f)(6)(i) through (xii) of this section must be entered into ECMPS with each Notification.

(i) If you have elected to use paragraph (2) of the definition of “startup” in § 63.10042, then, for startup and shutdown incidents that occur on or prior to December 31, 2023, you must include the information in § 63.10031(c)(5) in the semiannual compliance report, in a PDF file. If you have elected to use paragraph (2) of the definition of “startup” in § 63.10042, then, for startup and shutdown event(s) that occur on or after January 1, 2024, you must use the ECMPS Client Tool to submit the information in §§ 63.10031(c)(5) and 63.10020(e) along with each quarterly compliance report, in a PDF file, starting with a report for the first calendar quarter of 2024. The applicable data elements in paragraphs (f)(6)(i) through (xii) of this section must be entered into ECMPS with each startup and shutdown report.

(j) If you elect to use a certified PM CEMS to monitor PM emissions continuously to demonstrate compliance with this subpart and have begun recording valid data from the PM CEMS prior to [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE

FEDERAL REGISTER

], you must use the ECMPS Client Tool to submit a detailed report of your PS 11 correlation test (see appendix B to part 60 of this chapter) in a PDF file no later than 60 days after that date. For a correlation test completed on or after [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE

FEDERAL REGISTER

], but prior to January 1, 2024, you must submit the PDF report no later than 60 days after the date on which the test is completed. For a correlation test completed on or after January 1, 2024, you must submit the PDF report according to section 7.2.4 of appendix C to this subpart. The applicable data elements in paragraphs (f)(6)(i) through (xii) of this section must

be entered into ECMPS with the PDF report.

(k) If you elect to demonstrate compliance using a PM CPMS or an approved HAP metals CEMS, you must submit quarterly reports of your QA/QC activities (

e.g.,

calibration checks, performance audits), in a PDF file, beginning with a report for the first quarter of 2024, if the PM CPMS or HAP metals CEMS is used for the compliance demonstration in that quarter. Otherwise, submit a report for the first calendar quarter in which the PM CPMS or HAP metals CEMS is used to demonstrate compliance. These reports are due no later than 60 days after the end of each calendar quarter. The applicable data elements in paragraphs (f)(6)(i) through (xii) of this section must be entered into ECMPS with the PDF report.

10. Section 63.10032 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory text and (a)(1) to read as follows:

§ 63.10032

What records must I keep?

(a) You must keep records according to paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section. If you are required to (or elect to) continuously monitor Hg and/or HCl and/or HF and/or PM emissions, or if you elect to use a PM CPMS, you must keep the records required under appendix A and/or appendix B and/or appendix C and/or appendix D to this subpart. If you elect to conduct periodic (

e.g.,

quarterly or annual) performance stack tests, then, for each test completed on or after January 1, 2024, you must keep records of the applicable data elements under § 63.7(g). You must also keep records of all data elements and other information in appendix E to this subpart that apply to your compliance strategy.

(1) In accordance with § 63.10(b)(2)(xiv), a copy of each notification or report that you submit to comply with this subpart. You must also keep records of all supporting documentation for the initial Notifications of Compliance Status, semiannual compliance reports, or quarterly compliance reports that you submit.

11. Section 63.10042 is amended by:

a. In the definition “Diluent cap,” adding “PM,” after “HF,”;

b. In the definition “Monitoring system malfunction or out of control period,” removing the words “or out of control period”; and

c. Adding the definition “Out of control period” in alphabetical order.

The addition reads as follows:

§ 63.10042

What definitions apply to this subpart?

Out-of-control period,

as it pertains to continuous monitoring systems, means any period:

(1) Beginning with the hour corresponding to the completion of a daily calibration or quality assurance audit that indicates that the instrument fails to meet the applicable acceptance criteria; and

(2) Ending with the hour corresponding to the completion of an additional calibration or quality assurance audit following corrective action showing that the instrument meets the applicable acceptance criteria.

12. Table 3 to subpart UUUUU is amended by revising the entries “3. A coal-fired, liquid oil-fired (excluding limited-use liquid oil-fired subcategory units), or solid oil-derived fuel-fired EGU during startup” and “4. A coal-fired, liquid oil-fired (excluding limited-use liquid oil-fired subcategory units), or solid oil-derived fuel-fired EGU during shutdown” to read as follows:

Table 3 to Subpart UUUUU of Part 63—Work Practice Standards

[ * * * * * * * ]

If your EGU is . . .

You must meet the following . . .

* * * * * * *

3. A coal-fired, liquid oil-fired (excluding limited-use liquid oil-fired subcategory units), or solid oil-derived fuel-fired EGU during startup

a. You have the option of complying using either of the following work practice standards:

(1) If you choose to comply using paragraph (1) of the definition of “startup” in § 63.10042, you must operate all CMS during startup. Startup means either the first-ever firing of fuel in a boiler for the purpose of producing electricity, or the firing of fuel in a boiler after a shutdown event for any purpose. Startup ends when any of the steam from the boiler is used to generate electricity for sale over the grid or for any other purpose (including on site use). For startup of a unit, you must use clean fuels as defined in § 63.10042 for ignition. Once you convert to firing coal, residual oil, or solid oil-derived fuel, you must engage all of the applicable control technologies except dry scrubber and SCR. You must start your dry scrubber and SCR systems, if present, appropriately to comply with relevant standards applicable during normal operation. You must comply with all applicable emissions limits at all times except for periods that meet the applicable definitions of startup and shutdown in this subpart. You must keep records during startup periods. You must provide reports concerning activities and startup periods, as specified in § 63.10011(g) and § 63.10021(h) and (i). If you elect to use paragraph (2) of the definition of “startup” in § 63.10042, you must report the applicable information in § 63.10031(c)(5) concerning startup periods as follows: for startup periods that occur on or prior to December 31, 2023 in PDF files in the semiannual compliance report; for startup periods that occur on or after January 1, 2024, quarterly, in PDF files, according to § 63.10031(i).

(2) If you choose to comply using paragraph (2) of the definition of “startup” in § 63.10042, you must operate all CMS during startup. You must also collect appropriate data, and you must calculate the pollutant emission rate for each hour of startup.

For startup of an EGU, you must use one or a combination of the clean fuels defined in § 63.10042 to the maximum extent possible, taking into account considerations such as boiler or control device integrity, throughout the startup period. You must have sufficient clean fuel capacity to engage and operate your PM control device within one hour of adding coal, residual oil, or solid oil-derived fuel to the unit. You must meet the startup period work practice requirements as identified in § 63.10020(e).

Once you start firing coal, residual oil, or solid oil-derived fuel, you must vent emissions to the main stack(s). You must comply with the applicable emission limits beginning with the hour after startup ends. You must engage and operate your particulate matter control(s) within 1 hour of first firing of coal, residual oil, or solid oil-derived fuel.

You must start all other applicable control devices as expeditiously as possible, considering safety and manufacturer/supplier recommendations, but, in any case, when necessary to comply with other standards made applicable to the EGU by a permit limit or a rule other than this Subpart that require operation of the control devices.

b. Relative to the syngas not fired in the combustion turbine of an IGCC EGU during startup, you must either: (1) Flare the syngas, or (2) route the syngas to duct burners, which may need to be installed, and route the flue gas from the duct burners to the heat recovery steam generator.

c. If you choose to use just one set of sorbent traps to demonstrate compliance with the applicable Hg emission limit, you must comply with the limit at all times; otherwise, you must comply with the applicable emission limit at all times except for startup and shutdown periods.

d. You must collect monitoring data during startup periods, as specified in § 63.10020(a) and (e). You must keep records during startup periods, as provided in §§ 63.10032 and 63.10021(h). You must provide reports concerning activities and startup periods, as specified in §§ 63.10011(g), 63.10021(i), and 63.10031. If you elect to use paragraph (2) of the definition of “startup” in § 63.10042, you must report the applicable information in § 63.10031(c)(5) concerning startup periods as follows: for startup periods that occur on or prior to December 31, 2023, in PDF files in the semiannual compliance report; for startup periods that occur on or after January 1, 2024, quarterly, in PDF files, according to § 63.10031(i).

4. A coal-fired, liquid oil-fired (excluding limited-use liquid oil-fired subcategory units), or solid oil-derived fuel-fired EGU during shutdown

You must operate all CMS during shutdown. You must also collect appropriate data, and you must calculate the pollutant emission rate for each hour of shutdown for those pollutants for which a CMS is used.

While firing coal, residual oil, or solid oil-derived fuel during shutdown, you must vent emissions to the main stack(s) and operate all applicable control devices and continue to operate those control devices after the cessation of coal, residual oil, or solid oil-derived fuel being fed into the EGU and for as long as possible thereafter considering operational and safety concerns. In any case, you must operate your controls when necessary to comply with other standards made applicable to the EGU by a permit limit or a rule other than this Subpart and that require operation of the control devices.

If, in addition to the fuel used prior to initiation of shutdown, another fuel must be used to support the shutdown process, that additional fuel must be one or a combination of the clean fuels defined in § 63.10042 and must be used to the maximum extent possible, taking into account considerations such as not compromising boiler or control device integrity.

Relative to the syngas not fired in the combustion turbine of an IGCC EGU during shutdown, you must either: (1) Flare the syngas, or (2) route the syngas to duct burners, which may need to be installed, and route the flue gas from the duct burners to the heat recovery steam generator.

You must comply with all applicable emission limits at all times except during startup periods and shutdown periods at which time you must meet this work practice. You must collect monitoring data during shutdown periods, as specified in § 63.10020(a). You must keep records during shutdown periods, as provided in §§ 63.10032 and 63.10021(h). Any fraction of an hour in which shutdown occurs constitutes a full hour of shutdown. You must provide reports concerning activities and shutdown periods, as specified in §§ 63.10011(g), 63.10021(i), and 63.10031. If you elect to use paragraph (2) of the definition of “startup” in § 63.10042, you must report the applicable information in § 63.10031(c)(5) concerning shutdown periods as follows: for shutdown periods that occur on or prior to December 31, 2023, in PDF files in the semiannual compliance report; for shutdown periods that occur on or after January 1, 2024, quarterly, in PDF files, according to § 63.10031(i).

13. Table 8 to subpart UUUUU is revised to read as follows:

Table 8 to Subpart UUUUU of Part 63—Reporting Requirements

[In accordance with § 63.10031, you must meet the following reporting requirements, as they apply to your compliance strategy]

You must submit the following reports . . .

1. The electronic reports required under § 63.10031(a)(1), if you continuously monitor Hg emissions.

2. The electronic reports required under § 63.10031(a)(2), if you continuously monitor HCl and/or HF emissions.

Where applicable, these reports are due no later than 30 days after the end of each calendar quarter.

3. The electronic reports required under § 63.10031(a)(3), if you continuously monitor PM emissions.

Reporting of hourly PM emissions data using ECMPS shall begin with the first operating hour after: January 1, 2024 or the hour of completion of the initial PM CEMS correlation test, whichever is later.

Where applicable, these reports are due no later than 30 days after the end of each calendar quarter.

4. The electronic reports required under § 63.10031(a)(4), if you elect to use a PM CPMS.

Reporting of hourly PM CPMS response data using ECMPS shall begin with the first operating hour after January 1, 2024 or the first operating hour after completion of the initial performance stack test that establishes the operating limit for the PM CPMS, whichever is later.

Where applicable, these reports are due no later than 30 days after the end of each calendar quarter.

5. The electronic reports required under § 63.10031(a)(5), if you continuously monitor SO

emissions.

Where applicable, these reports are due no later than 30 days after the end of each calendar quarter.

6. PDF reports for all performance stack tests completed prior to January 1, 2024 (including 30- or 90-boiler operating day Hg LEE test reports and PM test reports to set operating limits for PM CPMS), according to § 63.10031(f) introductory text and (f)(6).

For each test, submit the PDF report no later than 60 days after the date on which testing is completed.

For a PM test that is used to set an operating limit for a PM CPMS, the report must also include the information in § 63.10023(b)(2)(vi).

For each performance stack test completed on or after January 1, 2024, submit the test results in the relevant quarterly compliance report under § 63.10031(g), together with the applicable reference method information in sections 17 through 31 of appendix E to this subpart.

7. PDF reports for all RATAs of Hg, HCl, HF, and/or SO

monitoring systems completed prior to January 1, 2024, and for correlation tests, RRAs and/or RCAs of PM CEMS completed prior to January 1, 2024, according to § 63.10031(f)(1) and (6).

For each test, submit the PDF report no later than 60 days after the date on which testing is completed.

For each SO

or Hg system RATA completed on or after January 1, 2024, submit the electronic test summary required by appendix A to this subpart or part 75 of this chapter (as applicable) together with the applicable reference method information in sections 17-30 of appendix E to this subpart, either prior to or concurrent with the relevant quarterly emissions report.

For each HCl or HF system RATA, and for each correlation test, RRA, and RCA of a PM CEMS completed on or after January 1, 2024, submit the electronic test summary in accordance with section 11.4 of appendix B to this subpart or section 7.2.4 of appendix C to this part, as applicable, together with the applicable reference method information in sections 17-30 of appendix E to this subpart.

8. Quarterly reports, in PDF files, that include all 30-boiler operating day rolling averages in the reporting period derived from your PM CEMS, approved HAP metals CEMS, and/or PM CPMS, according to § 63.10031(f)(2) and (6). These reports are due no later than 60 days after the end of each calendar quarter.

The final quarterly rolling averages report in PDF files shall cover the fourth calendar quarter of 2023.

Starting with the first quarter of 2024, you must report all 30-boiler operating day rolling averages for PM CEMS, approved HAP metals CEMS, PM CPMS, Hg CEMS, Hg sorbent trap systems, HCl CEMS, HF CEMS, and/or SO

CEMS (or 90-boiler operating day rolling averages for Hg systems), in XML format, in the quarterly compliance reports required under § 63.10031(g).

If your EGU or common stack is in an averaging plan, each quarterly compliance report must identify the EGUs in the plan and include all of the 30- or 90- group boiler operating day weighted average emission rates (WAERs) for the averaging group.

The quarterly compliance reports must be submitted no later than 60 days after the end of each calendar quarter.

9. The semiannual compliance reports described in § 63.10031(c) and (d), in PDF files, according to § 63.10031(f)(4) and (6). The due dates for these reports are specified in § 63.10031(b).

The final semiannual compliance report shall cover the period from July 1, 2023 through December 31, 2023.

10. Notifications of compliance status, in PDF files, according to § 63.10031(f)(4) and (6) until December 31, 2023, and according to § 63.10031(h) thereafter.

11. Quarterly electronic compliance reports, in accordance with § 63.10031(g), starting with a report for the first calendar quarter of 2024. The reports must be in XML format and must include the applicable data elements in sections 2 through 13 of appendix E to this subpart.

These reports are due no later than 60 days after the end of each calendar quarter.

12. Quarterly reports, in PDF files, that include the applicable information in §§ 63.10031(c)(5)(ii) and 63.10020(e) pertaining to startup and shutdown events, starting with a report for the first calendar quarter of 2024, if you have elected to use paragraph (2) of the definition of “startup” in § 63.10042 (see § 63.10031(i)).

These PDF reports shall be submitted no later than 60 days after the end of each calendar quarter, along with the quarterly compliance reports required under § 63.10031(g).

13. A test report for the PS 11 correlation test (see appendix B to part 60 of this chapter) of your PM CEMS, in accordance with § 63.10031(j).

If, prior to [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE

FEDERAL REGISTER

], you have begun using a certified PM CEMS to demonstrate compliance with this subpart, use the ECMPS Client Tool to submit the report, in a PDF file, no later than 60 days after that date.

For correlation tests completed on or after [DATE 60 DAYS AFTER DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL RULE IN THE

FEDERAL REGISTER

], but prior to January 1, 2024, submit the report, in a PDF file, no later than 60 days after the date on which the test is completed.

For correlation tests completed on or after January 1, 2024, submit the test results electronically, according to section 7.2.4 of appendix C to this subpart, together with the applicable reference method data in sections 17 through 31 of appendix E to this subpart.

14. Quarterly reports that include the QA/QC activities for your PM CPMS or approved HAP metals CEMS (as applicable), in PDF files, according to § 63.10031(k).

The first report shall cover the first calendar quarter of 2024, if the PM CPMS or HAP metals CEMS is in use during that quarter. Otherwise, reporting begins with the first calendar quarter in which the PM CPMS or HAP metals CEMS is used to demonstrate compliance.

These reports are due no later than 60 days after the end of each calendar quarter.

14. Table 9 to subpart UUUUU is amended by:

a. Revising the entries “§ 63.9”, “§ 63.10(c)(7)”, and “§ 63.10(c)(8)”; and

b. Adding the entry “§ 63.10(e)(3)(v) and (vi)” in numerical order.

The addition and revisions read as follows:

Table 9 to Subpart UUUUU of Part 63—Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart UUUUU

[ * * * * * * * ]

Citation

Subject

Applies to subpart UUUUU

* * * * * * *

§ 63.9

Notification Requirements

Yes, except (1) for the 60-day notification prior to conducting a performance test in § 63.9(e); instead use a 30-day notification period per § 63.10030(d), (2) the notification of the CMS performance evaluation in § 63.9(g)(1) is limited to RATAs, and (3) the information required per § 63.9(h)(2)(i); instead provide the applicable information in § 63.10030(e)(1) through (e)(8), for the initial notification of compliance status, only.

* * * * * * *

§ 63.10(c)(7)

Additional recordkeeping requirements for CMS—identifying exceedances and excess emissions

Applies only through December 31, 2023.

§ 63.10(c)(8)

Additional recordkeeping requirements for CMS—identifying exceedances and excess emissions

Applies only through December 31, 2023.

* * * * * * *

§ 63.10(e)(3)(v) and (vi)

Excess emissions and continuous monitoring system performance reports

Applies only through December 31, 2023.

* * * * * * *

15. Appendix A to subpart UUUUU is amended by revising sections “7.1.3.3”, “7.1.4.3”, “7.1.8.2” and “7.2.3.1” to read as follows:

Appendix A to Subpart UUUUU of Part 63—HG Monitoring Provisions

7. Recordkeeping and Reporting

7.1.3.3 The hourly Hg concentration, if a quality-assured value is obtained for the hour (µg/scm, with one leading non-zero digit and one decimal place, expressed in scientific notation). Use the following rounding convention: if the digit immediately following the first decimal place is 5 or greater, round the first decimal place upward (increase it by one); if the digit immediately following the first decimal place is 4 or less, leave the first decimal place unchanged;

7.1.4.3 The hourly Hg concentration, if a quality-assured value is obtained for the hour (µg/scm, with one leading non-zero digit and one decimal place, expressed in scientific notation). Use the following rounding convention: If the digit immediately following the first decimal place is 5 or greater, round the first decimal place upward (increase it by one); if the digit immediately following the first decimal place is 4 or less, leave the first decimal place unchanged. Note that when a single quality-assured Hg concentration value is obtained for a particular data collection period, that single concentration value is applied to each operating hour of the data collection period.

7.1.8.2 The hourly Hg emissions rate (lb/TBtu or lb/GWh, as applicable), calculated according to section 6.2.1 or 6.2.2 of this appendix, rounded to the same precision as the standard (

i.e.,

with one leading non-zero digit and one decimal place, expressed in scientific notation), if valid values of Hg concentration and all other required parameters (stack gas volumetric flow rate, diluent gas concentration, electrical load, and moisture data, as applicable) are obtained for the hour. Use the following rounding convention: If the digit immediately following the first decimal place is 5 or greater, round the first decimal place upward (increase it by one); if the digit immediately following the first decimal place is 4 or less, leave the first decimal place unchanged;

7.2.3.1 For an EGU that begins reporting hourly Hg concentrations with a previously-certified Hg monitoring system, submit the monitoring plan information in section 7.1.1.2 of this appendix prior to or concurrent with the first required quarterly emissions report. For a new EGU, or for an EGU switching to continuous monitoring of Hg emissions after having implemented another allowable compliance option under this subpart, submit the information in section 7.1.1.2 of this appendix at least 21 days prior to the start of initial certification testing of the CEMS. Also submit the monitoring plan information in 40 CFR 75.53(g) pertaining to any required flow rate, diluent gas, and moisture monitoring systems within the applicable time frame specified in this section, if the required records are not already in place.

16. Appendix B to subpart UUUUU is amended by:

a. Revising the heading and introductory text of section 2.3 and sections “9.4”, “10.1.3.3”, “10.1.7.2”, “10.1.8.1.1”, “10.1.8.1.2”, and “10.1.8.1.3”;

b. Adding sections “10.1.8.1.4” through “10.1.8.1.12” in numerical order;

c. Revising sections “11.3.1”, “11.4 introductory text”, and “11.4.1”;

d. Adding sections “11.4.1.1” through “11.4.1.9” in numerical order;

e. Revising sections “11.4.2 introductory text”, “11.4.3.11”, and “11.4.3.12”;

f. Redesignating section “11.4.3.13” as “11.4.3.14”;

g. Adding new section “11.4.3.13”;

h. Revising newly redesignated section “11.4.3.14”;

i. Redesignating section “11.4.4” as “11.4.13”;

j. Adding sections: “11.4.4 introductory text”; “11.4.4.1 through 11.4.4.7”; “11.4.5 introductory text”; “11.4.5.1”; “11.4.5.1.1 through 11.4.5.1.9”; “11.

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.