[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 208 (Friday, October 28, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page ]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-26817]


[Federal Register: October 28, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[AD-FRL-5099-3]
RIN 2060-AC19


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 
Source Categories: Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants From the Synthetic 
Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry and Other Processes Subject to 
the Negotiated Regulation for Equipment Leaks

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed compliance extension and proposed changes to subpart 
H.

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

SUMMARY: Elsewhere in today's Federal Register, the EPA is announcing a 
3-month stay and reconsideration of certain portions of the ``National 
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Synthetic 
Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry and Other Processes Subject to 
the Negotiated Regulation for Equipment Leaks'' (collectively known as 
the ``hazardous organic NESHAP'' or the ``HON''). The EPA is issuing 
the stay pursuant to Clean Air Act section 307(d)(7)(B), 42 U.S.C. 
7606(d)(7)(B), which provides the Administrator authority to stay the 
effectiveness of a rule during reconsideration.
    This action is a proposal to extend the compliance date for certain 
compressors and for surge control vessels and bottoms receivers to 
allow the time necessary for installation of controls. Changes are also 
being proposed to the applicability of control requirements for surge 
control vessels and bottoms receivers. This action also proposes a 
temporary extension of the applicable compliance dates beyond the 3 
months of the stay, but only as necessary to complete reconsideration 
(including appropriate regulatory action) of the rule in question.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before November 28, 
1994, unless a hearing is requested by November 7, 1994. If a hearing 
is requested, written comments must be received by December 12, 1994.
    Public Hearing. Anyone requesting a public hearing must contact the 
EPA no later than November 7, 1994. If a hearing is held, it will take 
place on November 14, 1994, beginning at 10:00 a.m.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Comments should be submitted (in duplicate, if 
possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (6102), 
Attention Docket Number A-90-20 (see docket section below), room M-
1500, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, 
Washington, D.C. 20460. The EPA requests that a separate copy also be 
sent to the contact person listed below.
    Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at the 
EPA's Office of Administration Auditorium, Research Triangle Park, 
North Carolina. Persons interested in attending the hearing or wishing 
to present oral testimony should notify Mrs. Kim Teal, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711, 
telephone (919) 541-5580.
    Docket. Dockets No. A-90-20 and A-89-10, containing the supporting 
information for the original NESHAP and this action, are available for 
public inspection and copying between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, at the EPA's Air and Radiation Docket and Information 
Center, Waterside Mall, room M-1500, first floor, 401 M Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20460, or by calling (202) 260-7548 or 260-7549. A 
reasonable fee may be charged for copying.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Janet S. Meyer, Emission Standards 
Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 
27711, telephone number (919) 541-5254.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On April 22, 1994 (59 FR 19402), and June 6, 1994 (59 FR 29196), 
the EPA promulgated in the Federal Register national emission standards 
for hazardous air pollutants (``NESHAP'') for the synthetic organic 
chemical manufacturing industry (SOCMI), and for several other 
processes subject to the equipment leaks portion of the rule. These 
regulations were promulgated as subparts F, G, H, and I in 40 CFR part 
63, and are commonly referred to as the hazardous organic NESHAP, or 
the HON. The final rule required existing sources to comply with 
subpart H beginning October 24, 1994 for some groups of SOCMI processes 
and for processes subject to subpart I. These compliance dates were the 
same as the proposed compliance dates and were consistent with the 
agreement on the negotiated rule for equipment leaks. The final rule 
required existing sources to comply with subpart G no later than April 
22, 1997.
    Public comments on the proposed rule included a substantial number 
of requests for a compliance schedule for subpart H similar to the 3-
year schedule provided under subpart G. Several commenters argued that 
the 6-to-18-month compliance period in proposed subpart H did not take 
into consideration the implementation problems that could arise during 
installation of required equipment. A few commenters thought that 
proposed subpart H did not permit applications for compliance 
extensions. The EPA did not revise the compliance schedule as requested 
because the commenters did not provide any information that would 
justify establishing a source-category-wide compliance schedule similar 
to that provided in subpart G. Due to the lack of detailed information 
on equipment changes and installation schedules, the EPA thought that 
case-by-case compliance extensions would be sufficient to address any 
implementation problems that might arise. In issuing the final rule, 
the EPA added a provision, Sec. 63.182(a)(6), to clarify that 
individual extensions of compliance may be requested for installation 
of equipment required by subpart H.
    The second major area of public comment concerned the proposed 
definition of product accumulator vessel and its overlap with the 
definitions for process vents and storage vessels. Major concerns 
expressed included: (1) The proposed definition did not distinguish 
between product accumulator vessels and process vents, storage vessels 
or other in-process vessels; (2) multiple standards (process vents 
under subpart G and equipment leaks under subpart H) would apply to the 
same vent; and (3) product accumulator vessels, which are point 
sources, would be regulated under provisions that were intended for 
fugitive emissions (i.e., equipment leaks). These commenters suggested 
eliminating the inconsistencies by: (1) Deleting the subpart H 
requirements for product accumulator vessels and regulating them as 
process vents or storage vessels under subpart G; or (2) allowing 
sources to select whether to comply with the requirements of subpart G 
or subpart H. Several commenters representing the non-SOCMI processes 
subject to subpart H also suggested deleting requirements for product 
accumulator vessels for those processes from subpart H. A few of these 
commenters thought that the EPA had added these provisions to the 
negotiated rule after the conclusion of the negotiations. The 
commenters preferred regulating such vessels under future MACT 
standards for the appropriate source category.
    As described in the April 22, 1994 Federal Register (59 FR 19440), 
the EPA concluded that, of the equipment included in the definition of 
``product accumulator vessels,'' only surge control vessels and bottoms 
receivers were outside the scope of process vents, storage vessels, and 
wastewater. Therefore, the term ``product accumulator vessel'' was 
removed from subpart H, and replaced with ``surge control vessels and 
bottoms receivers.'' This change was intended to clarify the 
applicability of the rules and was not a change in the substance or 
effect of the negotiated rule.
    Since the final rule was issued, it has become apparent that 
compliance with the provisions of Sec. 63.164 and Sec. 63.170 involves 
more equipment modifications and changes than originally believed. 
Additionally, the EPA has determined that an administrative process 
needs to be added to subparts F and I to establish these case-by-case 
compliance extensions. A petition for reconsideration has been 
submitted to the EPA requesting reconsideration of the compliance dates 
for compressors, Sec. 63.164, and for surge control vessels and bottoms 
receivers, Sec. 63.170.

II. Summary of and Rationale for Proposed Revisions

    The purpose of this proposal is to revise the compliance dates for 
compressors and for surge control vessels and bottoms receivers to 
provide sufficient time to make the equipment changes necessary for 
compliance with the provisions of Sec. 63.164 and Sec. 63.170. It is 
proposed to add new paragraphs Sec. 63.100 (k)(4) through (k)(7) and 
Sec. 63.103(g) to subpart F to revise the compliance dates for existing 
sources and to document the use of the compliance extensions. Similar 
changes are also being proposed for subpart I, as new paragraphs 
Sec. 63.190 (e)(3) through (e)(5). This action also proposes a revised 
Sec. 63.170 to address issues that have arisen over technical 
feasibility of these control provisions and confusion over the 
distinction between surge control vessels, on the one hand, and process 
vents or storage vessels, on the other hand. This action also proposes 
to add paragraph (k)(8) to Sec. 63.100 and paragraph (h) to Sec. 63.103 
providing a compliance extension for processes that plan to eliminate 
the use of or production of HAP.

A. Surge Control Vessels and Bottoms Receivers

1. Compliance Schedule
    Compliance with the provisions of Sec. 63.170 requires that the 
surge control vessel or bottoms receiver be routed to the process or to 
a control device. Since the rule was issued, the EPA has received 
numerous inquiries regarding the feasibility of complying in the 
specified compliance period given the nature of the process changes 
required for either of the compliance options. Based on this 
information and review of the rulemaking record, the EPA has concluded 
that the nature of the equipment changes required is similar to the 
changes required for compliance with the provisions for process vents, 
storage vessels, etc. subject to subpart G. The scope of the equipment 
changes is, thus, more complex than was originally envisioned when the 
6-month compliance date was selected.
    The new information that the EPA has received demonstrates that at 
many facilities major equipment modifications or replacements are 
necessary in order to comply with the standard. The process changes 
involved include rerouting of a vent stream to a control device or to 
the process; replacement of a surge control vessel operated at 
atmospheric pressure with another that can be operated at a pressure 
greater than atmospheric; replacement, removal or addition of other 
equipment; and process redesign. Such process changes take more than a 
few months to effect, especially considering planning, approval of 
permits, and in some cases approval by the Food and Drug Administration 
or other government entities. All these changes require the same degree 
of engineering design and evaluation that the controls required for 
process vents and storage vessels require. Furthermore, from the range 
of situations reported, it appears that the need for additional time to 
implement the required equipment changes is not limited to specific 
processes or kinds of equipment.
    In light of new information received since publication of the final 
rule, the EPA has concluded that the compliance date for surge control 
vessels and bottoms receivers should be the same as that for process 
vents and other equipment subject to subpart G, i.e., April 22, 1997. 
Due to the widespread need for the additional time to design, purchase, 
install, and permit new equipment, the EPA proposes to revise the 
compliance date to April 22, 1997 for all sources subject to the 
provisions of Sec. 63.170. This proposed language is presented in 
Sec. 63.100(k)(7) of subpart F and Sec. 63.190(e)(6) of subpart I.
2. Revisions to Sec. 63.170
    In addition to the concern with the achievability of the compliance 
dates, the EPA has received numerous inquiries regarding the definition 
of surge control vessels and the distinction between surge control 
vessels (and bottoms receivers) and storage vessels. The EPA has 
concluded from these discussions that this confusion is partially 
attributable to the fact that the present definition for surge control 
vessel is too broad and implies that any vessel that is not a storage 
vessel, e.g., knockout pot, is a surge control vessel. A revised 
definition for ``surge control vessel'' is being proposed to clarify 
that the term is limited to vessels that are within the process unit to 
provide in-process storage, mixing or management of flow rates or 
volumes to assist in production of a product.
    Even with this revised definition, the EPA recognizes that 
considerable overlap will remain between vessels used for storage of 
materials, storage vessels, and equipment that meets the definition of 
surge control vessels or bottoms receivers. This is expected because 
the equipment is frequently indistinguishable in terms of structure, 
size, materials of construction, and materials stored. In many cases, 
these items of equipment may be distinguished only after reviewing 
process diagrams to determine whether the chemicals in the vessel will 
undergo further processing steps at the chemical manufacturing process 
unit. The EPA is aware that in some cases surge control vessels and 
other unit operations have been regulated as storage vessels although 
the function of the particular vessels was not for storage of feed 
materials or product. This classification probably occurred because the 
equipment is physically indistinguishable from other containers used 
for storage.
    To minimize the confusion over appropriate categorization of 
equipment, the EPA believes it would be most appropriate to apply the 
same control criteria to surge control vessels and bottoms receivers 
that are applied to storage vessels in subpart G. This approach should 
provide a workable solution to the problem by eliminating the remaining 
differences between the two categories of equipment and should avoid 
creating unforeseen problems. An additional consideration in this 
decision was that this approach would involve only minimal changes to 
the present text of the rule. Given the length and complexity of the 
HON as a whole, the EPA thinks such a change would be understood more 
readily and with fewer implementation delays. If surge control vessels 
and bottoms receivers were addressed in subpart G, substantial 
redrafting would be required throughout subpart G. Therefore, the EPA 
considered this alternative to have a greater potential for creating 
more issues and confusion than if the problem were addressed in subpart 
H.
    The use of the storage vessel control criteria is also considered 
appropriate for the following reasons. First, it would take 
considerable time, perhaps as much as 1 to 2 years, to gather the 
necessary information and establish separate control requirements for 
surge control vessels and bottoms receivers. Second, information 
presently available to the EPA indicates that surge control vessels and 
bottoms receivers have been regulated as storage vessels in a number of 
cases. Third, the range of physical characteristics and operating 
conditions of surge control vessels and bottoms receivers appears to 
substantially overlap that of storage vessels. Although the EPA does 
not have quantitative data on the characteristics and controls of surge 
control vessels and bottoms receivers, EPA considers the storage vessel 
information to provide the best available data on the characteristics 
of surge control vessels and bottoms receivers. Therefore, the EPA 
believes the MACT floor analysis and selection of the standard analysis 
for storage vessels are adequate for surge control vessels and bottoms 
receivers.

B. Compressors

    The provisions of Sec. 63.164 require the use of mechanical seals 
equipped with a barrier-seal system and controlled degassing of the 
barrier fluid or enclosure of the compressor seal area and venting of 
emissions through a closed-vent system to a control device. The 
standard also allows designation of a compressor as being subject to a 
500 ppm performance standard. These provisions are consistent with the 
provisions in existing equipment leak standards in 40 CFR parts 60 and 
61. Because no public comments were received that identified categories 
of compressors or types of changes that justified compliance times 
longer than the 6 to 18 months provided in the proposed rule, the EPA 
concluded that case-by-case extensions would be sufficient to address 
any implementation problems that might arise.
    Since the final rule was issued, the EPA has received new 
information that indicates it is infeasible for some sources subject to 
the October 24, 1994 compliance date to comply with the compressor 
provisions in the allotted 6-month compliance period. In the 
development of the equipment leak rule, the EPA treated control of 
compressors as requiring similar lead times and control measures as 
those required for control of pumps. It has since been determined that 
significant differences exist in the time required to make the 
necessary equipment changes for compressors. In particular for some 
compressors, compliance with the provisions of Sec. 63.164 requires 
replacement of an existing mechanical seal system or identification of 
an alternative barrier fluid system. Because compressors are 
individually designed for each process and for the expected range of 
operating conditions (pressure, temperature, chemicals in the process, 
etc.), selection of replacement seal or barrier fluid systems requires 
case-by-case engineering evaluation and equipment specification. 
Replacement of a seal system or barrier fluid system for a compressor 
could involve significant capital outlay and always requires careful 
planning and evaluation to ensure continued proper operation of the 
compressor. For projects of this nature, the time required to conduct 
and complete such an assessment, write equipment specifications, bid 
and purchase the equipment is roughly 1 year. Actual installation of 
the replacement seal or barrier fluid system reportedly can be 
completed within 1 week. Thus, the EPA believes that 1 year is the 
minimum feasible period for installation of required equipment. 
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to revise the compliance date for 
compressors at process units subject to the October 24, 1994 and 
January 23, 1995 compliance dates to April 24, 1995. The proposed 
language is presented in new paragraph Sec. 63.100(k)(4) in subpart F 
and Sec. 63.190(e)(3) in subpart I.
    The EPA has also determined that provisions need to be added to 
subparts F and I to provide a mechanism for owners or operators to 
request case-by-case compliance extensions for delays due to 
unavailability of parts. Since replacement seal systems and barrier 
fluid systems are designed for the compressor and the unit, it is 
possible that the vendor company may not be able to provide the 
replacement system on schedule and there would be no other vendor who 
could quickly provide the parts. When the EPA established the 
compliance date for the compressor provisions, the possible need for 
such a compliance extension was not recognized. Therefore, the EPA is 
proposing to allow application for a compliance extension in cases 
where replacement of the seal system or barrier fluid system is 
required and additional time is necessary due to unavailability of 
parts. The proposed language is presented in new paragraph 
Sec. 63.100(k)(5) to subpart F and paragraph Sec. 63.190(e)(4) to 
subpart I. The EPA expects that this compliance extension provision 
will be used only in those rare cases where, despite proper planning 
and scheduling by the owner or operator, the replacement seal or 
barrier fluid system is not available on time. The EPA expects that 
with the proposed revisions to the compliance date the vast majority of 
compressors will not need compliance extensions.
    In reevaluating the compliance period provided in the rule for 
compressors, the EPA also reconsidered whether it was appropriate to 
allow compliance extensions in cases where a process unit shutdown is 
necessary to permit installation of the replacement seal system or 
barrier fluid system. Typically, in a shutdown of a process unit with a 
compressor, the entire system is depressurized and the equipment is 
cleared of process fluids. Even with good air pollution control 
practices, such a process unit shutdown could involve substantially 
more emissions than if the compressor were allowed to operate with 
seals that do not meet the technical specifications of the standard. 
Whether delaying installation of replacement seals or barrier fluid 
systems is environmentally beneficial depends on the particular 
circumstances of each case as well as the length of the delay. 
Therefore, after evaluating the tradeoffs, the EPA concluded that 
compliance extensions until the next scheduled process unit shutdown 
should be allowed in certain circumstances. The EPA also judged that, 
based on estimates of the expected tradeoffs in emissions reduction, 
all compressors should be in compliance with the requirements of 
Sec. 63.164 no later than April 22, 1996. These proposed changes to the 
compliance dates are presented in paragraph Sec. 63.100(k)(5) of 
subpart F and Sec. 63.190(e)(5). The EPA wants to emphasize that these 
proposed compliance extensions would be available only in cases where a 
process unit shutdown is necessary to allow installation of a new seal 
system or a new barrier fluid system or requires changes to the 
existing barrier fluid system.

C. Proposed Sec. 63.100(k)(8)

    The EPA is proposing to allow compliance extensions for processes 
that plan to eliminate the use or production of HAP from their process. 
Subpart I presently provides, in Sec. 63.190(e), additional time for 
such process changes. The proposed new paragraph Sec. 63.100(k)(8) 
would be added to subpart F to address an oversight in the drafting of 
the final rule.

D. Proposed Compliance Extension

    Elsewhere in today's Federal Register, the EPA is announcing, 
pursuant to Clean Air Act section 307(d)(7)(B), reconsideration of the 
equipment leak provisions of the HON dealing with compressors and with 
surge control vessels and bottoms receivers (40 CFR 63.164, 63.170). In 
that action the EPA is also announcing a 3-month partial stay of those 
provisions during the reconsideration. However, the EPA may not be able 
to complete reconsideration of, and any appropriate curative regulatory 
action to, the rule within the 3-month period expressly provided by 
Clean Air Act section 307(d)(7)(B). If the EPA does not complete the 
reconsideration and rulemaking in this timeframe, then it will be 
necessary to temporarily extend the applicable compliance dates until 
the EPA completes final rulemaking action upon reconsideration. By this 
action the EPA proposes, pursuant to section 301(a)(1) of the Clean Air 
Act, 42 U.S.C. 7601(a)(1), a temporary extension of the compliance 
dates beyond the 3 months provided for Group I sources that had been 
required to comply with subpart H by October 24, 1994, and for sources 
required to comply as of January 23, 1995 or later, only as necessary 
to complete reconsideration and revision of the rule in question. As 
the EPA expects to be able to complete reconsideration of these 
regulatory provisions expeditiously, the EPA does not believe this 
temporary extension will, as a practical matter, affect the compliance 
dates for sources in Groups III, IV, or V since completion of the 
rulemaking is expected before April 24, 1995. If, following 
consideration of public comment, the EPA takes final action to extend 
these compliance dates, the dates would be extended until the effective 
date of the EPA's final action following reconsideration of these 
rules.
    The EPA is proposing this temporary extension of the compliance 
dates in order to complete reconsideration of the rule, as discussed 
above. The EPA intends to complete its reconsideration of the rule and, 
following the notice and comment procedures of section 307(d) of the 
Clean Air Act, take appropriate action as expeditiously as practicable. 
The EPA will seek to ensure that the affected parties are not unduly 
prejudiced by the EPA's reconsideration.

III. Impacts

A. Surge Control Vessels and Bottoms Receivers

    The proposed revisions to the compliance date and the control 
requirements for surge control vessels and bottoms receivers will not 
affect the estimated emissions reduction and control cost for the rule. 
In the background analyses used to characterize emissions, emission 
reductions, and control costs for this rule, the EPA treated surge 
control vessels and bottoms receivers as either process vents or 
storage vessels. This approach was taken due to the lack of sufficient 
data to characterize surge control vessels and bottoms receivers and 
the EPA's view that this equipment could be best characterized as a 
storage vessel. Consequently, the proposed revisions to the compliance 
date and the requirements of Sec. 63.170 have no effect on the emission 
reductions or cost estimates.

B. Compressors

    The proposed revisions to the compliance date for compressors 
provisions are estimated to have a negligible effect on the emissions 
reduction due to the equipment leak control requirements. Emissions 
from compressors contribute only a small portion of the estimated 
emissions from equipment leaks because there are very few compressors 
located in SOCMI process units. Information from earlier EPA studies 
also shows that the majority of compressors in SOCMI already meet most, 
if not all, of the equipment specifications in Sec. 63.164. Moreover, 
because of the nature of the equipment changes and the long lead time, 
the EPA believes the proposed revisions will not result in delays of 
installation of required controls. These proposed revisions to subpart 
H are not expected to affect the estimated cost of compliance with the 
rule.

IV. Administrative

A. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements of the previously 
promulgated NESHAP were submitted to and approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB). A copy of this Information Collection 
Request (ICR) document (OMB control number 1414.02) may be obtained 
from Sandy Farmer, Information Policy Branch (PM-223Y); U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency; 401 M Street, SW; Washington, DC 20460 
or by calling (202) 260-2740.
    Today's changes to the NESHAP would have a minor impact on the 
information collection burden estimates made previously. The added 
provisions provide a mechanism to request compliance extensions and are 
not required reports. Therefore, the ICR has not been revised.

B. Executive Order 12866 Review

    The HON rule promulgated on April 22, 1994 was considered 
``significant'' under Executive Order 12866 and a regulatory impact 
analysis (RIA) was prepared. The amendments proposed today would revise 
compliance dates to provide the time necessary for installation of 
controls and do not add any additional control requirements. The EPA 
believes that these proposed amendments would have a negligible impact 
on the results of the RIA and the change is considered to be within the 
uncertainty of the analysis. For the reasons discussed in section III, 
the impacts on emissions reduction are also believed to be negligible.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 requires the identification 
of potentially adverse impacts of Federal regulations upon small 
business entities. The Act specifically requires the completion of a 
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in those instances where small business 
impacts are possible. Because this rulemaking imposes no adverse 
economic impacts, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis has not been 
prepared.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

    Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 605(b), I hereby certify 
that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small business entities.

    Dated: October 24, 1994.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, part 63 of chapter I of 
title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended 
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, 7412, 7414, 7416, and 7601.

Subpart F--National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air 
Pollutants from the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing 
Industry

    2. Section 63.100 is amended by revising paragraph (k) introductory 
text, revising the first sentence of paragraph (k)(3), and by adding 
paragraphs (k)(4) through (k)(8) to read as follows:


Sec. 63.100  Applicability and designation of source.

* * * * *
    (k) Except as provided in paragraphs (l) and (m) of this section, 
sources subject to subparts F, G, or H of this part are required to 
achieve compliance on or before the dates specified in paragraphs 
(k)(1) through (k)(8) of this section.
* * * * *
    (3) Existing sources shall be in compliance with subpart H of this 
part no later than the dates specified in paragraphs (k)(3)(i) through 
(k)(3)(v) of this section, except as provided for in paragraphs (k)(4) 
through (k)(8) of this section. * * *
    (4) Existing chemical manufacturing process units in Groups I and 
II as identified in table 1 of this subpart shall be in compliance with 
the requirements of Sec. 63.164 of subpart H no later than April 24, 
1995 for any compressor meeting one or more of the criteria in 
paragraphs (k)(4)(i) through (k)(4)(iii) of this section, if the work 
can be accomplished without a process unit shutdown, as defined in 
Sec. 63.161 in subpart H.
    (i) The seal system will be replaced;
    (ii) A barrier fluid system will be installed; or
    (iii) A new barrier fluid will be utilized which requires changes 
to the existing barrier fluid system.
    (5) Existing chemical manufacturing process units shall be in 
compliance with the requirements of Sec. 63.164 in subpart H no later 
than 1 year after the applicable compliance date specified in paragraph 
(k)(3) of this section, for any compressor meeting the criteria in 
paragraphs (k)(5)(i) through (k)(5)(iv) of this section.
    (i) The compressor meets one or more of the criteria specified in 
paragraphs (k)(4) (i) through (iii) of this section;
    (ii) The work can be accomplished without a process unit shutdown 
as defined in Sec. 63.161 of subpart H;
    (iii) The additional time is actually necessary due to the 
unavailability of parts beyond the control of the owner or operator; 
and
    (iv) The owner or operator submits the request to the EPA Regional 
Office at the addresses listed in Sec. 63.13 of subpart A of this part 
no later than 45 days before the applicable compliance date in 
paragraph (k)(3) of this section, but in no event earlier than [date 30 
days after publication of final rule in the Federal Register]. The 
request shall include the information specified in paragraphs 
(k)(5)(iv)(A) through (k)(5)(iv)(E) of this section. Unless the EPA 
Regional Office objects to the request within 30 days after receipt, 
the request shall be deemed approved.
    (A) The name and address of the owner or operator and the address 
of the existing source if it differs from the address of the owner or 
operator;
    (B) The name, address, and telephone number of a contact person for 
further information;
    (C) An identification of the chemical manufacturing process unit, 
and of the specific equipment for which additional compliance time is 
required;
    (D) The reason compliance can not reasonably be achieved by the 
applicable date specified in paragraphs (k)(3)(i) through (k)(3)(v) of 
this section; and
    (E) The date by which the owner or operator expects to achieve 
compliance.
    (6) If compliance with the compressor provisions of Sec. 63.164 of 
subpart H of this part can not reasonably be achieved without a process 
unit shutdown, as defined in Sec. 63.161 of subpart H, the owner or 
operator shall achieve compliance no later than April 22, 1996. The 
owner or operator who elects to use this provision shall comply with 
the requirements of Sec. 63.103(g) of this subpart.
    (7) Existing sources shall be in compliance with the provisions of 
Sec. 63.170 of subpart H no later than April 22, 1997.
    (8) If an owner or operator of a chemical manufacturing process 
unit subject to the provisions of subparts F, G, and H of this part 
plans to implement pollution prevention measures to eliminate the use 
or production of HAP listed in table 2 of this subpart by October 23, 
1995, the provisions of subpart H do not apply regardless of the 
compliance dates specified in paragraph (k)(3) of this section. The 
owner or operator who elects to use this provision shall comply with 
the requirements of Sec. 63.103(h) of this subpart.
* * * * *
    3. Section 63.103 is amended by adding paragraphs (g) and (h) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 63.103  General compliance, reporting, and recordkeeping 
provisions.

* * * * *
    (g) An owner or operator who elects to use the compliance extension 
provisions of Sec. 63.100(k)(6) shall submit the compliance extension 
request to the EPA Regional Office no later than 45 days before the 
applicable compliance date in Sec. 63.100(k)(3), but in no event 
earlier than [date 30 days after publication of final rule in the 
Federal Register]. The request shall contain the information specified 
in Sec. 63.100(k)(5)(iv) and the reason compliance can not reasonably 
be achieved without a process unit shutdown, as defined in Sec. 63.161.
    (h) An owner or operator who elects to use the compliance extension 
provisions of Sec. 63.100(k)(8) shall submit to the EPA Regional Office 
a brief description of the process change, identify the HAP eliminated, 
and the expected date of cessation of operation of the current process. 
The description shall be submitted no later than [date 30 days after 
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register] or with the 
Notice of Compliance Status as required in Sec. 63.182(c) of subpart H, 
whichever is later.

Subpart H--National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air 
Pollutants for Equipment Leaks

    4. Section 63.161 is amended by revising the definition of surge 
control vessel to read as follows:


Sec. 63.161  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Surge control vessel means feed drums, recycle drums, and 
intermediate vessels. Surge control vessels are used within a chemical 
manufacturing process unit when in-process storage, mixing, or 
management of flow rates or volumes is needed on a recurring or ongoing 
basis to assist in production of a product.
* * * * *
    5. Section 63.170 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 63.170  Standards: Surge control vessels and bottoms receivers.

    Each surge control vessel or bottoms receiver that is not routed 
back to the process and that meets the conditions specified in table 2 
or table 3 of this subpart shall be equipped with a closed-vent system 
that routes the organic vapors vented from the vessel or bottoms 
receiver back to the process or to a control device that complies with 
the requirements in Sec. 63.172 of this subpart, except as provided in 
Sec. 63.162(b) of this subpart.
    6. Subpart H is amended by adding tables 2 and 3 to read as 
follows:
* * * * * 

  Table 2 to Subpart H.--Surge Control Vessels and Bottom Receivers at  
                            Existing Sources                            
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Vapor    
                                                             Pressurea  
             Vessel Capacity (cubic meters)                (kilopascals)
                                                                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
75  capacity < 151............................  13
                                                                    .1  
151  capacity.................................  5.
                                                                    2   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
aMaximum true vapor pressure of total organic HAP at operating          
  temperature.                                                          


  Table 3 to Subpart H.--Surge Control Vessels and Bottom Receivers at  
                            Existing Sources                            
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Vapor    
                                                             Pressurea  
             Vessel Capacity (cubic meters)                (kilopascals)
                                                                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
38  capacity < 151............................  13
                                                                    .1  
151  capacity.................................  0.
                                                                    7   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
aMaximum true vapor pressure of total organic HAP at operating          
  temperature.                                                          

Subpart I--National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air 
Pollutants for Certain Processes Subject to the Negotiated 
Regulation for Equipment Leaks

    7. Section 63.190 is amended by revising paragraph (e)(2) and by 
adding paragraph (e)(3) through (e)(6) to read as follows:
* * * * *


Sec. 63.190  Applicability and designation of source.

    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (2) Existing sources shall comply no later than October 24, 1994, 
except as provided in paragraphs (e)(3) through (e)(7) of this section 
or unless an extension has been granted by the EPA Regional Office or 
operating permit authority as provided in Sec. 63.6(i) of subpart A of 
this part.
    (3) Existing chemical manufacturing process units shall be in 
compliance with the requirements of Sec. 63.164 of subpart H no later 
than April 24, 1995 for any compressor meeting one or more of the 
criteria in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (e)(3)(iii) of this section, 
if the work can be accomplished without a process unit shutdown, as 
defined in Sec. 63.161.
    (i) The seal system will be replaced;
    (ii) A barrier fluid system will be installed; or
    (iii) A new barrier fluid will be utilized which requires changes 
to the existing barrier fluid system.
    (4) Existing chemical manufacturing process units shall be in 
compliance with the requirements of Sec. 63.164 of subpart H no later 
than January 23, 1996, for any compressor meeting the criteria in 
paragraphs (e)(4)(i) through (e)(4)(iv) of this section.
    (i) The compressor meets one or more of the criteria specified in 
paragraphs (e)(3) (i) through (iii) of this section;
    (ii) The work can be accomplished without a process unit shutdown 
as defined in Sec. 63.161;
    (iii) The additional time is actually necessary due to the 
unavailability of parts beyond the control of the owner or operator; 
and
    (iv) The owner or operator submits the request to the EPA Regional 
Office at the addresses listed in Sec. 63.13 of subpart A of this part 
no later than [date 30 days after publication of final rule in the 
Federal Register]. The request shall include the information specified 
in paragraphs (e)(4)(iv)(A) through (e)(4)(iv)(E) of this section. 
Unless the EPA Regional Office objects to the request within 30 days 
after receipt, the request shall be deemed approved.
    (A) The name and address of the owner or operator and the address 
of the existing source if it differs from the address of the owner or 
operator;
    (B) The name, address, and telephone number of a contact person for 
further information;
    (C) An identification of the chemical manufacturing process unit, 
and of the specific equipment for which additional compliance time is 
required;
    (D) The reason compliance can not reasonably be achieved by April 
24, 1995; and
    (E) The date by which the owner or operator expects to achieve 
compliance.
    (5) If compliance with the compressor provisions of Sec. 63.164 of 
subpart H of this part can not reasonably be achieved without a process 
unit shutdown, as defined in Sec. 63.161 of subpart H, the owner or 
operator shall achieve compliance no later than April 22, 1996. The 
owner or operator who elects to use this provision shall comply with 
the requirements of Sec. 63.192(g) of this subpart.
    (6) Existing sources shall be in compliance with the provisions of 
Sec. 63.170 of subpart H no later than April 22, 1997.
* * * * *
    8. Section 63.192 is amended by adding a new paragraph (l) to read 
as follows:
* * * * *


Sec. 63.192  Standard.

* * * * *
    (l) An owner or operator who elects to use the compliance extension 
provisions of Sec. 63.190(e)(5) shall submit the compliance extension 
request to the EPA Regional Office no later than [date 30 days after 
publication of final rule in the Federal Register]. The request shall 
contain the information specified in Sec. 63.190(e)(4)(iv) and the 
reason compliance can not reasonably be achieved without a process unit 
shutdown, as defined in Sec. 63.161 of subpart H.

[FR Doc. 94-26817 Filed 10-27-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P