These final rule amendments also correct several format, grammatical, and typographical errors which occur in Table 2 (item 9.b.ii), Table 5 (item 1.b), Table 6 (item 1), Table 7 (item 1.a.i, item 1.c.i, and item 2.a.i), and Sec. 63.2343(d).
III. Rationale for These Final Rule Amendments
A. Use of TOC as a Surrogate for HAP When Demonstrating Compliance With Percent Emission Reduction

Section 63.2354(b) of the NESHAP specifies that you must comply with various requirements of 40 CFR part 63, subpart SS for performance testing provisions, including Sec. 63.997(e). Additionally, Sec. 63.2346(f) specifies that if you elect to demonstrate compliance with the percent reduction requirements using TOC rather than organic HAP, you must first demonstrate, subject to approval of the Administrator, that TOC is an appropriate surrogate for organic HAP. This requirement was intended to address circumstances under which a device such as a condenser could achieve substantively different results from one compound to another. Under these conditions, an inlet and outlet percent control determination for TOC might not be equivalent to a similar determination for each or total HAP. Since promulgation, we have received questions on whether the requirement to first demonstrate that TOC is an appropriate surrogate for organic HAP is necessary for a combustion device. When organic compounds are controlled by combustion processes, the organic compounds emitted at the outlet of the device are not the same as those entering the inlet to the device and are typically unknown. Further, unlike noncombustion devices, combustion devices achieve a greater uniformity of destruction across all organic HAP compounds. Therefore, we have determined that the requirement to first demonstrate that TOC is an appropriate surrogate for organic HAP is unwarranted for combustion devices and have modified paragraph (f) of 40 CFR 63.2346 to make this requirement applicable only to non combustion devices.
B. Compliance Date and Initial Demonstration of Compliance for Storage Tanks Using Vapor Balancing or Routing Emissions Back to a Process or a Fuel Gas System

Section 63.2342 identifies when an owner or operator must comply with the requirements of subpart EEEEE, while Sec. 63.2358 identifies the dates by which an owner or operator must demonstrate initial compliance. As discussed below, there is an inconsistency in these two sections of the rule as they apply to storage tanks for which vapor balancing or routing of emissions to a fuel gas system or back to a process are used to comply with the rule.

Paragraph (b)(1) of Sec. 63.2342 states that owners or operators of existing affected sources must be in compliance with the emission limitations, operating limits, and work practice standards for existing sources by February 5, 2007, except as specified in Sec.
63.2342(b)(2). Paragraph (b)(2) states that ``floating roof tanks at existing affected sources must be in compliance with the work practice standards in Table 4 to this subpart, item 1, at all times after the next degassing and cleaning activity or within 10 years after February 3, 2004, whichever occurs first. If the first degassing and cleaning activity occurs during the 3 years following February 3, 2004, the compliance date is February 5, 2007.''

With regards to demonstrating initial compliance, paragraph (c)(1) of Sec. 63.2358 states that ``for storage tanks at existing affected sources complying with the work practice standard in Table 4 to this subpart, you must conduct your initial compliance demonstration the next time the storage tank is emptied and degassed, but not later than 10 years after February 3, 2004.'' The work practice standards in Table 4 for storage tanks at existing facilities are:

As stated in the July 28, 2006, Federal Register in response to a public comment (71 FR 42899), the technical basis for allowing demonstration of initial compliance up to 10 years after February 3, 2004, applies only to storage tanks with floating roofs and not to storage tanks with fixed roofs. EPA, in both the February 3, 2004 rulemaking promulgating 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE, and in the July 28, 2006 rulemaking promulgating amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE, inadvertently failed to revise Sec. 63.2358 to reflect its intent to apply the ``up to 10 years'' compliance provision to only the ``floating roof'' work practice standard.

As the current regulation stands, owners and operators seeking to comply with the work practice standards for storage tanks would have ``up to 10 years'' to demonstrate initial compliance if they elect to comply by routing the emissions to a fuel gas system or back to a process or by using a vapor balancing system. This was never EPA's intent for these two types of work practice standards. EPA points out that these same types of work practice standards are allowed for transfer racks, and the rule is unambiguous that demonstration of initial compliance is required within 180 days after the compliance date of February 3, 2007.

To correct this oversight, EPA is clarifying that the ``up to 10 year'' demonstration of initial compliance date applies only when a floating roof is used to comply with 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE, and inserting the actual date ``February 3, 2014'' into the rule text. In addition, the intended compliance date has past (180 days after the compliance date of February 3, 2007) to demonstrate initial compliance if they elect to route storage tank emissions to a fuel system or back to a process or to use vapor balancing. Because facilities will need time to plan and install equipment and affected sources had up to 3 years to comply with the original rule, we are specifying the compliance date for routing storage tank emissions to a fuel gas system or back to a process or to use vapor balancing to be 3 years from this notice. However, we retain and still require compliance by ``the next time the storage tank is emptied and degassed, but not later than'' 3 years from this notice.
C. Monitoring of Vapor Balancing System Components With the Potential To Leak

Table 10 to 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE addresses continuous compliance requirements, in part, for vapor balancing systems when used for transfer racks and storage tanks. EPA has received a question concerning the relationship between the continuous compliance requirements for vapor balancing systems and those for equipment leak components.

[[Page 21828]]

For vapor balancing systems, there are two places in 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE that identify compliance requirementsTable 10 and Sec. 63.2346(a)(4)(v). As found in item 4.b.i to Table 10, the continuous compliance requirement for a transfer rack using a vapor balancing system reads:
``Monitoring each potential source of vapor leakage in the system quarterly during the loading of a transport vehicle or the filling of a container using the methods and procedures described in the rule requirements selected for the work practice standard for equipment leak components as specified in Table 4 to subpart EEEE, item 4. An instrument reading of 500 ppmv defines a leak. Repair of leaks is performed according to the repair requirements specified in your selected equipment leak standards.''

Paragraph (a)(4)(v) of Sec. 63.2346 identifies leak detection and repair (LDAR) requirements for pressure relief devices used in vapor balancing systems. The current rule language is, at best, ambiguous as to the relationship of this paragraph and the language in Table 10.

For equipment leak components, which are defined in 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE as pumps, valves, and sampling connections, the owner or operator selects one of three 40 CFR part 63 subparts, as specified in item 4 of Table 4. These three subparts identify LDAR provisions that are to be applied to pumps, valves, and sampling connections.

To clarify the intended relationship between these various provisions, the phrase ``each potential source of vapor leakage'' is intended to apply to any and all equipment in the vapor balancing system that may leak, including, but not limited to pumps, valves, and sampling connections. For all such equipment, the owner or operator is to apply the applicable provisions found in the equipment leak standard selected by the owner or operator to comply with the equipment leak components. This could mean that an owner or operator may be applying LDAR requirements found in the selected 40 CFR part 63 subpart for components other than a pump, valve, or sampling connection. If the vapor balancing system has a pressure relief valve, however, the owner or operator would comply with the LDAR provisions for pressure relief valves found in Sec. 63.2346(a)(4)(v). For equipment leak components (as defined in 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE) that are not part of a vapor balancing system, continuous compliance is demonstrated as specified in item 5 to Table 10.

To clarify these relationships, EPA is revising item 4.b.i in Table 10 or 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE to read as follows:
``Except for pressure relief devices, monitoring each potential source of vapor leakage in the system, including, but not limited to pumps, valves, and sampling connections, quarterly during the loading of a transport vehicle or the filling of a container using the methods and procedures described in the rule requirements selected for the work practice standard for equipment leak components as specified in Table 4 to this subpart, item 4. An instrument reading of 500 ppmv defines a leak. Repair of leaks is performed according to the repair requirements specified in your selected equipment leak standards. For pressure relief devices, comply with Sec. 63.2346(a)(4)(v). If no loading of a transport vehicle or filling of a container occurs during a quarter, then monitoring of the vapor balancing system is not required.''

Finally, item 6.b.i to Table 10 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE addresses the same vapor balancing system monitoring requirements, but for storage tanks. EPA is making the same changes as in item 4.b.i to Table 10. EPA is also making one additional change. As the rule currently reads, item 6.b.i refers to ``monitoring each potential source of vapor leakage in the system quarterly during the loading of a transport vehicle or the filling of a container.'' This item should be referring to the loading of a storage tank and not the loading of a transport vehicle or the filling or a container. Therefore, EPA is also correcting this incorrect reference.

D. Format, Grammatical, and Typographical Errors

1. In Table 2, item 9.b.ii or 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE should have been placed on a separate line rather than on the same line as the end of item 9.b.i. For clarity, item 9.b.ii has been reformatted so that it starts on its own line.

2. In Table 5 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE, the first two columns associated with item b. were incorrectly placed under the headings ``According to * * *'' and ``Using * * *''. They should have been placed under the headings, respectively, ``You must conduct * * *'' and ``According to * * *''.

3. In Table 6, item 1 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE, the first column crossreferences items 1 through 6 in Table 2. The sentence, therefore, should refer to ``meeting any set of tank capacity and liquid organic HAP vapor pressure criteria'' rather to ``meeting either set.''

4. In Table 6 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE, the second column of item 1 states, in part, ``or as an option for combustion devices to an exhaust concentration of <=20 ppmv.'' The word ``nonflare'' was inadvertently omitted from this sentence. This sentence is revised to read, in part, ``or as an option for nonflare combustion devices to an exhaust concentration of <=20 ppmv.'' This makes the sentence consistent with the other items in Table 6.

5. In Table 7 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE, three typographical errors are being corrected from the July 28, 2006, FR notice. In item 1.a.i, ``perform'' was misspelled as ``perofrm.''. In item 1.c.i, the crossreference was incorrectly identified as Sec. 3.2346(a)(4); the correct crossreference is Sec. 63.2346(a)(4). In item 2.a.i, ``primary'' was misspelled as ``priamry.''

6. Section 63.2343(d) currently reads: ``If one or more of the events identified in paragraphs (d)(1) through (4) of this section occur since the filing of the Notification of Compliance Status or the last Compliance report, you must submit a subsequent Compliance report as specified in paragraphs (b)(3) and (c)(3) of this section.'' The crossreferences to paragraphs (b)(3) and (c)(3) are incorrect. The correct crossreferences are paragraphs (b)(2) and (c)(2). The direct final rule makes this correction.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

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

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

This action does not impose any new information collection burden. The final amendments clarify, but do not add requirements increasing the collection burden. However, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has previously approved the information collection requirements contained in the existing regulations at 40 CFR part 63, subpart EEEE under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq., and has assigned OMB control number 20600539. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency to prepare
[[Page 21829]]
a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute unless the Agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.

For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's final rule amendments on small entities, a small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; or (3) a small organization that is any notforprofit enterprise which is
independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.

The final rule amendments will not impose any new requirements on small entities, and, therefore, will have no significant adverse economic impact on subject small entities. The Administrator certifies that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public Law 1044, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a costbenefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that may result in expenditures to State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires us to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most costeffective, or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows us to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most costeffective, or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before we establish any regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including tribal governments, we must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements.

EPA has determined that these final rule amendments do not contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more for State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any one year. These final rule amendments clarify certain provisions and correct typographical errors in the rule text for a rule EPA determined not to include a Federal mandate that may result in an estimated cost of $100 million or more (69 FR 5061, February 3, 2004). These clarifications do not change the level or cost of the standard, except, in some cases, reduce the cost of testing for combustion control devices at some facilities using that option. Thus, these final rule amendments are not subject to the requirements of section 202 and 205 of the UMRA. EPA has determined that these final rule amendments contain no regulatory requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. These final rule amendments clarify certain provisions and correct typographical errors in the rule text, thus, should not affect small governments. E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

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

These final rule amendments do not have federalism implications. They will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. They provide clarification and correct typographical errors. These changes do not modify existing or create new responsibilities among EPA Regional Offices, States, or local enforcement agencies. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to these final rule amendments.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments

Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' These final rule amendments do not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175. They will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to these final rule amendments.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as applying to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks, such that the analysis required under section 5501 of the Executive Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it is based solely on technology performance.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

These final rule amendments are not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because they are not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Public Law No. 104113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) [[Page 21830]]
directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS) in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. VCS are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS.

This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA did not consider the use of any VCS.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and LowIncome Populations

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) establishes Federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs Federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and lowincome populations in the United States.

EPA has determined that these final rule amendments will not have disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or lowincome populations because it does not affect the level of protection provided to human health or the environment. These final rule amendments do not relax the control measures on sources regulated by the rule and, therefore, will not cause emissions increases from these sources.

K. Congressional Review Act

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing the final rule amendments and other required information to the United States Senate, the United States House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the final rule amendments in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). These final rule amendments will be effective on July 22, 2008. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

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

Dated: April 16, 2008.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 63 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 63[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 63 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
Subpart EEEE[Amended]
2. Section 63.2343 is amended by revising paragraph (d) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 63.2343 What are my requirements for emission sources not requiring control?
* * * * *
(d) If one or more of the events identified in paragraphs (d)(1) through (4) of this section occur since the filing of the Notification of Compliance Status or the last Compliance report, you must submit a subsequent Compliance report as specified in paragraphs (b)(2) and (c)(2) of this section.
* * * * *
3. Section 63.2346 is amended by revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.2346 What emission limitations, operating limits, and work practice standards must I meet?
* * * * *
(f) For noncombustion devices, if you elect to demonstrate compliance with a percent reduction requirement in Table 2 to this subpart using total organic compounds (TOC) rather than organic HAP, you must first demonstrate, subject to the approval of the Administrator, that TOC is an appropriate surrogate for organic HAP in your case; that is, for your storage tank(s) and/or transfer rack(s), the percent destruction of organic HAP is equal to or higher than the percent destruction of TOC. This demonstration must be conducted prior to or during the initial compliance test.
* * * * *
4. Section 63.2358 is amended by revising paragraphs (b)(1) and (c)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 63.2358 By what date must I conduct performance tests and other initial compliance demonstrations?
* * * * *
(b)(1) For storage tanks and transfer racks at existing affected sources complying with the emission limitations listed in Table 2 to this subpart or with the work practice standards in items 1.b or 1.c in Table 4 to this subpart, you must demonstrate initial compliance with the emission limitations the next time the storage tank is emptied and degassed, but not later than April 25, 2011.
* * * * *
(c)(1) For storage tanks at existing affected sources complying with the work practice standard in item 1.a in Table 4 to this subpart, you must conduct your initial compliance demonstration the next time the storage tank is emptied and degassed, but not later than February 3, 2014.
* * * * *
5. Table 2 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63 is amended by revising entry 9. to read as follows:
* * * * *
Table 2 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.Emission Limits If you own or operate . . . And if . . . Then you must . . . * * * * * * *
9. A transfer rack at a new a. The total Table 1 i. See the facility where the total organic HAP content requirements in actual annual facility of the organic items 7.a.i and level organic liquid liquid being loaded 7.a.ii of this loading volume through through one or more table. transfer racks is less than of the transfer
800,000 gallons. rack's arms is at
least 25 percent by
weight and is being
loaded into a
transport vehicle.
[[Page 21831]]
b. One or more of i. For all such the transfer rack's loading arms at the arms is filling a rack during the container with a loading of organic capacity equal to liquids, comply or greater than 55 with the provisions gallons. of Sec. Sec. 63.924 through 63.927 of 40 CFR part 63, Subpart PPNational Emission Standards for Containers, Container Level 3 controls; OR ii. During the loading of organic liquids, comply with the work practice standards specified in item 3.a of Table 4 to this subpart. * * * * * * *
6. Table 5 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63 is amended by revising entry 1. to read as follows:
* * * * *
Table 5 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.Requirements for Performance Tests and Design Evaluations According to the For . . . You must conduct . . . According to . . . Using . . . To determine . . . following requirements . . . 1. Each existing, each a. A performance test i. Sec. (1) EPA Method 1 or (A) Sampling port (i) Sampling sites reconstructed, and each new to determine the 63.985(b)(1)(ii), 1A in appendix A1 locations and the must be located at affected source using a nonflare organic HAP (or, upon Sec. 63.988(b), of 40 CFR part 60, required number of the inlet and outlet control device to comply with an approval, TOC) Sec. 63.990(b), or as appropriate. traverse points. of each control emission limit in Table 2 to this control efficiency of Sec. 63.995(b). device if complying subpart, items 1 through 10. each nonflare control with the control device, OR the efficiency exhaust concentration requirement or at of each combustion the outlet of the device; OR. control device if complying with the exhaust concentration requirement; AND (ii) the outlet sampling site must be located at each control device prior to any releases to the atmosphere. (2) EPA Method 2, 2A, (A) Stack gas See the requirements 2C, 2D, or 2F in velocity and in items appendix A1 of 40 volumetric flow rate. 1.a.i.(1)(A)(i) and CFR part 60, or EPA (ii) of this table. Method 2G in appendix A2 of 40 CFR part 60, as appropriate. (3) EPA Method 3 or (A) Concentration of See the requirements 3B in appendix A2 CO2 and O2 and dry in items of 40 CFR part 60, molecular weight of 1.a.i.(1)(A)(i) and as appropriate. the stack gas. (ii) of this table. (4) EPA Method 4 in (A) Moisture content See the requirements appendix A3 of 40 of the stack gas. in items CFR part 60. 1.a.i.(1)(A)(i) and (ii) of this table. [[Page 21832]]
(5) EPA Method 18 in (A) Total organic HAP (i) The organic HAP appendix A6 of 40 (or, upon approval, used for the CFR part 60, or EPA TOC), or calibration gas for Method 25 or 25A in formaldehyde EPA Method 25A in appendix A7 of 40 emissions. appendix A7 of 40 CFR part 60, as CFR part 60 must be appropriate, or EPA the single organic Method 316 in HAP representing the appendix A of 40 CFR largest percent by part 63 for volume of emissions; measuring form AND aldehyde. (ii) During the performance test, you must establish the operating parameter limits within which total organic HAP (or, upon approval, TOC) emissions are reduced by the required weight percent or, as an option for nonflare combustion devices, to 20 ppmv exhaust concentration. b. A design evaluation Sec. 63.985(b)(1)(i) ..................... ..................... During a design (for nonflare control evaluation, you must devices) to determine establish the the organic HAP (or, operating parameter upon approval, TOC) limits within which control efficiency of total organic HAP, each nonflare control (or, upon approval, device, or the TOC) emissions are exhaust concentration reduced by at least of each combustion 95 weightpercent control device. for storage tanks or 98 weightpercent for transfer racks, or, as an option for nonflare combustion devices, to 20 ppmv exhaust concentration * * * * * * * 7. Table 6 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63 is amended by revising entry 1. to read as follows:
* * * * *
[[Page 21833]]
Table 6 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.Initial Compliance With Emission Limits
You have For each . . . For the following demonstrated initial emission limit . . . compliance if . . . 1. Storage tank at an Reduce total organic Total organic HAP existing, reconstructed, or HAP (or, upon (or, upon approval, new affected source meeting approval, TOC) TOC) emissions, any set of tank capacity emissions by at based on the and liquid organic HAP least 95 weight results of the vapor pressure criteria percent, or as an performance testing specified in Table 2 to option for nonflare or design this subpart, items 1 combustion devices evaluation through 6. to an exhaust specified in Table concentration of 5 to this subpart, <=20 ppmv. item 1.a or 1.b, respectively, are reduced by at least 95 weightpercent or as an option for nonflare combustion devices to an exhaust concentration <=20 ppmv.
* * * * * * *
8. Table 7 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63 is amended by revising entries 1. and 2. to read as follows:

Table 7 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.Initial Compliance With Work Practice Standards
You have For each . . . If you . . . demonstrated initial compliance if . . . 1. Storage tank at an a. Install a i. After emptying existing affected source floating roof or and degassing, you meeting either set of tank equivalent control visually inspect capacity and liquid organic that meets the each internal HAP vapor pressure criteria requirements in floating roof specified in Table 2 to Table 4 to this before the this subpart, items 1 or 2. subpart, item 1.a. refilling of the storage tank and perform seal gap inspections of the primary and secondary rim seals of each external floating roof within 90 days after the refilling of the storage tank.
b. Route emissions i. You meet the to a fuel gas requirements in system or back to a Sec. 63.984(b) process. and submit the statement of connection required by Sec. 63.984(c). c. Install and, i. You meet the during the filling requirements in of the storage tank Sec.
with organic 63.2346(a)(4). liquids, operate a
vapor balancing
system.
2. Storage tank at a a. Install a i. You visually reconstructed or new floating roof or inspect each affected source meeting any equivalent control internal floating set of tank capacity and that meets the roof before the liquid organic HAP vapor requirements in initial filling of pressure criteria specified Table 4 to this the storage tank, in Table 2 to this subpart, subpart, item 1.a. and perform seal items 3 through 5. gap inspections of the primary and secondary rim seals of each external floating roof within 90 days after the initial filling of the storage tank. b. Route emissions i. See item 1.b.i of to a fuel gas this table. system or back to a
process.
c. Install and, i. See item 1.c.i of during the filling this table. of the storage tank
with organic
liquids, operate a
vapor balancing
system.
* * * * * * *
9. Table 10 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63 is amended by revising entries 4. and 6. to read as follows:
* * * * *
Table 10 to Subpart EEEE of Part 63.Continuous Compliance With Work Practice Standards
You must demonstrate For the following continuous For each . . . standard . . . compliance by . . . * * * * * * *
4. Transfer rack that is a. Ensure that i. Ensuring that subject to control based on organic liquids are organic liquids are the criteria specified in loaded into loaded into Table 2 to this subpart, transport vehicles transport vehicles items 7 through 10, at an in accordance with in accordance with existing, reconstructed, or the requirements in the requirements in new affected source. Table 4 to this Table 4 to this subpart, items 5 or subpart, items 5 or 6, as applicable. 6, as applicable. [[Page 21834]]
b. Install and, i. Except for during the loading pressure relief of organic liquids, devices, monitoring operate a vapor each potential balancing system. source of vapor leakage in the system, including, but not limited to pumps, valves, and sampling connections, quarterly during the loading of a transport vehicle or the filling of a container using the methods and procedures described in the rule requirements selected for the work practice standard for equipment leak components as specified in Table 4 to this subpart, item 4. An instrument reading of 500 ppmv defines a leak. Repair of leaks is performed according to the repair requirements specified in your selected equipment leak standards. For pressure relief devices, comply with Sec. 63.2346(a)(4)(v). If no loading of a transport vehicle or filling of a container occurs during a quarter, then monitoring of the vapor balancing system is not required. c. Route emissions i. Continuing to to a fuel gas meet the system or back to a requirements process. specified in Sec. 63.984(b). * * * * * * *
6. Storage tank at an a. Route emissions i. Continuing to existing, reconstructed, or to a fuel gas meet the new affected source meeting system or back to requirements any of the tank capacity the process. specified in Sec. and vapor pressure criteria 63.984(b). specified in Table 2 to
this subpart, items 1
through 6.
b. Install and, i. Except for during the filling pressure relief of the storage tank devices, monitoring with organic each potential liquids, operate a source of vapor vapor balancing leakage in the system. system, including, but not limited to pumps, valves, and sampling connections, quarterly during the loading of a storage tank using the methods and procedures described in the rule requirements selected for the work practice standard for equipment leak components as specified in Table 4 to this subpart, item 4. An instrument reading of 500 ppmv defines a leak. Repair of leaks is performed according to the repair requirements specified in your selected equipment leak standards. For pressure relief devices, comply with Sec. 63.2346(a)(4)(v). If no loading of a transport vehicle or filling of a container occurs during a quarter, then monitoring of the vapor balancing