[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 239 (Monday, December 14, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68832-68901]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-27385]
[[Page 68831]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency
_______________________________________________________________________
40 CFR Part 63
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants; Manufacture
of Amino/Phenolic Resins; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 239 / Monday, December 14, 1998 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 68832]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[AD-6173-3]
RIN 2060-AE36
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants;
Manufacture of Amino/Phenolic Resins
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule and notice of public hearing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The proposed rule would reduce air emissions of hazardous air
pollutants (HAP) from existing and new sources that manufacture amino
or phenolic resins. The proposed rule would implement section 112 of
the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (Act) and is based on the
Administrator's determination that amino/phenolic resin sources emit
HAP identified on the EPA's list of 188 HAP.
The resins covered by the proposed rule use formaldehyde as a
primary feedstock. The major HAP emitted by sources covered by the
proposed rule include formaldehyde, methanol, phenol, xylene, and
toluene. Beginning with the first year after sources are required to
comply with the proposed rule, the EPA concludes that the proposed rule
is estimated to reduce HAP emissions from existing sources by 356
megagrams per year (Mg/yr) from a baseline level of 644 Mg/yr. This is
a 55 percent reduction.
The published list of source categories included the amino resins
production source category and the phenolic resins production source
category. These two products can broadly be classified as formaldehyde-
based thermosetting resins. These two source categories are being
combined into one source category (i.e., the amino/phenolic resins
production source category) and are treated as a single source category
for the purposes of this rulemaking.
DATES: Comments: Comments must be received on or before February 12,
1999. For information on submitting electronic comments see the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Public Hearing: A public hearing will be held, if requested, to
provide interested persons an opportunity for oral presentation of
data, views, or arguments concerning the proposed standards for the
manufacture of Amino/Phenolic Resins. If anyone contacts the EPA
requesting to speak at a public hearing by January 11, 1999, a public
hearing will be held on January 28, 1999 beginning at 9:30 a.m.
ADDRESSES: Comments: Comments should be submitted (in duplicate, if
possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (MC-6102)
Attention: Docket No. A-92-19, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
401 M Street SW., Washington, DC 20460. The EPA requests that a
separate copy also be sent to John Schaefer, USEPA, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711,
telephone (919) 541-0296, fax (919) 541-3470 and e-mail:
[email protected].
Comments and data may also be submitted electronically by following
the instructions listed in SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. No confidential
business information (CBI) should be submitted through e-mail.
Public Hearing: Persons interested in attending the hearing should
notify Ms. Maria Noell at (919) 541-5607, Organic Chemicals Group (MD-
13) to verify that a hearing will occur. The public hearing, if
required, will be held at the EPA's Office of Administration
Auditorium, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Request to Speak at Hearing: Persons wishing to present oral
testimony must contact the EPA by January 11, 1999 by contacting Ms.
Maria Noell; Organic Chemicals Group, (MD-13), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711,
telephone number (919) 541-5607.
Basis and Purpose Document: The basis and purpose document (BPD)
may be obtained from the U.S. Environmental Protection Library (MD-35),
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone (919) 541-2777. Please
refer to ``National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Source Category: Manufacture of Amino/Phenolic Resins--Background
Information for Proposed Standards'' for the BPD. This document may
also be obtained electronically from the EPA's Technology Transfer
Network (TNN) (see SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for access information.)
Docket: A docket, No. A-92-19, containing information considered by
the EPA in the development of the proposed standards for the
Manufacture of Amino/Phenolic Resins, is available for public
inspection between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday
(except for Federal holidays) at the following address: U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Docket and
Information Center (MC-6102), 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC 20460,
telephone: (202) 260-7548. The docket is located at the above address
in Room M-1500, Waterside Mall (ground floor). The proposed
regulations, BPD, and other supporting information are available for
inspection and copying. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning the
proposed standard, contact Mr. John Schaefer, US EPA, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711,
telephone (919) 541-0296.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated Entities: Regulated categories and
entities include:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated
Category entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manufacture of Amino/Phenolic Resins...... Amino/phenolic resins
facilities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 the 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 facility is regulated by this action, you should carefully
examine the applicability criteria in Sec. 63.1400 of the rule. If you
have questions regarding the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person listed in the preceding FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Electronic comments and data can be sent directly to EPA at: A-and-
R-D[email protected]. Electronic comments must be submitted as an
ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of
encryption. Comments and data will also be accepted on diskette in
Wordperfect 5.1 file format or 6.1 file format or ASCII file format.
All comments and data in electronic form must be identified by the
docket number A-92-19. Electronic comments may be filed online at many
Federal Depository Libraries.
This document, the proposed regulatory texts, and BPD are available
in docket number A-92-19 or by request from the EPA's Air and Radiation
Docket and Information Center. (see ADDRESSES) Electronic copies of
this document may also be obtained from the EPA Technology Transfer
Network (TTN) via the internet at the following address: http://
www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The EPA TTN is a free service, except for the
normal long distance charges that apply.
[[Page 68833]]
The following outline is provided to aid in reading the preamble to
the proposed NESHAP for the Manufacture of Amino/Phenolic Resins. The
information presented in this preamble is organized as follows:
I. List of Source Categories
A. Single Source Category
B. Change of Source Category Name
C. Industry Profile
II. Background
A. Pollutants
B. Development of the Standard
III. Authority for National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) Decision Process
A. Source of Authority for NESHAP Development
B. Criteria for Development of NESHAP
IV. Summary of Proposed Standards
A. Source Categories to be Regulated, Definition of Affected
Source, and Definition of Amino/Phenolic Resin
B. Relationship to Other Rules
C. Pollutants to be Regulated
D. Affected Emission Points
E. Format of the Standards
F. Summary of the Proposed Standards
G. Compliance and Performance Test Provisions
H. Monitoring Requirements
I. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
V. Rationale for Proposed Standards
A. Selection of Hazardous Air Pollutants for Control
B. Selection of Emission Points
C. Determination of the Proposed Standards
D. Selection of the Format of the Proposed Rule
E. Selection of Compliance and Performance Test Provisions
F. Selection of Parameter Monitoring Provisions
G. Selection of Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
VI. Solicitation of Comments
VII. Summary Of Environmental, Energy, Cost, and Economic Impacts
A. Facilities Affected by These NESHAP
B. Primary Air Impacts
C. Non-air Environmental Impacts
D. Energy Impacts
E. Cost Impacts
F. Economic Impacts
VIII. Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
C. Executive Order 12866 Review
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
E. Unfunded Mandates
F. Executive Order 12875
G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
H. Executive Order 13045
I. Executive Order 13084
Please note that in the rule which follows this preamble,
Secs. 63.1410, 63.1411, 63.1412, and 63.1416 are all reserved sections.
This action was taken in order to maintain clarity and continuity in
the rule if new sections need to be added to the rule at a later date.
I. List of Source Categories
A. Single Source Category
Section 112 of the Act requires that the EPA evaluate and control
emissions of HAP. The control of HAP is achieved through promulgation
of emission standards under sections 112(d) and 112(f) of the Act and
work practice and equipment standards under section 112(h) of the Act
for categories of sources that emit HAP. On July 16, 1992, the EPA
published an initial list of major and area source categories to be
regulated, (57 FR 31576), as required under section 112(c) of the Act.
The amino resins production and phenolic resins production source
categories were recorded separately on this initial list.
The EPA believes that it is technically feasible to regulate
emissions from amino and phenolic resin manufacturing facilities by a
single set of emission standards. As described in detail in Chapter 3
of the Basis and Purpose Document, the amino resins manufacturing
process and the phenolic resins manufacturing process are very similar.
At many facilities, the same process equipment is used to produce both
amino and phenolic resins. For such facilities, complying with two
different sets of standards would be difficult, if not impossible. In
addition, the emission points for facilities manufacturing amino and
phenolic resins are the same (reactor and non-reactor process vents,
storage vessels, wastewater, and equipment leaks) and the resulting
emission characteristics are very similar. Lastly, amino and phenolic
manufacturing facilities use the same types of control devices to
control HAP emissions from corresponding emission points; that is,
there are no significant differences in the types of control
technologies applicable to controlling emissions from amino and
phenolic resins manufacturing processes. Another consideration in
treating amino and phenolic resin facilities under a single set of
standards is the cost involved in developing the standards and in
complying with the standards. For the EPA, it is more efficient and
less costly to develop a single standard than to develop separate
standards for multiple source categories that have similar emission
characteristics and applicable control technologies. A single set of
standards will ensure that process equipment with comparable HAP
emissions and control technologies are subject to consistent emission
control requirements. In addition, compliance and enforcement
activities will be more efficient and less costly.
In summary, the information obtained during the information
gathering phase of the project demonstrated that the manufacturing
processes, emission characteristics, and applicable control
technologies for facilities in these two source categories are similar.
Based on these factors, the EPA concluded that these two source
categories are to be treated as a single source category for the
purposes of this rulemaking. For purposes of this preamble and the
proposed rule, the term amino/phenolic resin, and similar terms, will
be used to indicate that the two source categories of amino resins and
phenolic resins have been treated as a single source category for
purposes of developing this rule.
B. Change of Source Category Name
Under today's action the EPA is proposing to revise the source
category list published under section 112(c) of the Act to combine the
Amino Resins Production and the Phenolic Resins Production source
categories into a new category called ``Amino/Phenolic Resins
Production.''
C. Industry Profile
Production methods used in the manufacture of amino/phenolic resins
include both batch and continuous operations, although batch operations
make up a majority of the process. The sizes of the major facilities
range from 140 Mg/yr to 149,000 Mg/yr. Air emissions of HAP originate
from breathing and withdrawal losses from storage vessels, venting of
process vessels, leaks from piping and equipment used to transfer HAP
(equipment leaks), and volatization of HAP from wastewater streams. HAP
emitted from the amino/phenolic production processes include a range of
compounds. Among the most prevalent are formaldehyde, methanol, and
phenol. Detailed information describing the manufacturing processes and
associated emissions can be found in the Basis and Purpose Document.
Over 56 companies at 99 facilities produce amino/phenolic products.
An estimated 40 facilities are considered to be major sources according
to the CAA criterion of having the potential to emit 10 tons per year
of any HAP or 25 tons per year of combined HAP, based on 1992 emissions
data. The proposed rule would apply to all major sources that
manufacture amino/phenolic resins. Area sources would not be subject to
the proposed rule.
[[Page 68834]]
II. Background
A. Pollutants
The Act was created, in part, ``to protect and enhance the quality
of the Nation's air resources so as to promote the public health and
welfare and the productive capacity of its population'' [section
101(b)(1) of the Act]. The proposed rule protects air quality and
promotes the public health by reducing emissions of some of the HAP
listed in section 112(b)(1) of the Act.
The HAP listed in section 112(b)(1) of the Act emitted by the
amino/phenolic resin facilities covered by this proposed rule include
formaldehyde, methanol, phenol, xylene, and toluene. Exposure to these
compounds has been demonstrated to cause adverse health effects. The
adverse health effects associated with the exposure to these specific
HAP are discussed briefly in the following paragraphs. In general,
these findings have only been shown with concentrations higher than
those in the ambient air.
Formaldehyde, one of the HAP associated with this source category,
has been classified as a probable human carcinogen of medium
carcinogenic hazard based on sufficient animal and limited human
evidence. In addition, short-term and long-term exposure to significant
levels of formaldehyde may cause irritation of the eye, nose, throat,
and, at higher levels, the respiratory tract in humans. Long-term
exposures of animals have also resulted in damage to respiratory tract
tissues. Although little information is available on developmental
effects to humans, animal tests do not indicate effects on fetal
development.
Short-term inhalation of large amounts of methanol by humans may
cause headache, gastric disturbances, and visual disturbances leading
to blindness. Effects on vision, gastrointestinal system and the
nervous system have been reported in humans following significant long-
term exposures. While no information is available on the reproductive
or developmental effects of methanol in humans, birth defects have been
observed in the offspring of rats exposed by inhalation to very high
levels of methanol during pregnancy. Although no information is
available on the carcinogenic effects of methanol in humans or animals,
several tests of methanol's ability to damage genetic material have
been negative. Because of a lack of information for humans and
inadequate animal evidence, EPA does not consider methanol to be
classifiable as a human carcinogen.
Short-term inhalation of high levels of phenol in air by humans may
cause irritation of lungs, muscle tremors, loss of coordination,
paralysis, and with several weeks of high exposure, severe heart,
kidney, liver and lung damage. Chronic inhalation exposure to phenol in
humans has been associated with liver injury, and muscle pain and
weakness. Effects on fetal development have been observed in animals
ingesting phenol during pregnancy. Studies in mice have reported that
phenol applied to the skin causes skin cancer and, its application
coincident with certain cancer-causing chemicals, increases their
carcinogenic potency. Because of a lack of information for humans and
inadequate animal evidence, EPA does not consider phenol to be
classifiable as a human carcinogen.
Short-term inhalation of high levels of mixed xylenes in humans may
cause irritation of the nose and throat, nausea, vomiting, gastric
irritation, mild transient eye irritation, and neurological effects.
Long-term inhalation of high levels of xylenes in humans may result in
nervous system effects such as headaches, dizziness, fatigue, tremors,
and incoordination. Other reported effects noted include labored
breathing, heart palpitation, severe chest pain, abnormal heart
functioning, and possible effects on the blood and kidneys.
Developmental effects have been reported from xylene exposure via
inhalation in animals. Because of a lack of information for humans and
inadequate animal evidence, EPA does not consider xylenes to be
classifiable as a human carcinogen.
Short-term inhalation of relatively high concentrations of toluene
by humans may cause nervous system effects such as fatigue, sleepiness,
headaches, and nausea, as well as, irregular heartbeat. Repeated
exposure to high concentrations may cause additional nervous system
effects, including incoordination, tremors, decreased brain size,
involuntary eye movements, and may impair speech, hearing, and vision.
Long-term exposure of toluene in humans has also been reported to
irritate the skin, eyes, and respiratory tract, and to cause dizziness,
headaches, and difficulty with sleep. Children whose mothers were
exposed to high levels of toluene before birth may suffer nervous
system dysfunction, attention deficits, and minor face and limb
defects. Inhalation of toluene by pregnant women may also increase the
risk of spontaneous abortion. Because of a lack of information for
humans and inadequate animal evidence, EPA does not consider toluene to
be classifiable as a human carcinogen.
The EPA does not have the type of current detailed data on each of
the amino/phenolic resin facilities covered by the proposed rule, and
the people living around the facilities, that would be necessary to
conduct an analysis to determine the actual population exposures to the
organic HAP emitted from these facilities and potential for resultant
health effects. Therefore, the EPA does not know the extent to which
the adverse health effects described above occur in the populations
surrounding these facilities. However, to the extent the adverse
effects do occur, the promulgated standard will substantially reduce
emissions and exposures to the level achievable with maximum achievable
control technology.
B. Development of the Standard
The alternatives considered in the development of the proposed
rule, including those alternatives selected as standards for new and
existing sources, are based on process and emissions data received from
the existing facilities known by the EPA to be in operation.
Regulatory alternatives more stringent than the MACT floor were
selected when they were judged to be achievable ``taking into
consideration the cost of achieving such emission reduction, and any
non-air quality health and environmental impacts and energy
requirements'' [Section 112(d)(2) of the Act].
The proposed rule gives existing facilities 3 years from the
effective date of the final rule to comply. This is the maximum amount
allowed by Section 112(i)(3)(A) of the Act. Based on the number of
existing facilities affected by the proposed rule, the EPA believes
that required retrofits or other actions can be achieved in the
timeframe allotted. New facilities will be required to comply with the
rule upon start-up. The EPA sees no reason why new facilities would not
be able to comply with the requirements of the rule upon start-up.
Included in the proposed rule are methods for determining initial
compliance as well as monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements. All of these components are necessary to ensure that
affected sources will comply with the standards both initially and over
time. However, the EPA has made every effort to simplify the
requirements in the rule.
The proposed rule is modeled after the Hazardous Organic NESHAP
(HON) (40 CFR part 63, subparts F, G, and H) and the Polymers & Resins
IV NESHAP. Because the proposed rule relies on the Polymers & Resins IV
NESHAP for some regulatory language and the Polymers &
[[Page 68835]]
Resins IV NESHAP is currently under litigation with changes to the
regulatory text expected to be part of the litigation outcome,
corresponding changes may be made to this proposal at the appropriate
time. In some instances, the proposed rule refers to the HON. In doing
so, the proposed rule has benefited from the extensive public debate
and participation experienced in the HON rulemaking. The EPA has also
attempted to maintain consistency with existing regulations by either
incorporating text from existing or forthcoming regulations or
referencing the applicable sections, depending on which method would be
least confusing for a given situation.
Representatives from other interested EPA offices and programs,
including Regional offices, as well as state environmental agency
personnel, participated in the regulatory development. These
representatives were involved in the regulatory development process,
and were given opportunities to review and comment on the proposed rule
before proposal and promulgation. Therefore, the EPA believes that the
implication to other EPA offices and programs and to state agencies has
been adequately considered during the development of the proposed rule.
In addition, the EPA has met with some members of industry concerning
the proposed rule. Finally, industry, regulatory authorities, and
environmental groups will have the opportunity to comment on the
proposed rule and provide additional information during the public
comment period following proposal.
The proposed rule will result in an organic HAP emission reduction
of 356 Mg/yr for existing facilities. No emission reductions have been
estimated for new facilities because the EPA does not anticipate that
any new facilities will be built over the next 5 years. The emission
reductions achieved by these standards will help to achieve the primary
goal of the Clean Air Act, which is to ``enhance the quality of the
Nation's air resources so as to promote the public health and welfare
and the productive capacity of its population.''
III. Authority for National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) Decision Process
A. Source of Authority for NESHAP Development
Section 112 of the Act gives the EPA the authority to establish
national standards to reduce air emissions from sources that emit one
or more HAP. Section 112(b) contains a list of HAP to be regulated by
NESHAP. Section 112(c) directs the EPA to use this pollutant list to
develop and publish a list of source categories for which NESHAP will
be developed. The EPA must list all known source categories and
subcategories of ``major sources'' (defined below) that emit one or
more of the listed HAP. A major source is defined in section 112(a) as
any stationary source or group of stationary sources located within a
contiguous area and under common control that emits or has the
potential to emit in the aggregate, considering controls, 10 tons/yr or
more of any one HAP or 25 tons/yr or more of any combination of HAP.
This list of source categories was published in the Federal Register on
July 16, 1992 (57 FR 31576) and includes amino and phenolic resins.
B. Criteria for Development of NESHAP
The NESHAP are to be developed to control HAP emissions from both
new and existing sources according to the statutory directives set out
in section 112(d) of the Act. The statute requires the standards to
reflect the maximum degree of reduction in emissions of HAP that is
achievable for new or existing sources. This control level is referred
to as MACT. Consideration of control levels more stringent than the
MACT floor (described below) must reflect consideration of the cost of
achieving the emission reduction, any non-air quality, health, and
environmental impacts, and energy requirements.
The MACT floor is the least stringent level allowed for MACT
standards. For new sources, the standards for a source category or
subcategory ``shall not be less stringent than the emission control
that is achieved in practice by the best controlled similar source, as
determined by the Administrator'' [section 112(d)(3) of the Act].
Existing source standards shall be no less stringent than the average
emission limitation achieved by the best performing 12 percent of the
existing sources for categories and subcategories with 30 or more
sources or the average emission limitation achieved by the best
performing 5 sources for categories or subcategories with fewer than 30
sources [section 112(d)(3) of the Act]. These two minimum levels of
control define the MACT floor for new and existing sources.
Two interpretations have been evaluated by the EPA for representing
the MACT floor for existing sources. One interpretation is that the
MACT floor is represented by the worst performing source of the best
performing 12 percent of the sources. The second interpretation is that
the MACT floor is represented by the ``average emission limitation
achieved'' by the best performing sources, where the ``average'' is
based on a measure of central tendency, such as the arithmetic mean,
median, or mode. This latter interpretation is referred to as the
``higher floor interpretation.'' In a June 6, 1994 Federal Register
notice (59 FR 29196), the EPA presented its interpretation of the
statutory language concerning the MACT floor for existing sources.
Based on a review of the statute, legislative history, and public
comments, the EPA believes that the ``higher floor interpretation'' is
a better reading of the statutory language. The determination of the
MACT floor for existing sources under the proposed rule followed the
``higher floor interpretation.''
IV. Summary of Proposed Standards
A. Source Categories to be Regulated, Definition of Affected Source,
and Definition of Amino/Phenolic Resin
The published list of source categories included the amino resins
production source category and the phenolic resins production source
category. These two products can broadly be classified as formaldehyde-
based thermosetting resins. These two source categories are being
combined into one source category and are treated as a single source
category for the purposes of this rulemaking. The proposed rule would
regulate organic HAP emissions from facilities in the amino/phenolic
resin source category, provided that a facility is determined to be a
major source. The proposed rule would regulate existing and new
affected sources. For this proposed rule, an affected source is defined
as each group of one or more amino/phenolic resin process units (APPU)
that is located at a plant site that is a major source. An APPU is
defined as follows:
Amino/Phenolic Resin Process Unit (APPU) means a collection of
equipment assembled and connected by hard-piping or ductwork used to
process raw materials and to manufacture an amino/phenolic resin as
its primary product. This collection of equipment includes process
vents from process vessels; equipment identified in Sec. 63.149;
storage vessels, as determined in Sec. 63.1400(g); and the equipment
that is subject to the equipment leak provisions as specified in
Sec. 63.1415. Utilities, lines and equipment not containing process
fluids, and other non-process lines, such as heating and cooling
systems which do not combine their materials with those in the
processes they serve, are not part of the amino/phenolic resin
process unit. An amino/phenolic resin process unit consists of more
than one unit operation.
In addition to the emission points and/or equipment included in the
definition
[[Page 68836]]
of APPU, the affected source includes waste management units,
maintenance wastewater, heat exchange systems, and equipment used to
comply with the proposed rule, including control devices and recovery
devices.
As described earlier in this preamble, the source categories of
amino resins and phenolic resins have been combined into a single
source category. To reflect this administrative action in the proposed
rule, there are three definitions: amino/phenolic resin, amino resin,
and phenolic resin. These definitions are presented below:
Amino/Phenolic Resin means one or both of the following types of
resins:
(1) Amino resin, or
(2) Phenolic resin.
Amino resin means a resin produced through the reaction of
formaldehyde, or a formaldehyde containing solution (e.g., aqueous
formaldehyde), with compound(s) that contain the amino group; these
compounds include melamine, urea, and urea derivatives.
Phenolic resin means a resin that is a condensation product of
formaldehyde and phenol, or a formaldehyde substitute and/or a
phenol substitute. Substitutes for formaldehyde include acetaldehyde
or furfuraldehyde. Substitutes for phenol include other phenolic
starting compounds such as cresol, xylenols, p-tert-butylphenol, p-
phenylphenol, and nonylphenol.
B. Relationship to Other Rules
Affected sources subject to the proposed rule may also be subject
to other existing rules. The relationship between this rule and three
other rules is discussed below. See proposed Sec. 63.1401(g)-(i).
Affected sources subject to the proposed rule may have storage
vessels subject to the NSPS for Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Vessels
(40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb). For storage vessels subject to and
complying with the NSPS, the proposed rule requires that such storage
vessels remain in compliance with the NSPS because the NSPS level of
control (i.e., 95%) is more stringent than the control level for the
proposed rule (i.e., 50%). For storage vessels subject to the NSPS but
that did not have to apply controls (e.g., the storage vessels stores
an organic liquid but the vapor pressure of the stored material is
below the applicability criteria), the proposed rule states that after
the compliance date for the proposed rule, such storage vessels are
only required to comply with the proposed rule and are no longer
subject to subpart Kb.
Affected sources subject to the proposed rule may have cooling
towers subject to the NESHAP for Industrial Cooling Towers (40 CFR part
63, subpart Q). There is no conflict between the requirements of
subpart Q and the proposed rule. Subpart Q prohibits the use of certain
chemicals in the cooling tower water, and the proposed rule implements
a leak detection and repair program for organic HAP. Therefore,
affected sources subject to both rules must comply with both rules.
Affected sources subject to the proposed rule may also be subject
to the Standards of Performance for Equipment Leaks of VOC in the
Synthetic Organic Chemicals Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI LDAR) (40 CFR
part 60, subpart VV) and/or the National Emission Standards for Organic
Hazardous Air Pollutants for Equipment Leaks (HON NESHAP LDAR)(40 CFR
part 63, subpart H). After the compliance date for the proposed rule,
such affected sources are only required to comply with the proposed
rule and are no longer subject to CFR part 60 subpart VV or to CFR part
63 subpart H. The proposed rule directly references the HON provisions
contained in subpart H, and therefore is equivalent to the HON. The HON
is more stringent than the subpart VV.
Another likely instance of interaction between the proposed rule
and other rules is related to storage vessels already covered by the
HON; this is likely to occur at amino/phenolic resin facilities that
are collocated with formaldehyde plants subject to the HON. In such
cases, a methanol storage vessel supplying methanol to the amino/
phenolic resin facility is likely to be subject to the HON. The storage
vessel assignment procedures in the proposed rule address such
situations. If a storage vessel is already subject to another part 63
standard, that storage vessel is considered to be assigned to the
process unit subject to the part 63 standard and is not subject to the
proposed rule.
C. Pollutants To Be Regulated
Facilities in the amino/phenolic source category emit a variety of
organic HAP. Among the most significant emissions of organic HAP are
the following: formaldehyde, methanol, phenol, xylene, and toluene. The
proposed rule would regulate emissions of these compounds, as well as a
variety of other organic HAP that are emitted.
D. Affected Emission Points
Emissions from the following emission points are being covered by
the proposed rule: storage vessels, continuous process vents, batch
process vents, heat exchange systems, wastewater, and equipment leaks.
E. Format of the Standards
The Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON) (subparts F, G, H, and I of 40
CFR part 63) is relied on heavily and provides the basis for selection
of the proposed formats for the majority of emission points. For those
emission points relying on the HON (i.e., storage vessels, continuous
process vents, heat exchange systems, wastewater, and equipment leaks),
the format of the proposed standards is the same as that found in the
HON. The following paragraphs summarize the selected formats.
For storage vessels, the format of the proposed standards is
dependent on the method selected to comply with the standards. If tank
improvements (e.g., internal or external floating roofs with proper
seals and fittings) are selected, the format is a combination of
design, equipment, work practice, and operational standards. If a
closed vent system and control device are selected, the format is a
combination of design and equipment standards, and a percent reduction
or outlet concentration. As an alternate standard, the proposed rule
allows emissions from storage vessels to be vented to a control device
continuously achieving an outlet concentration of 20 ppmv of organic
HAP. In this case the format is an outlet concentration.
For continuous process vents, the format of the proposed standards
is also dependent on the method selected to comply with the standards.
If a control device other than a flare is used, the formats are a
percent reduction or an outlet concentration. If a flare is selected,
the format is a combination of equipment and operating specifications.
Like storage vessels, the proposed rule allows compliance by venting
emissions to a control device continuously achieving an outlet
concentration of 20 ppmv of organic HAP.
For batch process vents the format depends on the type of batch
process vent. For reactor batch process vents, a percent reduction and
an emission limit were selected. The standard requires that emissions
are reduced by a certain percent (i.e., 93 percent at existing affected
sources and 95 percent at new affected sources) over the batch cycle.
As an alternative, the standard allows a demonstration that emissions
are limited to 0.017 kg of HAP per megagram of product at existing
affected sources or 0.01 kg of HAP per megagram of product at new
affected sources. For non-reactor batch process vents, the standard
requires that emissions for the collection of non-reactor batch process
vents within the affected source are
[[Page 68837]]
reduced by 68 percent at existing affected sources and by 83 percent at
new affected sources. Like continuous process vents, if a flare is
selected, the format is a combination of equipment and operating
specifications. Like storage vessels and continuous process vents, the
proposed rule allows compliance by venting emissions to a control
device continuously achieving an outlet concentration of 20 ppmv of
organic HAP.
For heat exchange systems, a work practice standard is proposed.
This standard requires a leak detection and repair program to detect
and repair leaks of organic HAP into cooling tower water.
For wastewater streams requiring control, the proposed standards
incorporate several formats: equipment, operational, work practice, and
emission standards. The particular format selected depends on which
portion of the wastewater stream is involved. For transport and
handling equipment, the selected format is a combination of equipment
standards and work practices. For the reduction of organic HAP from the
wastewater stream itself, several alternative formats are included,
including alternative numerical emission limit formats and equipment
design and operation standard for a steam stripper. For vapor recovery
and destruction devices other than flares, the format is a weight
percent reduction. For flares, the format is a combination of equipment
and operating specifications.
For equipment leaks, the proposed standards incorporate several
formats: equipment, design, base performance levels (e.g., maximum
allowable percent leaking valves), work practices, and operational
practices. Different formats are necessary for different types of
equipment because of the nature of the equipment, available control
techniques, and applicability of the measurement method.
F. Summary of the Proposed Standards
Detailed information describing the approach used to determine MACT
floors and the consideration of regulatory alternatives is presented in
Section V of this preamble.
The proposed standards for new and existing affected sources are
summarized in Table 1 and Table 2, respectively. The sections below
present the proposed standards by emission point and present the
alternative 20 ppmv of organic HAP emission limit.
1. Storage Vessels
The proposed standard for storage vessels at existing affected
sources is 50 percent emission reduction for storage vessels meeting
the following applicability criteria:
Aqueous formaldehyde: 10,000 gallons capacity with vapor
pressure 0.47 psia
Non-aqueous formaldehyde: 10,160 gallons capacity with vapor
pressure 2.45 psia; and 90,000 gallons capacity
with vapor pressure 0.45 psia.
For storage vessels at new affected sources, the applicability criteria
are the same but the control levels are different. For aqueous
formaldehyde storage vessels, the control level is 50 percent, and for
non-aqueous formaldehyde storage vessels, the control level is 95
percent.
2. Continuous Process Vents
The proposed standard for continuous process vents at new affected
sources utilizes the MACT floor level of control and the HON process
vent provisions to establish a two-tiered standard. For continuous
process vents with total resource effectiveness values (TRE) greater
than 1.0 but less than or equal to 1.2, 85 percent emission reduction
is required (i.e., MACT floor). For continuous process vents with a TRE
value of 1.0 or less, 98 percent emission reduction is required (i.e.,
HON). For process vents with a TRE value greater than 1.2, controls are
not required. TRE values are determined using the TRE equations from
the HON for a thermal incinerator with 70 percent heat recovery. As an
alternative to the percent reduction, an owner or operator may
demonstrate that the selected controls reduce the outlet concentration
to 20 ppmv.
The proposed rule does not contain any requirements for the control
of continuous process vents at existing affected sources.
Table 1.--Proposed Standards for New Affected Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicability
Emission point criteria Standard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Storage Vessels............. For aqueous 50 percent control
formaldehyde OR alternative
vessels; vessels standard of venting
with capacities of to a control device
10,000 gallons or continuously
greater with vapor achieving a 20 ppmv
pressures of 0.47 outlet
psia or greater. concentration OR 95
For non-aqueous percent control OR
formaldehyde alternative
vessels; vessels standard of venting
with capacities of to a control device
10,160 gallons or continuously
greater with vapor achieving a 20 ppmv
pressures of 2.45 outlet
psia or greater and concentration.
vessels with
capacities of
90,000 gallons and
greater with vapor
pressures of 0.45
psia and greater.
Continuous Process Vents.... HON TRE value 85 percent control
calculations; two for vents with TRE
levels of control. greater than 1.0
but less than or
equal to 1.2 and 98
percent control for
vents with TRE
equal to or less
than 10.0 OR
alternative
standard of venting
to a control device
continously
achieving a 20 ppmv
outlet
concentration.
Reactor Batch Process Vents. No applicability 95 percent control
criteria, all over the batch
reactor batch cycle; or 0.01
process vents are kilogram of HAP per
subject to control. megagram of
product; OR
alternative
standard of venting
to a control device
continuously
achieving a 20 ppmv
outlet
concentration.
Non-Reactor Batch Process Facility-wide 83 percent control
Vents. emissions from the for the collection
collection of non- of non-reactor
reactor batch batch process vents
process vents within the affected
greater than or source; OR
equal to 0.23 Mg. alternative
standard of venting
to a control device
continuously
achieving a 20 ppmv
outlet
concentration.
Heat Exchange Systems....... No applicability Monitor for leaks.
criteria.
Wastewater.................. HON applicability HON control level.
criteria.
[[Page 68838]]
Equipment Leaks............. HON applicability HON leak detection
criteria a. and repair program.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a The HON has an exemption for equipment components in organic HAP
service less than 300 hours per year.
Table 2.--Proposed Standards for Existing Affected Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicability
Emission point criteria Standard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Storage Vessels............. For aqueous 50 percent control
formaldehyde OR alternative
vessels; vessels standard of venting
with capacities of to a control device
10,000 gallons or continuously
greater with vapor achieving a 20 ppmv
pressures of 0.47 outlet
psia or greater. concentration.
For non-aqueous
formaldehyde
vessels; vessels
with capacities of
10,160 gallons or
greater with vapor
pressures of 2.45
psia or greater and
tanks with
capacities of
90,000 gallons and
greater with vapor
pressures of 0.45
psia and greater.
Continuous Process Vents.... Not applicable...... No standard
selected.
Reactor Batch Process Vents. No applicability 93 percent control
criteria, all over the batch
reactor batch cycle; OR 0.017
process vents are kilogram of HAP per
subject to control. megagram of
product; OR
alternative
standard of venting
to a control device
continuously
achieving a 20 ppmv
outlet
concentration.
Non-Reactor Batch Process Facility-wide 68 percent control
Vents. emissions from non- for all non-reactor
reactor batch batch process vents
process vents within the affected
greater than or source; OR
equal to 0.23 Mg. alternative
standard of venting
to a control device
continuously
achieving a 20 ppmv
outlet
concentration.
Heat Exchange Systems....... No applicability Monitor for leaks.
criteria.
Wastewater.................. Not applicable...... No standard
selected.
Equipment Leaks............. HON applicability HON leak detection
criteria a. and repair program.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a The HON has an exemption for equipment components in organic HAP
service less than 300 hours per year.
3. Batch Process Vents
Batch process vents are distinguished as reactor batch process
vents or non-reactor batch process vents under the proposed standards,
and are discussed separately in this section.
Reactor Batch Process Vents. The proposed standards for reactor
batch process vents at new affected sources are 95 percent emission
reduction with an alternative emission limit of 0.01 kilogram of HAP
per megagram of product. The proposed standards for reactor batch
process vents at existing affected sources are 93 percent emission
reduction with an alternative emission limit of 0.017 kilogram of HAP
per megagram of product. Because there are no applicability criteria
for reactor batch process vents, all vents require control.
Non-Reactor Batch Process Vents. The proposed standard for non-
reactor batch process vents at new affected sources is an overall
emissions reduction of 83 percent from all non-reactor batch process
vents within the affected source for affected sources with emissions
from non-reactor batch process vents greater than or equal to 0.25 tpy.
The proposed standard for existing affected sources is an overall
emissions reduction of 68 percent for the collection of non-reactor
batch process vents within the affected source for affected sources
with emissions from the collection of non-reactor batch process vents
greater than or equal to 0.23 Mg.
4. Heat Exchange Systems
A monitoring program to detect leaks from the process into the
cooling water is the proposed standard for heat exchange systems at
both new and existing affected sources. This monitoring program is the
same as the HON program (40 CFR part 63, subpart F).
5. Wastewater Streams
The proposed standard for wastewater streams at new affected
sources is the HON. No standard is being proposed for existing affected
sources.
6. Equipment Leaks
The proposed standard for equipment leaks at new and existing
affected sources is based on the HON (40 CFR part 63, subpart H).
Aspects of the proposed standards that are not found in the HON are:
(1) The option to group valves, (2) longer monitoring frequencies for
facilities that demonstrate lower leak frequencies for valves and
connectors, (3) delay of repair of equipment for which leaks have been
detected is also allowed if the owner or operator determines that
repair personnel would be exposed to an immediate danger if attempting
to repair without a process shutdown, (4) closed-vent systems designed
to operate at a pressure below atmospheric pressure may be used to
comply, and (5) an actual annual production cutoff of 800 megagrams per
year (i.e., affected sources that maintain actual annual production of
amino/phenolic resins is equal to or less than 800 megagrams per year
are exempt from the equipment leaks provisions).
7. Alternative Standard
As an alternative to the standards presented above for storage
vessels, continuous process vents, reactor batch process vents, and
non-reactor batch process vents, an owner or operator may choose to
meet an alternative emission limit. Under the alternative emission
limit, vent streams requiring control may be vented to a control device
continuously achieving an outlet concentration of 20 ppmv of organic
HAP. This alternative emission limit differs from the 20 ppmv
alternatives that accompany the percent reduction requirements for
storage vessels and continuous process vents in that a performance test
specific to an
[[Page 68839]]
individual emission point is not required. Instead, an initial
demonstration that the control device continuously achieves an outlet
concentration of 20 ppmv of organic HAP is required. Continuous
compliance is demonstrated through continuous monitoring of the control
device outlet concentration.
G. Compliance and Performance Test Provisions
Compliance and performance test provisions, to include group
determination procedures, contained in the proposed rule are based on
the HON, but there are several important exceptions. First, test
methods are different because of the specific HAP emitted by amino/
phenolic resin facilities. Second, the specific provisions for batch
process vents are based on the provisions from the promulgated Group IV
Polymers and Resins NESHAP (40 CFR part 63 Subpart JJJ).
Because of the specific HAP emitted by amino/phenolic resin
facilities, the test methods specified in the HON are not completely
adequate for the proposed rule. Specifically, formaldehyde is not
adequately detected using either Method 18 or Method 25A of appendix A,
40 CFR part 60. Therefore, the following test methods have been added
specifically for formaldehyde: Methods 316 and 320. Method 316 is a
manual method that was proposed with the Mineral Wool NESHAP (62 FR
25370) and Method 320 is an FTIR-based method that was proposed with
the Portland Cement NESHAP (63 FR 14181). Further, Method 18 does not
always adequately detect methanol, and Method 308 has been included as
an option for testing for methanol.
Under the proposed rule, owners or operators of control devices
receiving 9.1 Mg/yr (10 tpy) or less of uncontrolled HAP emissions are
not required to conduct a performance test and instead may perform a
design evaluation to demonstrate compliance with the proposed rule.
Each type of emission point is discussed briefly in the paragraphs
below.
1. Storage Vessels
The proposed standards for storage vessels refer directly to the
HON storage vessel provisions. The group status of storage vessels is
determined based on the storage vessel capacity and vapor pressure of
the stored material. The proposed rule includes a table specifying
storage vessels that are Group 1 and therefore require control. There
is no requirement for an emissions test or engineering assessment to
determine the group status of a storage vessel.
Compliance demonstration provisions include periodic visual
inspections of vessels, roof seals, and fittings, as well as internal
inspections.
2. Continuous Process Vents
The proposed standards for continuous process vents refer directly
to the HON process vent provisions. Under the referenced provisions, an
owner or operator is required to either calculate a TRE index value to
determine whether each continuous process vent is a Group 1 or Group 2
vent, or the owner or operator can elect to comply with the continuous
process vent control requirements without calculating the TRE index.
The TRE index value is determined after the last recovery device in the
process or prior to venting to the atmosphere. The TRE calculation
involves an emissions test or engineering assessment and use of the TRE
equations in the proposed rule.
Performance test provisions are included for Group 1 continuous
process vents to verify that the control device achieves the required
performance.
3. Batch Process Vents
There are no group determination procedures for reactor batch
process vents because all reactor batch process vents are subject to
control under the proposed rule. For non-reactor batch process vents,
control is required for affected sources with 0.25 tons per year or
more of uncontrolled emissions from the collection of non-reactor batch
process vents within the affected source. Procedures for determining
uncontrolled emissions from non-reactor batch process vents are
included in the proposed rule. For those affected sources required to
control non-reactor batch process vents, an owner or operator can
choose to not control some non-reactor batch process vents, as long as
emissions from the collection of non-reactor batch process vents are
reduced by the specified percentage. Performance test provisions are
included to verify the efficiency achieved by the control device.
Compliance is demonstrated by showing that for the batch cycle, if
an individual reactor batch process vent is being controlled, or on an
overall basis, if non-reactor batch process vents are being controlled,
the specified percent reduction is achieved. To demonstrate this, an
emissions profile must be developed that identifies each batch emission
episode included in the batch process vent and characterizes emissions
from each batch emission episode on a mass emitted per unit time basis.
Using this emissions profile, the owner or operator must show that the
periods of under-control and over-control of emissions balance and the
batch cycle percent reduction or the overall percent reduction is
achieved. The proposed rule contains procedures for estimating
emissions from individual batch emission episodes, estimating control
device efficiency, and for demonstrating that the required percent
reduction is achieved.
Procedures for demonstrating compliance with the alternative
kilogram of HAP per megagram of product emission limit are also
included in the proposed rule.
4. Heat Exchange Systems
There are no performance test requirements for heat exchange
systems. Compliance is demonstrated through the monitoring of cooling
water to detect leaks in heat exchange systems. If a leak is detected,
the heat exchange system must be repaired.
5. Wastewater
The proposed standards for wastewater refer directly to the HON
wastewater provisions. For demonstrating compliance with the various
requirements (i.e., group determinations, demonstrations of control
device performance, or demonstrations of treatment processes), the
proposed rule allows the owners or operators to either conduct
performance tests or to document compliance using engineering
calculations.
6. Equipment Leaks
The proposed standards for equipment leaks refer directly to the
HON equipment leak provisions. The proposed rule retains the use of
Method 21 to detect leaks. Method 21 requires a portable organic vapor
analyzer to monitor for leaks from equipment in use. A ``leak'' is a
concentration specified in the regulation for the type of equipment
being monitored and is based on the instrument response to methane (the
calibration gas) in air. The observed screening value may require
adjustment for response factor relative to methane if the weighted
response factor of the stream exceeds a specified multiplier. The
proposed rule requires the use of Method 18 to determine the organic
content of a process stream.
H. Monitoring Requirements
The proposed rule requires monitoring of HAP emissions and control
and recovery device operating parameters. HAP emissions are
[[Page 68840]]
monitored directly as part of complying with the kilogram of HAP
emissions per megagram of product limits for reactor batch process
vents or as part of the 20 ppmv alternative standard. Control device
operating parameters are monitored as part of complying with the
percent reduction requirements of the proposed rule.
Continuous parameter monitoring is required for control devices.
Exceptions to this are that control devices controlling less than 1 ton
per year of uncontrolled emissions are exempt from continuous
monitoring but the owner or operator must conduct a daily or per batch
demonstration that the control device is operating properly. Second,
owners or operators of control devices serving storage vessels are not
required to conduct parameter monitoring unless the owner or operator
specifies continuous monitoring in the monitoring plan required by the
referenced HON provisions. However, if a control device is used, the
owners or operator must identify the appropriate monitoring procedures
to be followed for compliance demonstration purposes. Further, if a
control device serves both a storage vessel(s) and another emission
point subject to the proposed rule, the control device is subject to
continuous parameter monitoring if the other emission point is subject
to continuous parameter monitoring.
Parameters must be monitored when emissions are vented to the
control device. The proposed rule directly references the HON
monitoring requirements for continuous process vents, storage vessels,
and wastewater. However, there are general monitoring requirements
specified in the proposed rule (e.g., establishment of parameter
monitoring levels) that apply to all emission points.
The proposed rule identifies parameters to be monitored for most
control devices expected to be used for emission points regulated by
the proposed rule. Parameter monitoring levels are established based on
design evaluation for control devices with uncontrolled emissions less
than 10 tons per year. For all other control devices required to
conduct continuous parameter monitoring, parameter monitoring levels
are established based on a performance test, but can be supplemented by
manufacturer's recommendations and/or an engineering assessment. If an
owner or operator chooses to supplement results of the performance test
using manufacturer's recommendations and/or engineering assessment, the
established parameter monitoring level is subject to review and
approval by the Administrator.
Parameter monitoring averages are determined based on all recorded
values, except for values recorded under certain conditions, for
example under conditions of start-up, shutdown, or malfunction.
Parameter averages must be daily averages for control devices serving
continuous process vents, waste management units, storage vessels (if
required), or equipment leaks. Parameter averages may be either batch
cycle daily averages or block averages for batch process vents.
Parameter averages based on batch cycle daily averages cover a 24-hour
period, based on the defined operating day, and may or may not cover
multiple batch cycles for the batch process vent. A batch cycle daily
average may also cover partial batch cycles, therefore the proposed
rule requires that the information required to calculate parameter
monitoring compliance for partial batch cycles be provided. Parameter
averages based on block averages cover the complete batch cycle,
regardless of the length of time for the batch cycle.
There are two types of violations under the proposed rule;
violations of the operating limit and violations of the emission limit.
Violations of the operating limit occur when not enough operating
parameter monitoring data are available to constitute a valid day's
worth of data or when the average is above the maximum or below the
minimum established value. The proposed rule requires that 75 percent
of the possible data points are recorded and are valid during a day.
Violations of the emission limit occur when a control device fails to
meet the 20 ppmv alternative standard allowed for continuous process
vents, batch process vents, and storage vessels, or when a control
device fails to meet the kilogram of HAP per megagram of product
emission limits for batch process vents. There is one situation where
an exceedance of an operating parameter is considered a violation of
the emission limit. When the exit gas temperature monitoring data for a
condenser shows an exceedance, it is considered a violation of the
emission limit.
Provisions for alternate monitoring parameters are included in the
proposed rule. An owner or operator must apply for approval to monitor
an alternate parameter.
I. Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
The general recordkeeping and reporting requirements of this
subpart are very similar to those found in the HON. The proposed rule
also relies on the provisions of subpart A of 40 CFR part 63. A table
included in the proposed rule designates which sections of subpart A
apply to the proposed rule. Specific recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for each type of emission point are also included in the
proposed rule. The proposed rule references the recordkeeping and
reporting requirements for continuous process vents, storage vessels,
wastewater, and equipment leaks.
The proposed rule requires sources to keep records and submit
reports of information necessary to document compliance. Records must
be kept for 5 years. The following reports must be submitted to the
Administrator as appropriate: (1) Precompliance Report, (2)
Notification of Compliance Status, (3) Periodic Reports, and (4) Other
Reports. The requirements for each of the four reports are summarized
below. In addition, sources complying with the equipment leak
requirements contained in subpart H must follow the recordkeeping and
reporting requirements of subpart H.
1. Precompliance Report
The Precompliance Report would be due no later than 12 months prior
to the compliance date. The Precompliance Report includes the
following, as appropriate: compliance extension requests; requests to
monitor alternative parameters; intent to use alternative controls;
intent to use the alternative continuous monitoring and recordkeeping
allowed by the rule; demonstration that the emissions estimation
equations for batch process vents are not appropriate; and information
related to establishing parameter monitoring levels, if required.
2. Notification of Compliance Status
The Notification of Compliance Status would be due 150 days after
the affected source's compliance date. It includes the information
necessary to demonstrate that compliance has been achieved for emission
points required to apply controls by the proposed rule. Such
information includes, but is not limited to, the results of any
performance tests; one complete test report for each test method used
for a particular kind of emission point; TRE determinations for
continuous process vents; design analyses for storage vessels and
wastewater emission points and for certain batch process vents; and
monitored parameter levels for each emission point and supporting data
for the designated level.
3. Periodic Reports
Generally, Periodic Reports would be submitted semiannually.
However, there is an exception. The Administrator may
[[Page 68841]]
request that the owner or operator submit quarterly reports for certain
emission points that the Administrator identifies. After 1 year,
semiannual reporting can be resumed, unless the Administrator requests
continuation of quarterly reports.
Periodic Reports would include information required to be reported
under the recordkeeping and reporting provisions for each emission
point. For continuously monitored parameters, the data on those periods
when the parameters are above the maximum or below the minimum
established levels are included in the reports. Periodic Reports would
also include results of any performance tests conducted during the
reporting period and instances when required inspections revealed
problems.
4. Other Reports
Other reports required under the proposed rule include: the
notification of inspections required for storage vessels; reports of
changes to the primary product for an APPU or process unit; reports of
addition of one or more APPUs, addition of one or more emission points,
or change in the group status of emission points.
V. Rationale for Proposed Standards
A. Selection of Hazardous Air Pollutants for Control
Of the 188 compounds listed, only a limited number are emitted from
amino/phenolic resin facilities. Because the EPA judged that it was
unnecessary to require facilities to test for all 188 HAP, a list of
the specific HAP to be regulated in the proposed rule was developed.
However, all 188 listed HAP must be considered in any major source
determination under the General Provisions to 40 CFR part 63.
To select which HAP are to be regulated under the proposed NESHAP,
the EPA evaluated the emissions data provided by the industry in the
1992 Information Collection Request. Based on this evaluation, the EPA
is proposing that the following specific HAP be regulated under the
proposed NESHAP: formaldehyde, methanol, phenol, xylenes (isomers and
mixtures), toluene, o-Cresol, m-Cresol, p-Cresol, ethylene glycol,
styrene, methyl ethyl ketone, ethyl benzene, naphthalene, cresol/
cresylic acid (isomers and mixtures), glycol ethers, diethanolamine,
aniline, methyl isobutyl ketone, acrylamide, biphenyl, and dimethyl
formamide.
B. Selection of Emission Points
Emissions from the production of amino/phenolic resins were
identified as occurring from storage vessels, continuous process vents,
batch process vents, heat exchange systems, wastewater, and equipment
leaks. Batch process vents are distinguished as being reactor batch
process vents or non-reactor batch process vents. The EPA is proposing
standards for all of these types of emission points in the proposed
rule.
Non-reactor batch process vents include, but are not limited to,
filter presses, batch drying operations, weigh tanks, holding tanks,
distillation systems, and flaking belt operations. Many facilities did
not report the presence of non-reactor batch process vents, but the EPA
judged that all facilities had some number of these types of batch
process vents. Because of the discrepancy within the gathered data, the
EPA judged that including non-reactor batch process vents with reactor
batch process vents in the development of the MACT floor could result
in a level of control for non-reactor batch process vents that was not
representative of the controls present at existing sources. A primary
factor in making this judgment was the fact that only three of the best
performing 5 facilities, in terms of reactor batch process vent
control, reported non-reactor batch process vents.
In addition, because heat exchange systems have been identified as
a potential source of emissions, the EPA judges that proposing a
standard to cover this emission point is warranted. However, the EPA is
not aware if any heat exchange systems exist in the amino/phenolic
resin industry and would like to solicit comments from interested
persons on this subject. The request for comment on heat exchange
systems is discussed in Section VI of this preamble.
C. Determination of the Proposed Standards
The sections below present the rationale for determining MACT
floors by emission point, regulatory alternatives beyond the MACT
floor, alternative standards (Section C.7) and action taken to address
predicted adverse economic impacts to small businesses (Section C.8).
Heat exchange systems are not discussed in this section because no MACT
floor determination was made. A more detailed explanation of the
development of the proposed standards is set forth in the Basis and
Purpose Document (BPD), which supplements this preamble and is
available from the docket.
1. Storage Vessels
The MACT floor for existing sources for categories with 30 or more
sources is based on ``the average emission limitation achieved by the
best performing 12 percent of the existing sources (for which the
Administrator has emission information).'' (CAA section 112(d)(3))
Here, the ``source'' is the amino/phenolic resin facility. Because EPA
has emissions information for 40 amino/phenolic resins facilities that
are major sources, the best performing 12 percent of existing sources
is represented by the best performing 5 facilities. The best performing
5 facilities were selected based on the same approach as used in
developing the MACT floor for storage vessels under the HON.
Applicability criteria and control levels for the MACT floor were also
developed using the HON approach.
For existing sources, the HON approach determines whether or not
there is control at the MACT floor by considering the overall control
status of each facility independently, judging each facility as
controlled or uncontrolled based on a predominance of controlled or
uncontrolled storage vessels. For example, if 8 out of 10 storage
vessels are controlled at a given facility, the overall control status
of that facility is ``controlled.'' Next, the HON approach looks at a
predominance of the best performing 5 facilities. For example, if at
least 3 out of the 5 facilities are considered ``controlled,'' a MACT
floor of control is considered to exist. Table 3 presents a summary of
the number of uncontrolled and controlled storage vessels at each of
the best performing 5 facilities and presents the HON approach finding
that the existing source MACT floor is ``controlled.''
Table 3.--Storage Vessels at the Best Performing 5 Facilities
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Control Emissions
Vapor Size device ---------------------
No. tanks Company Location Chemical pressure (gal) Control efficiency Uncont. Cont. Mg/
(psia) percent Mg/yr yr
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 tks............................... Borden................. Fayetteville, NC....... aqueous formaldehyde... 0.47 55,000 Scrubber.............. 50 912 456
15 tks.............................. Borden................. Fayetteville, NC....... aqueous formaldehyde... 0.47 16,000 Scrubber.............. 50 812 406
[[Page 68842]]
2 tks............................... Borden................. Fayetteville, NC....... phenol................. <0.01 25,000 None.................. 0 260 260
1 tk................................ Borden................. Fayetteville, NC....... methanol distillate.... 1.63 30,000 None.................. 0 73 73
1 tk................................ Borden................. Fayetteville, NC....... methanol distillate.... 1.63 20,000 None.................. 0 49 49
1 tk................................ Borden................. Fayetteville, NC....... aqueous formaldehyde... 0.47 10,000 Scrubber.............. 50 33 16
8 tks............................... Borden................. Louisville, KY......... aqueous formaldehyde... 0.47 20,000 Scrubber.............. 50 704 352
2 tks............................... Borden................. Louisville, KY......... distillate............. 1.63 20,300 None.................. 0 695 695
3 tks............................... Borden................. Louisville, KY......... phenol................. <0.01 20,300 None.................. 0 500 500
1 tk................................ Borden................. Louisville, KY......... ethylene glycol........ <0.01 20,000 None.................. 0 1 1
1 tk................................ Borden................. Louisville, KY......... toluene................ 0.71 4,500 None.................. 0 1 1
1 tk................................ Cytec.................. Wallingford, CT........ methanol distillate.... 1.63 20,000 None.................. 0 2981 2981
1 tk................................ Cytec.................. Wallingford, CT........ methanol distillate.... 1.63 11,600 None.................. 0 2865 2865
1 tk................................ Cytec.................. Wallingford, CT........ methanol distillate.... 1.63 15,000 None.................. 0 2865 2865
1 tk................................ Cytec.................. Wallingford, CT........ methanol............... 2.45 50,000 Scrubber.............. 95 946 47
1 tk................................ Cytec.................. Wallingford, CT........ methanol............... 2.45 50,000 Scrubber.............. 95 946 47
1 tk................................ Cytec.................. Wallingford, CT........ methanol wash.......... 2.45 10,159 Scrubber.............. 95 625 31
1 tk................................ Cytec.................. Wallingford, CT........ recovered methanol..... 2.45 10,000 None.................. 0 600 600
1 tk................................ Cytec.................. Wallingford, CT........ methyl formcel......... 0.45 90,000 Scrubber.............. 95 452 23
1 tk................................ Cytec.................. Wallingford, CT........ methanol wash.......... 2.45 10,159 Scrubber.............. 95 222 11
1 tk................................ Cytec.................. Wallingford, CT........ xylene................. <1.5 15,000 None.................. 0 70 70
1 tk................................ Cytec.................. Wallingford, CT........ aqueous formaldehyde... 0.15 90,000 Scrubber.............. 95 32 2
1 tk................................ Simpson Timber......... Portland, OR........... aqueous formaldehyde... 0.47 47,972 Scrubber.............. 85 1420 213
1 tk................................ Simpson Timber......... Portland, OR........... methanol............... 1.93 80,926 None.................. 0 280 280
1 tk................................ Simpson Timber......... Portland, OR........... phenol................. <0.01 51,702 None.................. 0 160 160
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The capacity values (size in gallons) apply separately to each storage vessel, while the uncontrolled and controlled emissions (lb/yr) apply collectively to the group of storage vessels
for that specific facility.
The HON approach expresses applicability criteria in terms of vapor
pressure and storage vessel capacity cutoffs. Once a finding of
``controlled'' is made for the MACT floor, vapor pressure and capacity
cutoffs are developed that include those storage vessels at the
baseline that are controlled and exclude storage vessels that are
uncontrolled at the baseline. More than one set of vapor pressure and
storage vessel capacity cutoffs may be developed, as was the case for
the existing source MACT floor. The following applicability criteria
were developed:
aqueous formaldehyde: 10,000 gallons capacity with vapor
pressure 0.47 psia
Non-aqueous formaldehyde: 10,160 gallons capacity with vapor
pressure 2.45 psia; and 90,000 gallons capacity
with vapor pressure 0.45 psia.
Two sets of criteria were developed because the storage vessels in the
best performing 5 facility data set naturally lend themselves to
division based on the material stored (i.e., aqueous formaldehyde or
other materials), and because the HON approach requires that storage
vessels that are not controlled at the baseline be excluded by the
applicability criteria.
The MACT floor is established based on the control levels at the
baseline. Of the best performing 5 facilities, there are a total of 36
controlled storage vessels of which 6 are controlled to 95 percent, 1
is controlled to 85 percent, and 29 are controlled to 50 percent. The
median and mode, which is 50 percent, was chosen to represent the MACT
floor control level.
The MACT floor for new sources is set by the best controlled
source. Using the HON approach for new sources, the best controlled
source (here, the best controlled amino/phenolic resin facility) is
identified based on the absolute number of storage vessels controlled.
The Borden, Fayetteville facility is the best controlled source
based on absolute number of storage vessels controlled. However, the
only controlled storage vessels are aqueous formaldehyde storage
vessels and this leaves storage of other raw materials (i.e., non-
aqueous formaldehyde) unaddressed. The Cytec, Wallingford facility is
the next best controlled facility based on the absolute number of
storage vessels controlled and includes other raw materials among the
controlled vessels. The Borden, Fayetteville facility is the best
controlled facility for aqueous formaldehyde storage vessels, and the
Cytec, Wallingford facility is the best controlled facility for non-
aqueous formaldehyde storage vessels. Therefore, separate floors were
set for aqueous formaldehyde and non-aqueous formaldehyde storage
vessels.
Like the process for existing sources, vapor pressure and capacity
cutoffs were developed that include those storage vessels that are
controlled at baseline and exclude storage vessels that are
uncontrolled at baseline. The storage vessels at the Borden,
Fayetteville facility were used to develop the aqueous formaldehyde
criteria, and the storage vessels at the Cytec, Wallingford facility
were used to develop the non-aqueous formaldehyde criteria. The
following storage vessel applicability criteria were developed:
Aqueous formaldehyde: 10,000 gallons capacity with vapor
pressure 0.47 psia.
Non-aqueous formaldehyde 10,160 gallons capacity with vapor
pressure 2.45 psia; and 90,000 gallons capacity
with vapor pressure 0.45 psia.
The applicability criteria for existing and new sources are
coincidentally the same because of the large number of storage vessels
at the Borden, Fayetteville facility.
The control level for the new source MACT floor is established
based on the control levels at the best controlled facility. For
aqueous formaldehyde storage vessels, the best controlled facility is
the Borden, Fayetteville facility. For non-aqueous formaldehyde storage
vessels, the best controlled facility is the Cytec, Wallingford
facility.
The aqueous formaldehyde storage vessels at the Borden,
Fayetteville facility are all controlled to 50 percent. Therefore, the
MACT floor for aqueous
[[Page 68843]]
formaldehyde storage vessels is 50 percent. At the Cytec, Wallingford
facility some non-aqueous formaldehyde storage vessels are controlled
and some are not controlled. The applicability criteria presented above
separate the controlled tanks from the uncontrolled tanks. All of the
controlled tanks are controlled to 95 percent. Therefore, the MACT
floor for non-aqueous formaldehyde storage vessels is 95 percent.
2. Continuous Process Vents
The available data indicate that only three facilities had
continuous process vents and only one of the three facilities had
applied controls. The only continuous process vents identified by the
available data were dryer vents.
The MACT floor for existing sources is set by the average
performance achieved by the best performing 12 percent of existing
sources. Here, the amino/phenolic resin facility is the ``source.''
Because there are 40 amino/phenolic resin facilities in the source
category for which EPA has emissions information, the best performing
12 percent of existing affected sources is represented by the best
performing 5 facilities. Because only one facility was identified as
controlling its continuous process vents, the MACT floor for existing
sources is no control.
The MACT floor for new sources is set by the best controlled
source. The best controlled amino/phenolic resin facility has a
scrubber with an 85 percent control efficiency. Therefore, the MACT
floor level of control is 85 percent for continuous process vents that
meet the applicability criterion. The applicability criterion chosen to
represent the specific continuous process vents that are controlled at
the MACT floor is the HON total resource effectiveness (TRE) equation
for a thermal incinerator with 70 percent heat recovery. This
applicability criterion was selected because the HON process vent
provisions were relied upon for part of the standard and using the same
applicability criterion to define the MACT floor provides a consistent
approach for the rule.
The expression of applicability criteria is limited to the TRE
equation for a thermal incinerator with 70 percent heat recovery
because there was only one set of vent stream data, which did not allow
the EPA to evaluate a range of stream conditions that were controlled
versus those that were not controlled. This TRE value of 1.2 was
calculated using the vent stream data for the continuous process vents
setting the 85 percent MACT floor.
3. Batch Process Vents
As indicated in Section IV, batch process vents were distinguished
as reactor batch process vents or non-reactor batch process vents for
the purposes of the proposed rule. Reactor and non-reactor batch
process vents are discussed separately in this section.
Reactor Batch Process Vents
The MACT floor for existing sources is set by the average
performance achieved by the best performing 12 percent of existing
sources. Here, the ``source'' is the amino/phenolic resin facility.
Because there are 40 amino/phenolic resin facilities in the source
category for which EPA has emissions information, the best performing
12 percent of existing sources is represented by the best performing 5
facilities. Each of the best performing 5 facilities had applied
secondary controls to each of their reactor batch process vents; this
fact necessitates that the proposed rule require control of all reactor
batch process vents with no applicability criteria. Table 4 presents
the data for the best performing 5 facilities in terms of reactor batch
process vent controls.
Table 4.--Best performing Facilities for Reactor Batch Process Vents based on Applied Secondary Controls a
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Production of Collocated with Emission factor (lb
Facility Type of resin methylated resins (N formaldehyde plant (Y/ Secondary controls HAP/1000 lb
or percent) N) production)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ranbar............................ P N N thermal incinerator 0.84
(95 percent).
Georgia Pacific, Taylorsville, MS. A/P N Y catalytic incinerator 0.01
(95 percent).
Georgia Pacific, Port Wentworth, A/P 5-10% N caustic treatment (93 0.017
GA. percent).
Borden, Louisville, Ky............ P N Y scrubber (90 percent) CBI b
Solutia, Addyston, OH............. A 100% N scrubber (85 percent) CBI b
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a The data on this table is restricted to the 17 facilities that were contacted during the recent data gathering effort.
b CBI means Confidential Business Information.
The data set used for determining the MACT floor was limited to the
17 facilities for which the 1992 ICR responses indicated that secondary
controls had been applied to reactor batch process vents. These
facilities were contacted via telephone during 1997 and were asked a
series of questions in order to clarify the data that were reported in
the 1992 ICR responses. Some of the topics that were covered during the
teleconferences included the presence and purpose of a primary
condenser, emissions before and after the primary condenser, efficiency
of the primary condenser and secondary control devices, whether the
facility was collocated with a formaldehyde plant, and whether the
facility produced methylated resins.
In considering the best performing 5 facilities based on applied
secondary controls, the data were evaluated to determine if the
collocation with formaldehyde plants or the production of methylated
resins influenced the application of secondary controls, specifically
the use of combustion devices. No patterns emerged. One combustion
device is at a phenolic producer (Ranbar) that does not produce any
methylated resins and is not collocated with a formaldehyde plant. The
other combustion device is at an amino/phenolic producer (Georgia
Pacific, Taylorsville) that does not produce any methylated resins and
is collocated with a formaldehyde plant.
In addition, the data were evaluated for patterns of applied
secondary controls versus the production capacity of facilities. Again,
no patterns emerged. One combustion device is located at a 816 Mg/yr
producer (Ranbar), and the other combustion device is located at a
69,853 Mg/yr producer (Georgia Pacific, Taylorsville). These production
capacities are typical small and large facilities, respectively.
In conclusion, because of the good distribution of methylators and
non-methylators, facilities collocated with formaldehyde plants and
those not, and amino only, phenolic only, and amino/
[[Page 68844]]
phenolic producers within the best performing 5 facilities, the best
performing 5 facilities were considered representative of the industry.
The EPA considered two options for the MACT floor. The options
considered included selecting the percent reduction for the median
facility or averaging the percent reduction values for the best
performing 5 facilities, and then determining the alternate kilogram of
HAP per megagram of product emission limit in a similar manner. The
option selected uses the median facility for establishing the percent
reduction and the alternate emission limit. The Georgia Pacific, Port
Wentworth facility represents the median facility of the best
performing 5. Using the percent reduction value and the emission factor
for this facility, the MACT floor was selected as 93 percent emission
reduction with an alternative emission limit of 0.017 kilogram of HAP
per megagram of product.
The option of averaging the percent reductions for the best
performing 5 facilities was not selected because providing the
corresponding alternate emissions limit would require averaging the
emissions factors for the best performing 5 facilities. Because the
emission factor for Ranbar (0.84 kilogram of HAP per megagram of
product) is much higher than would be expected for a facility with a
combustion device, the EPA judged that this approach would not provide
a reasonable alternative emissions limit.
The MACT floor for new sources is set by the best controlled source
(here, the best controlled amino/phenolic resin facility). In selecting
the best controlled facility, the Ranbar and Georgia Pacific,
Taylorsville facilities were considered as equally controlled. Because
the emission factor for the Ranbar facility is judged to be
exceptionally high considering the reported secondary controls, the
Georgia Pacific, Taylorsville facility was selected as the best
controlled facility. Therefore, the MACT floor for reactor batch
process vents at new affected sources was selected as 95 percent
emission reduction with an alternative emission limit of 0.01 kilogram
of HAP per megagram of product.
Non-Reactor Batch Process Vents
The MACT floor for existing sources is set by the average
performance for the best performing 12 percent of existing sources.
Here, the amino/phenolic resin facility is the ``source.'' Because
there are 40 amino/phenolic resin facilities in the source category for
which EPA has emissions information, the best performing 12 percent of
existing sources is represented by the best performing 5 facilities.
The best performing 5 facilities were selected based on the overall
emission reduction achieved by for non-reactor batch process vents by
each facility. All of the best performing 5 facilities had applied
controls to some of their non-reactor batch process vents, and 2 of the
best performing 5 facilities had applied controls to all of their non-
reactor batch process vents. This baseline control situation, and the
limited data set available for the analysis, led the EPA to consider a
single option for the development of existing source MACT floor based
on achieving a specified emission reduction for the collection of non-
reactor batch process vents within the affected source. Based on the
data presented in Table 5, an average facility-wide emission reduction
value was calculated as 68 percent.
Table 5.--Best Performing 5 Facilities For Non-Reactor Batch Process Vents Based on Overall Percent Reduction
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Uncont'd Cont'd Primary
Company Location Emission point Emission point emis. emis. Primary control device Second. control Second. device Combined
description (tpy) (tpy) device eff.% device eff.% eff.%
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Schenectady.................... Rotterdam E14 Weigh tank........ 0.247 0.247 None.............. NR None.
Junction, NY.
Schenectady.................... Rotterdam E5/E6 Separator Tank.... 24.1 0.241 Condenser......... NR Scrubber......... NR 99.5
Junction, NY.
Schenectady.................... Rotterdam E7 Hold Tank......... 25.2 0.252 Condenser......... 99 None............. NR NR
Junction, NY.
Schenectady.................... Rotterdam E4 Holding Tank...... 12.1 12.1 None.............. ......... None.
Junction, NY.
Schenectady.................... Rotterdam E15/E16 Mix Tank Unit..... 7.31 0.3654 Condenser......... NR Scrubber......... NR 95
Junction, NY.
Schenectady.................... Rotterdam E20 Separator Unit.... 21.7 0.11 Condenser......... NR Scrubber......... 99.5
Junction, NY.
Schenectady.................... Rotterdam E19 Hold Tank......... 6.76 0.879 Condenser......... 87 None.
Junction, NY.
Schenectady.................... Rotterdam E21 Recycle System.... 0.182 0.182 None.............. None.
Junction, NY.
Schenectady.................... Rotterdam E22/E23 Recycle Tank...... 2.31 0.0231 Condenser......... 99 None.
Junction, NY.
Schenectady.................... Rotterdam E24 Flaking belt...... 5.67 2.84 Scrubber.......... NR None.
Junction, NY.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall Emission Reduction for non-reactor batch process vents is 83.7 percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Borden......................... Louisville, KY.... E1A Weigh Tank/Fixed 0.25 0.12 Scrubber.......... 90 None.
Roof.
Borden......................... Louisville, KY.... E2A Weigh Tank/Fixed 0.5 0.05 Scrubber.......... 90 None.
Roof.
Borden......................... Louisville, KY.... E8 Recovery (phenol). 0.004 0.004 None.............. None.
[[Page 68845]]
Borden......................... Louisville, KY.... E11 Cooling & Flaking. 0.005 0.005 Scrubber.......... 90 None.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall Emission Reduction for non-reactor batch process vents is 77 percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dynachem....................... Georgetown, IL.... E9 Weigh Tank........ 0.25 0.075 Scrubber.......... 72 None.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall Emission Reduction for non-reactor batch process vents is 70 percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Solutia........................ Addyston, OH...... E3 Methanol weigh 0.81 0.81 Vapor balance..... NR None.
tank.
Solutia........................ Addyston, OH...... E4 Formaldehyde weigh 0.014 0.014 None.............. ......... None.
tank.
Solutia........................ Addyston, OH...... E7 Distillation 1.44 0.22 Scrubber.......... 85 None.
Overhead Tank.
Solutia........................ Addyston, OH...... E6 Distillation Feed 0.261 0.039 Scrubber.......... 85 None.
Tank.
Solutia........................ Addyston, OH...... E8 Distillation 0.352 0.053 Scrubber.......... 85 None.
Bottom Tank.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall Emission Reduction for non-reactor batch process vents is 60.5 percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Borden......................... Fayetteville, NC.. E2 Weigh Tank........ 0.084 0.042 Scrubber.......... 50 None.
Borden......................... Fayetteville, NC.. E2 Weigh Tank........ 0.264 0.132 Scrubber.......... 50 None.
Borden......................... Fayetteville, NC.. E2 Weigh Tank........ 0.209 0.1045 Scrubber.......... 50 None.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall Emission Reduction for non-reactor batch process vents is 50 percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility-wide uncontrolled emissions from non-reactor batch process
vents were chosen as the applicability criteria, because it was the
only available data, and because the EPA judged that the applicability
criteria, like the control level, should be an overall value as opposed
to an individual process vent specific value. The uncontrolled
emissions cutoff of 0.23 Mg/yr (0.25 tpy) represents the smallest
facility-wide uncontrolled emissions from non-reactor batch process
vents for a facility in the best performing 5. The smallest value was
selected to ensure that all the facilities included in setting the MACT
floor would be represented by the applicability criteria.
Putting together the control level and applicability criteria, the
MACT floor for non-reactor batch process vents at existing sources
requires an overall emissions reduction of 68 percent for the
collection of non-reactor batch process vents within the source for
sources with uncontrolled emissions from the collection of non-reactor
batch process vents greater than or equal to 0.23 Mg/yr (0.25 tpy).
The MACT floor for new sources is set by the best controlled
source. Using the overall emission reduction for a facility approach,
the best controlled facility achieves an overall emission reduction of
83.7 percent; this value was rounded down to 83 percent.
The CAAA states that existing source MACT can be less stringent
than new source MACT. By implication, new source MACT cannot be less
stringent than existing source MACT. Therefore, the uncontrolled
facility-wide emissions cutoff of 0.23 Mg/yr (0.25 tpy) was used
because the uncontrolled emissions at the best controlled facility are
96 Mg/yr (106 tpy). If the value of 96 Mg/yr (106 tpy) were used, the
new source standard would be less stringent than the existing source
standard. Therefore, the MACT floor for non-reactor batch process vents
at new sources requires an overall emissions reduction of 83 percent
from the collection of non-reactor batch process vents within the
source for sources with uncontrolled emissions from the collection of
non-reactor batch process vents greater than or equal to 0.23 Mg/yr
(0.25 tpy).
4. Wastewater Streams
The MACT floor for existing and new sources is based on controls at
baseline. No facilities that are major sources were identified as
controlling their wastewater. Therefore, the MACT floor for existing
and new sources is no control.
5. Equipment Leaks
The MACT floor for existing sources is set by the average
performance for the best performing 12 percent of existing sources.
Here, the amino/phenolic resin facility is the ``source.'' Because
there are 40 amino/phenolic resin facilities in the source category for
which EPA has emissions information, the best performing 12 percent of
existing sources is represented by the best performing 5 facilities.
The only source identified as having a leak detection and repair (LDAR)
program subject to local, State, or Federal regulations is Solutia's
Springfield, MA, facility. A number of other facilities have been
identified as having a maintenance-type LDAR program. These
maintenance-type programs are likely to be less effective at reducing
emissions than the LDAR program in place at the Solutia, Springfield
facility. Unfortunately, no information is available to quantify the
emission reduction being achieved from these maintenance-type programs.
Therefore, the average of the best performing 5 facilities cannot be
defined at this time, and the MACT floor for equipment leaks for
existing sources is considered to be no control.
The MACT floor for new sources is set by the best controlled source
(here, the
[[Page 68846]]
best controlled amino/phenolic resins facility). As noted in the
previous paragraph, only one affected source has been identified as
having a LDAR program as the result of local, State, or Federal
regulations, while others have a maintenance-type LDAR program.
Therefore, the MACT floor for new affected sources is represented by
the LDAR program at the Solutia, Springfield facility.
6. Regulatory Alternatives Beyond the MACT Floor
This section discusses the regulatory alternatives beyond the MACT
floor that were evaluated for each of the six emission points where
applicable.
The MACT floor for storage vessels at existing sources was
identified as 50 percent. The MACT floor for storage vessels at new
sources was identified as 50 percent for aqueous formaldehyde storage
vessels and 95 percent for non-aqueous formaldehyde storage vessels.
For those storage vessels with a 50 percent emission reduction MACT
floor, the EPA judged that the incremental emission reductions and
costs would result in an incremental cost effectiveness value that was
unacceptable. This judgment was based on the small incremental emission
reduction that would be achieved versus the large incremental cost in
moving from a Scrubber to a combustion device. Although the change in
percentage from 50 percent to 95 percent appears to be significant, the
low level of HAP emitted from the storage vessels in this source
category would yield a small incremental emission reduction being
achieved.
The HON process vent provisions were evaluated as a regulatory
alternative beyond the MACT floor for continuous process vents.
Evaluation of the available data indicated that none of the continuous
process vents for which data were available would meet the HON TRE
applicability criteria of 1.0. For existing sources, the TRE values
ranged from 4.4 to 93.2. For new sources, the TRE values range from 1.2
to 25.4.
Based on the calculated TRE values, it is very unlikely that any
continuous process vents at an existing source would be caught by the
HON TRE applicability criteria. As the TRE values show (i.e., 4.4 to
93.2), these types of continuous process vents are not cost-effective
to control. Therefore, the HON process vent provisions were not
selected as the regulatory alternative for existing sources.
While the TRE values show that none of the continuous process vents
considered in the analysis would be caught by the HON TRE applicability
for new sources, the EPA judged that if a new source were to have a
continuous process vent within the cost-effectiveness accepted by the
EPA (i.e., with a TRE of 1.0 or less), it should be controlled.
Therefore, a two-tiered approach, utilizing the MACT floor level of
control for some continuous process vents and the HON provisions for
other continuous process vents, was chosen as the regulatory
alternative for new affected sources. The HON provisions were included
in the selected regulatory alternative because it has been proven
through past analyses that the HON provisions are a cost effective
approach for controlling continuous process vents. A two-tiered
approach was used because the MACT floor is more stringent than the
HON; the MACT floor controls continuous process vents that the HON
would not control.
The proposed standard for continuous process vents at new sources
utilizes the MACT floor level of control and the HON process vent
provisions to establish a two-tiered standard. For continuous process
vents with a TRE greater than 1.0 but less than 1.2, 85 percent
emission reduction is required (i.e., MACT floor). For continuous
process vents with a TRE value of 1.0 or less, 98 percent emission
reduction is required (i.e., HON). For process vents with a TRE value
greater than 1.2, controls are not required. TRE values are estimated
using the TRE equations from the HON for a thermal incinerator with 70
percent heat recovery.
The proposed rule does not contain any requirements for the control
of continuous process vents at existing sources.
Because the MACT floor level of control for reactor batch process
vents at existing sources was based on scrubbers with 93 percent
control, the next step was to consider combustion controls as a
regulatory alternative beyond the MACT floor. However, this option was
not chosen, because the EPA judged that the incremental emission
reductions and costs would result in an incremental cost effectiveness
value that was unacceptable. This judgment was based on the small
incremental emission reduction that would be achieved in moving from
93% emission reduction to 95% or 98% emission reduction versus the
large incremental cost in moving from a scrubber to a combustion
device.
Not enough information on beyond the MACT floor options for non-
reactor batch process vents was available to justify selecting a
regulatory alternative beyond the MACT floor.
A monitoring program to detect leaks from the process into the
cooling water was selected as the standard for heat exchange systems.
This monitoring program is the same as the HON program (subpart F).
Because heat exchange systems have been identified as a potential
source of emissions, the EPA judges that proposing a standard to cover
this emission point is warranted. However, the EPA is not aware if any
heat exchange systems exist in the amino/phenolic resin industry and
would like to solicit comments from interested persons on this subject.
The request for comment on heat exchange systems is discussed in
Section VI of this preamble.
The HON was considered as a regulatory alternative for both
existing and new sources for wastewater streams. To evaluate the HON as
a regulatory alternative, the available stream data were compared to
the HON applicability criteria. No wastewater streams were affected by
the HON existing source or new source applicability criteria. It should
be noted that there were very little data available for wastewater
streams and that for those streams for which data were available, the
data were partial (i.e., indicating either wastewater flow or HAP
concentration, but not both). However, based on the data, it appeared
unlikely that a wastewater stream would be covered by the HON
applicability criteria.
The EPA conducted an analysis to determine if a wastewater stream
that was covered at the limit of the applicability criteria (i.e.,
having just enough flow and just enough HAP concentration) would be
cost effective to control. The results of this analysis were that cost
effectiveness values ranged from $300 per ton of HAP removed to $41,100
per ton of HAP removed. Based on these results, the EPA judged that the
HON would be an acceptable regulatory alternative. However, the best
available data do not indicate that any wastewater streams at existing
affected sources will definitely require control. Without an indication
that imposition of the HON wastewater standards would achieve any
amount of emission reductions at existing sources, the EPA did not find
the cost of the applicability analysis and recordkeeping and reporting
requirements, which would be experienced regardless of whether or not a
wastewater stream required control, to be justified. Therefore,
wastewater streams at existing sources are not required to be
controlled.
However, the HON was chosen by the EPA as the standard for new
sources.
[[Page 68847]]
The EPA believes that because new sources will already be required to
characterize their emissions for the Title V permit application, the
additional cost of the applicability analysis associated with the
wastewater provisions would be acceptable given the potential for
reducing emissions.
For equipment leaks at existing sources, two regulatory
alternatives were identified--(1) 40 CFR part 60, subpart VV and (2)
the HON LDAR program under 40 CFR part 63, subpart H. For new sources,
the regulatory alternative evaluated was the application of the HON
LDAR program, because the MACT floor is equivalent to the subpart
program.
In conducting the regulatory analysis, there are several items that
need to be identified to determine whether or not any of the regulatory
alternatives are cost effective. First, component counts for each of
the major sources need to be determined. Second, estimates of emissions
and emission reductions need to be made. Third, the costs associated
with the LDAR programs need to be estimated. The details of the methods
used in the regulatory alternative analysis are presented in Chapter 6
of the Basis & Purpose Document.
Table 6 presents the results of the cost effectiveness analysis for
both new and existing sources. As seen in Table 6, the average cost
effectiveness of implementing the SOCMI Subpart VV LDAR program (i.e.,
a program equivalent to the MACT floor for new sources) from baseline
at each of the amino/phenolic resin facilities is $4,207 per megagram
of emission reduction. The average incremental cost effectiveness of
implementing the HON LDAR program from baseline is $2,608 per megagram
of emission reduction. The average incremental cost effectiveness of
going from the SOCMI Subpart VV program to the HON program is $1,343
per megagram of emission reduction.
The EPA judged the cost effectiveness values associated with the
HON LDAR program to be reasonable and, therefore, selected the HON LDAR
program as the proposed standards for equipment leaks at both existing
and new affected sources.
Table 6.--Summary of Regulatory Analysis for Equipment Leaks
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SOCMI,
Item subpart VV HON
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission Reduction from Baseline (Mg/yr)...... 52.6 119.0
Costs ($)..................................... 221,313 310,465
Cost Effectiveness ($/Mg)..................... 4,207 2,608
Incremental Emission Reduction (Mg/yr)........ ........... 66.4
Incremental Costs ($)......................... ........... 89,152
Incremental Cost Effectiveness ($/Mg)......... ........... 1,343
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. Alternative Standard
The proposed rule would provide an alternative standard for storage
vessels, continuous process vents, and batch process vents that are
equipped with add-on control devices. The alternative standard requires
that emissions from these types of emission points be vented to a
control device that is continuously achieving an outlet concentration
of 20 ppmv. For emissions points vented to such a control device, it is
not necessary to calculate the percent reduction achieved by the
control device. Any storage vessels, continuous process vents, or batch
process vents not vented to such a control device are subject to the
other control provisions in the proposed rule. All process vent and
storage vessel emissions that are manifolded to a common control device
are considered as one regulated entity under the alternative standard.
As determined during the development of the HON, 20 ppmv is the
physical limit that a combustion device can be expected to achieve. For
purposes of the proposed rule, setting an alternative standard that is
equivalent to the level achieved through combustion is equivalent to or
more stringent than the MACT floors and the selected standards for the
proposed rule.
The alternative standard is included because the EPA believes that
there will be a number of facilities and State regulators that will
benefit from a regulatory alternative that encourages aggregating and
treating emissions with a state-of-the-art common control device. The
alternative standard included in the proposed rule can be applied to
individual emission points that have emissions that are controlled with
add-on control devices or to emission points that are manifolded
together prior to treatment in an end-of-line control device (or series
of devices).
8. Implementation of a 800 Megagram per Year Production Cutoff for
Equipment Leaks
In response to the prediction by the economic impacts analysis that
5 facilities (3 small businesses) may experience a product line closure
(see Section VII.F) based on implementing the standards described in
Sections V.C.1 through V.C.6 of this preamble, the EPA reevaluated
those areas where the selected standard was more stringent than the
MACT floor (see Section V.C.6 of this preamble). The only emission
point where the selected standard was more stringent than the MACT
floor was equipment leaks. The EPA also evaluated those facilities
predicted to experience adverse economic impacts. The EPA found that 4
of these facilities, including the 3 facilities owned by small
businesses, had the lowest actual annual production of all 40 major
sources expected to be subject to the proposed rule, and the range of
production values for these 4 facilities was distinctive from the fifth
facility predicted to experience a product line closure. When the
requirement to comply with the equipment leak provisions was removed
from the 4 facilities with the lowest production values, a revised
economic impacts analysis showed that predicted product line closures
were reduced from a product line closure at 5 facilities to only 2
facilities. These 2 facilities are comprised of 1 of the 4 facilities
for which equipment leak costs were dropped and the fifth facility
(i.e., the facility with production distinctive from the other 4
facilities). Further, the two facilities still predicted to experience
a product line closure were not owned by small businesses. Based on the
results above, the EPA implemented an actual annual production cutoff
of 800 megagrams per year for the equipment leaks requirements.
The EPA took this action to mitigate adverse impacts to small
businesses while staying within statutory requirements. The value of
800 megagrams per year was selected based on inspection of the data and
a sensitivity analysis. First, based on inspection of the data, all 4
facilities reported actual annual production values less than 800
megagrams per year. Second, a sensitivity analysis showed that when
equipment leak costs were removed for the ``fifth facility,'' the
economic analysis still predicted product line closure for this
facility.
[[Page 68848]]
D. Selection of the Format of the Proposed Rule
The proposed standards adopt the formats found in the HON for the
following emission points: storage vessels, continuous process vents,
wastewater, equipment leaks, and heat exchange systems. The Federal
Register notice for the proposed HON (57 FR 62608; December 31, 1992)
provides the rationale for the selection of the specific formats used
in the final rule for the HON. Justification for use of a work practice
standard for equipment leaks, as opposed to a numerical limit, is
included in the HON rationale; such justification is required under
Section 112(h) of the Clean Air Act Amendments. The EPA finds no reason
for changing those formats and, therefore, has adopted the same formats
for this proposed rule as have been promulgated for the HON.
For batch process vents, three formats were selected. For reactor
batch process vents, the proposed rule requires that emissions are
reduced by a certain percent (i.e., 93 percent at existing sources and
95 percent at new sources) over the batch cycle. As an alternative, the
proposed rule allows a demonstration that emissions are limited to
0.017 kilogram of HAP per megagram of product at existing sources or
0.01 kilogram of HAP per megagram of product at new sources. For non-
reactor batch process vents, the proposed rule requires that the
emissions from the collection of non-reactor batch process vents within
the affected source are reduced by 68 percent at existing sources and
by 83 percent at new sources. For sources with 0.23 Mg/yr (0.25 tpy) or
more of uncontrolled emissions from the collection of non-reactor batch
process vents within the source.
For reactor batch process vents, the need to establish a format
that considered the nature of batch process vent emissions and the
limitations of control devices in achieving constant performance was a
major factor in selecting the format of the standard. A percent
reduction format is commonly used for process vents, as in the HON,
however, requiring a constant emission reduction does not account for
the emissions profile of a batch process vent. Therefore, as was done
in the Batch Processes ACT, the selected format requires a percent
reduction over the batch cycle. This allows the performance of a
control device to fluctuate over the batch cycle. This format also
allows an owner or operator to elect to control certain portions of the
emissions and not control other portions. For example, if a batch
process vent had a short period with a high emissions rate and longer
periods with very low emissions rates, the selected format allows an
owner or operator to over-control (i.e., achieve a percent reduction
higher than that required in the standard) the short period of high
emissions and not control or under-control the longer periods of low
emissions.
As an alternative to demonstrating a percent reduction for the
batch cycle, an emission limit expressed as kilogram of HAP per
megagram of product was selected as an alternative format. The
alternative emission limit is included to provide flexibility and to
avoid requiring sources with inherently low emissions to apply
secondary controls, thereby encouraging pollution prevention
activities.
Similar to reactor batch process vents, establishing a format for
non-reactor batch process vents required consideration of the nature of
batch process vent emissions and the limitations of control devices in
achieving constant performance. A primary factor in expressing the
standard for non-reactor batch process vents as an overall emission
reduction requirement was the limited data available to the EPA. As
discussed earlier, the data available for the best performing 5
facilities that were used in developing the MACT floor included two
facilities that had all their non-reactor batch process vents
controlled, and this situation, coupled with the lack of stream-
specific data, led the EPA to express the standard as an overall
percent reduction for the collection of non-reactor batch process vents
within an affected source.
E. Selection of Compliance and Performance Test Provisions
Compliance and performance test provisions for the proposed rule
are based on the HON, referring readers directly to the HON provisions.
Because the rationale for the referenced HON provisions has been
presented in detail in the proposal and promulgation preambles to the
HON, it is not repeated here. However, specific test methods to be used
have changed, and the rationale for the selected test methods is
discussed below.
Because of the specific HAP emitted by amino/phenolic resin
facilities, the test methods specified in the HON are not completely
adequate for the proposed rule. Specifically, formaldehyde is not
adequately detected using either Method 18 or Method 25A of appendix A,
40 CFR part 60. Therefore, the following test methods have been added
specifically for formaldehyde: Methods 316 and 320. Method 316 is a
manual method that was proposed with the Mineral Wool NESHAP (62 FR
25370) and Method 320 is an FTIR-based method that was proposed with
the Portland Cement NESHAP (63 FR 14181). Further, Method 18 does not
always adequately detect methanol, and Method 308 has been included as
an option for testing for methanol. The test methods identified above
have been included in the proposed rule in order to ensure that
compliance with the proposed rule can be accurately demonstrated.
Without the formaldehyde specific test methods, a predominant HAP would
not be detected during performance tests or estimation of emissions.
While Method 18 is considered adequate for the measurement of methanol,
more accurate measurements are possible with Method 308. Therefore,
Method 308 has been included as an optional test method for methanol.
The proposed rule specifies procedures to be followed when
conducting performance tests, referring to the General Provisions of
Subpart A as appropriate. One modification to the General Provisions
testing procedures is that the proposed rule requires that all tests be
conducted under maximum representative operating conditions; this term
is defined in the rule. The intent of maximum representative operating
conditions is for the owner or operator, within a specified time period
and without rearranging production schedules, to conduct the test under
the maximum HAP loading that the control device would experience. For
example, if a control device receives emissions from three batch
process vents and two of them frequently vent to the control device at
the same time, testing should be conducted when at least two of the
batch process vents are venting to the control device, as opposed to
when only one is venting.
Compliance with the batch process vent provisions is demonstrated
by showing that for the batch cycle, if an individual reactor batch
process vent is being controlled, or on an overall basis, if non-
reactor batch process vents are being controlled, the specified percent
reduction is achieved. To demonstrate this, an emissions profile must
be developed that identifies each batch emission episode included in
the batch process vent and characterizes emissions from each batch
emission episode on a mass emitted per unit time basis. Using this
emissions profile, the owner or operator must demonstrate that the
periods of under-control and over-control of emissions balance, and
[[Page 68849]]
the batch cycle percent reduction or the overall percent reduction is
achieved.
The procedures for demonstrating compliance with the percent
reduction requirements are largely based on the promulgated Group IV
Polymers and Resins NESHAP. The intention of the procedures is to allow
owners or operators to select the optimum scenario for controlling the
batch process vent(s) at their facility and to provide flexibility for
an owner or operator to consider the nature of batch process vent
emissions and the limitations of control devices in achieving constant
performance. The following are examples of how the compliance
demonstration procedures for percent reduction would work, first, for
an individual reactor batch process vent and, second, for the
collection of non-reactor batch process vents within an affected
source.
For an individual reactor batch process vent at an existing
affected source, the proposed rule requires an owner or operator to
reduce emissions by 93 percent for the batch cycle. For this example, a
given reactor batch process vent has three batch emission episodes:
charging, heating, and purging. Emissions from charging have a high
flow rate and a high HAP concentration level. Emissions from heating
have a very low flow rate and very low HAP concentration level.
Emissions from purging have a moderate flow rate and moderate HAP
concentration level. The owner or operator chooses to control the
charging episode and the purging episode and to not control the heating
episode. In this example, the two controlled batch emission episodes
must be over-controlled to a level sufficient to offset not controlling
the heating episode. In the final step of the compliance demonstration
procedure (see Sec. 63.1417(e)(5)(iii) of the proposed rule), emissions
at the outlet of the control device are subtracted from the sum of
emissions from the uncontrolled episode and emissions at the inlet of
the control device. This value is divided by the sum of emissions from
the uncontrolled episode and emissions at the inlet of the control
device, and this quotient is multiplied by 100 and compared to the
required 93 percent reduction requirement.
For the collection of non-reactor batch process vents at an
affected source, a similar example can be described. In this example
there are 10 non-reactor batch process vents, 7 with significant
emissions and 3 with insignificant emissions. The owner or operator
chooses to over-control (e.g., achieve 80 percent emission reduction
instead of the required 68 percent) the 7 non-reactor batch process
vents with significant emissions. Using the same equation as described
above (see Sec. 63.1417(e)(5)(iii) of the proposed rule), the owner or
operator demonstrates that periods of under-control and over-control
balance, and the specified percent reduction is achieved for the
collection of non-reactor batch process vents.
For demonstrating compliance with the kilogram of HAP per megagram
of product emission limits, the proposed rule requires that an owner or
operator determine the monthly average emission rate (i.e., kilogram of
HAP per megagram of product) each month and then calculate a rolling
average to determine compliance with the emission limit. Estimates of
emissions on a batch emission episode level are based on either direct
measurement or other means specified in the proposed rule. Direct
measurement is required when engineering assessment shows that 10 tons
per year or more of HAP are emitted from an individual batch process
vent. Once emissions have been characterized for a batch emission
episode, monthly emissions are determined based on the number and type
of batch emission episodes run during the month. Once emissions have
been characterized for a batch emission episode using direct
measurement or other means, the determined values can be used in
estimating monthly emissions unless the owner or operator has reason to
believe that the emissions estimate for a given batch emission episode
is no longer valid.
For the first 12 months of operation, the rolling average is
determined based on all the available monthly averages. Beginning after
the thirteenth month of operation, the rolling average is a 12-month
rolling average based on the individual monthly averages for the
preceding 12 months.
F. Selection of Parameter Monitoring Provisions
1. Enhanced Monitoring
Section 114(a)(3) of the Act and Sec. 70.6(c) of the operating
permit rule (57 FR 32251; 40 CFR 70.6(c)) require the submission of
``compliance certifications'' from sources subject to the operating
permit program. Section 114(a)(3) of the Act requires enhanced
monitoring and compliance certifications of all major stationary
sources. The annual compliance certifications certify whether
compliance has been continuous or intermittent.
2. Background
In general, the EPA recognizes two basic approaches to monitoring.
One method is to establish monitoring as a direct measure of continuous
compliance. Under this continuous compliance monitoring approach, an
enforceable value of the monitored parameter is defined and measured.
The Agency has adopted this approach in Part 63 standards, and is
committed to following this approach whenever appropriate in future
rulemakings. Another approach is to establish monitoring for the
purpose of documenting continued operation of the control measures
within ranges of specified indicators of performance (such as
emissions, control device parameters, and process parameters) that are
designed to provide a reasonable assurance of compliance with
applicable requirements; indicating excursions from these ranges; and
responding to the data so that excursions are corrected. This second
approach is the basis of the Compliance Assurance Monitoring (CAM)
rule, which applies to sources that are not currently subject to Part
63 standards.
When determining appropriate continuous compliance monitoring
options, EPA considers the availability and feasibility of the
following monitoring strategies in a ``top-down'' fashion: (1)
Continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS) for the actual HAP
emitted, (2) CEMS for HAP surrogates (e.g., monitoring for the
predominant HAP or total organic compounds as opposed to monitoring for
all regulated HAP), (3) monitoring operating parameters, and (4) work
practice standards. Thus, where available and feasible, the EPA
specifies CEMS for the actual regulated compound(s) for continuous
compliance monitoring. This option allows continuous compliance to be
determined relative to the emission limit, just as short-term
compliance is determined using a performance test. Where a CEMS for the
regulated pollutant is not available or feasible, the EPA specifies
monitoring a surrogate compound with a CEMS or monitoring an operating
parameter that is critical to maintaining compliance performance. Only
when these options are not feasible does EPA specify work practice
standards as a means of ensuring continuous compliance.
When a Part 63 rule specifies a surrogate pollutant CEMS or
parameter monitoring for demonstrating continuous compliance, the rule
includes specific limitations and averaging times for these alternative
[[Page 68850]]
situations. The surrogate pollutant or operating parameter limit
becomes an enforceable limit for the rule. There is no requirement that
an alternative limit, whether a surrogate pollutant or operational
parameter, be statistically correlated with emissions or the compliance
level of the regulated pollutant(s). The alternative limit is a
separately enforceable requirement of the rule. The alternative limit
is not secondary to the emission limit; rather, it is applied in lieu
of a continuous emission limit obligation that would otherwise be
measured with a CEMS.
To address the potential disparity between CEMS for the actual HAP
emitted and CEMS for HAP surrogate or operating parameter monitoring,
there are two types of violations--violations of the emission limit and
violations of operating limits. Exceedances of CEMS for the actual HAP
are considered violations of the emission limit. Exceedances of CEMS
for HAP surrogate or operating parameter monitoring are considered
violations of an operating limit. Specifically speaking to the proposed
rule, where a source is using an FTIR instrument to monitor compliance
with the 20 ppmv alternative standard, an exceedance is defined as a
violation of the emission limit. Where a source is monitoring an
operating parameter for a control device (e.g., pH of the scrubber
liquid), an exceedance is defined as a violation of the operating
limit. An exception is that because the exit gas temperature of a
condenser is so closely correlated with emissions, an exceedance of the
condenser temperature monitoring range is considered a violation of the
emission limit.
3. Specific Monitoring Requirements of this Subpart
The proposed rule requires monitoring of HAP emissions and control
and recovery device operating parameters. HAP emissions are monitored
directly as part of complying with the kilogram of HAP emissions per
megagram of product limits for reactor batch process vents or as part
of the 20 ppmv alternative standard. Control device operating
parameters are monitored as part of complying with the percent
reduction requirements of the proposed rule.
Exceptions to the requirement to conduct continuous parameter
monitoring are that control devices controlling less than 1 ton per
year of uncontrolled emissions are exempt, but must conduct a daily or
per batch demonstration that the control device is operating properly.
The EPA judged that control devices receiving such small amounts of
emissions did not warrant the expense and paperwork burden of
establishing parameter monitoring levels and conducting continuous
parameter monitoring. The compliance demonstration procedure is subject
to review by the Administrator. Another exception is that owners or
operators of control devices serving storage vessels are not required
to conduct parameter monitoring unless the owner or operator specifies
continuous monitoring in the monitoring plan required by the referenced
HON provisions. However, if a control device is used, the owners or
operator must identify the appropriate monitoring procedures to be
followed for compliance demonstration purposes. Further, if a control
device serves both a storage vessel(s) and another emission point
subject to the proposed rule, the control device is subject to
continuous parameter monitoring if the other emission point is subject
to continuous parameter monitoring.
An owner or operator may apply to monitor alternate parameters.
This provision has been included in previous rules and provides
flexibility to the owner or operator who would like to monitor a
parameter other than those identified in the rule.
Parameter monitoring levels are established based on design
evaluation for control devices with uncontrolled emissions less than 10
tons per year; however, approval by the Administrator is required. The
EPA judged that allowing a design evaluation for control devices
receiving less than 10 tons per year of uncontrolled emissions was a
reasonable balance between reducing burden and cost to the industry and
protecting the environment. For all other control devices required to
conduct continuous monitoring, parameter monitoring levels are
established based on a performance test, but can be supplemented by
manufacturer's recommendations and/or an engineering assessment. If the
results of the performance test are supplemented by manufacturer's
recommendations and/or engineering assessment, approval by the
Administrator is required.
The proposed rule requires the affected source to record daily
average values for most monitored parameters. The daily averaging
period was selected because the purpose of monitoring data is to ensure
proper operation and maintenance of the control device. Because it
often takes from 12 to 24 hours to correct a problem, this averaging
period was considered to best reflect operation and maintenance
practices. This averaging period therefore gives the owner or operator
a reasonable period of time to take action. If a shorter averaging
period (for example 3 hours) was selected, affected sources would be
likely to have multiple excursions caused by the same operational
problem because it would not be possible to correct problems in one 3-
hour period.
For batch process vents, parameter averages may be either batch
cycle daily averages or block averages. Using the same rationale as
presented above for daily averages, batch cycle daily averages and
block averages are included as options in the proposed rule so that
monitoring can reflect operation and maintenance practices. The block
is defined by the owner or operator and can be no longer than the batch
cycle for a batch process vent. Using a block average would allow an
owner or operator with a batch cycle that exceeds 24 hours to calculate
parameter monitoring averages for the entire batch cycle, which is
likely the most reflective period for observing the performance and
operation of the control device. For batch cycles that are shorter than
24 hours, the batch cycle daily average allows owners or operators the
same benefits extended to control devices receiving emissions from
continuous sources.
G. Selection of Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
The general recordkeeping and reporting requirements of this
subpart are very similar to those found in the HON. The proposed rule
also relies on the provisions of subpart A of part 63. A table included
in the proposed rule designates which sections of subpart A apply to
the proposed rule.
The proposed rule would require affected sources to submit the
following reports: Precompliance Report; Notification of Compliance
Status; Periodic Reports; and Other Reports. The purpose and contents
of each of these reports are described in this section.
The wording of the proposed rule requires all draft reports to be
submitted to the ``Administrator''. The term Administrator is defined
in Sec. 63.2 as ``the Administrator of the United States Environmental
Protection Agency or his or her authorized representative.'' Thus, the
term Administrator may include either the Administrator of the EPA, an
EPA regional office, a State agency, or other entity that has been
delegated the authority to implement the proposed rule. In most cases,
reports will be sent to State agencies. Addresses are provided in
subpart A of part 63.
Records of reported information and other information necessary to
[[Page 68851]]
document compliance with the regulation are generally required to be
kept for 5 years. A few records pertaining to equipment design would be
kept for the life of the equipment.
1. Precompliance Report
The Precompliance Report includes the following, as appropriate:
compliance extension requests; requests to monitor alternative
parameters; intent to use alternative controls; intent to use the
alternative continuous monitoring and recordkeeping allowed by the
rule; demonstration that the emissions estimation equations for batch
process vents are not appropriate; and information related to
establishing parameter monitoring levels, if required.
These types of information are required prior to the compliance
date to allow sufficient review time for the Administrator. To avoid
delays caused by a lack of response from the Administrator, some items
are considered approved if the Administrator does not respond within a
given period of time.
2. Notification of Compliance Status
The Notification of Compliance Status would be submitted 150 days
after the affected source's compliance date. It contains the
information necessary to demonstrate that compliance has been achieved,
such as the results of performance tests, design analyses, and
demonstrations of compliance (e.g., demonstration that the overall
percent reduction for non-reactor batch process vents has been
achieved).
Affected sources with a large number of emission points are likely
to be submitting results of multiple performance tests for each kind of
emission point. For each test method used for a particular kind of
emission point (e.g., a process vent), one complete test report would
be submitted. For additional tests performed for the same kind of
emission point using the same method, the results would be submitted,
but a complete test report is not required. Results would include
values needed to determine compliance (e.g., inlet and outlet
concentrations, flowrates, percent reduction) as well as the values of
monitored parameters averaged over the period of the test. The
submission of one test report will allow the regulatory authority to
verify that the affected source has followed the correct sampling and
analytical procedures and has done calculations correctly. Complete
test reports for other emission points may be kept at the plant rather
than submitted. This reporting system was established to ensure that
reviewing authorities have sufficient information to evaluate the
monitoring and testing used to demonstrate compliance while minimizing
the reporting burden.
Information demonstrating that the specified percent reduction is
being achieved for the batch cycle, if an individual reactor batch
process vent is being controlled, or on an overall basis, if non-
reactor batch process vents are being controlled, is required. This
information includes an emissions profile and a demonstration that the
periods of under-control and over-control of emissions balance and the
batch cycle percent reduction or the overall percent reduction is
achieved.
Another type of information to be included in the Notification of
Compliance Status is the specific level for each monitored parameter
for each emission point, and the rationale for why this level indicates
proper operation of the control device. If this information has already
been provided in the operating permit, it does not need to be repeated
in the Notification of Compliance Status. As an example, for a batch
process vent controlled by a scrubber, the site-specific liquid
flowrate into or out of the scrubber, or the pressure drop across the
scrubber, that will ensure proper operation of the scrubber is
required. For control devices receiving 10 tons per year or more of
uncontrolled emissions (i.e., large control devices), the parameter
monitoring data from the performance test that supports the calculated
parameter monitoring levels is required to be included in the
notification. Further, if the owner or operator had chosen to
supplement the results of the performance test with manufacturer's
recommendations and/or engineering assessment, the rationale to support
the specified parameter levels is required. For control devices
receiving less than 10 tons per year of uncontrolled emissions (i.e.,
small control devices), a design evaluation that supports the parameter
monitoring levels is required to be included in the notification.
Finally, for control devices receiving less than 1 ton per year of
uncontrolled emissions, the daily or per batch demonstration procedure
that will be used to verify that the control device is operating
properly is required.
3. Periodic Reports
Periodic Reports are required to ensure that the standards continue
to be met and that control devices are operated and maintained
properly. Generally, Periodic Reports would be submitted semiannually,
however, quarterly reports must be submitted in some instances.
Periodic Reports specify periods when the values of monitored
parameters are above the maximum or below the minimum established level
specified in the Notification of Compliance Status or operating permit.
For continuously monitored parameters, records must be kept of the
parameter value recorded once every 15 minutes. If a parameter is
monitored more frequently than once every 15 minutes, the 15-minute
averages may be kept instead of the individual values. This requirement
ensures that there will be enough monitoring values recorded to be
representative of the monitoring period without requiring the affected
source to retain additional data.
For some types of emission points and controls, periodic (e.g.,
monthly, quarterly, or annual) inspections or measurements are required
instead of continuous monitoring. For control devices receiving less
than 1 ton per year of uncontrolled emissions, continuous monitoring is
not required. Instead, a daily demonstration that the control device is
working is required. Records that such inspections, measurements, or
demonstrations were done must be kept; but results are included in
Periodic Reports only if a problem is found. This requirement is
designed to minimize the recordkeeping and reporting burden of the
proposed rule.
4. Other Reports
There are a very limited number of other reports. Where possible,
the proposed rule is structured to allow information to be reported in
the semiannual (or quarterly) Periodic Reports. However, in a few
cases, it is necessary for the affected source to provide information
to the regulatory authority shortly before or after a specific event.
For example, notification prior to internal storage vessel inspections
is required to allow the regulatory authority to have an observer
present. Certain notifications and reports required by subpart A of
part 63 must also be submitted.
5. Possible Alternative Recordkeeping Requirements
The proposed rule requires affected sources to keep readily
accessible records of monitored parameters. For those control devices
that must be monitored continuously, records which include at least one
monitored value for every 15 minutes of operation are considered
sufficient. These monitoring records must be maintained for 5 years.
However, there are some existing monitoring systems that might not
satisfy these requirements. To comply
[[Page 68852]]
with the proposed rule, affected sources have the flexibility to
request approval for the use of alternative recordkeeping systems under
the proposed rule or under provisions of subpart A of part 63.
VI. Solicitation of Comments
The EPA welcomes comments from interested persons on any aspect of
the proposed rule, and on any statement in the preamble or the
referenced supporting documents. The proposed rule was developed on the
basis of information available. The EPA is specifically requesting
factual information that may support either the approach taken in the
proposed standards or an alternate approach. In order to receive proper
consideration, documentation or data should be provided.
Comments are specifically requested on several aspects of the
proposed rule. These topics, grouped under the headings ``Batch Process
Vents'' and ``Other Topics,'' are summarized below.
Batch Process Vents
Basis for the Percent Reduction for Batch Process Vent Standards
Industry representatives have expressed concern with the adequacy
of the batch process vent emissions and control device efficiency data
available to the EPA for this rulemaking, and they have also expressed
concern with how the available data have been used in developing a
standard for reactor batch process vents. The EPA is requesting comment
on these concerns and data to address this issue.
Specific concerns with the data available to the EPA that have been
expressed by industry representatives include the following. First, the
data made available to the EPA through the 1992 Information Collection
Request (ICR) responses are not based on emissions testing and are
largely engineering estimates. It is the EPA's impression that
emissions data provided in the 1992 ICR responses is sometimes an
annualization of emissions from a single batch. Second, the basis for
the control device efficiencies provided in the 1992 ICR responses are
not described or qualified, and these data are also not based on
testing and are largely engineering estimates. Industry representatives
felt that many of the higher percent reduction levels reported in the
1992 ICR responses would not be achievable over an extended period of
time and that the reported values were likely maximum efficiencies.
The primary concern expressed by the industry with how the data
were used by the EPA in setting a standard for reactor batch process
vents is that the available control device data, in large part,
represent maximum efficiencies, and the EPA used those values to set a
standard that must be averaged across the entire batch. More
specifically, the owners of the facility which serves as the basis for
the MACT floor for existing affected sources and subsequently the basis
for the standard (Georgia Pacific) have stated that they cannot support
the percent reduction value reported in the 1992 ICR response as being
achievable by their facility. At the time the 1992 ICR response was
prepared, no test data were available for this facility, and the
reported data were based on engineering estimates.
Regarding the alternative emission limit (i.e., kg of HAP per Mg of
product) that accompanies the percent reduction standard, industry
representatives stated that emissions per batch can vary for different
batches of product. Therefore, when annual emissions, based on
emissions from a single batch, are used to determine the alternative
emission limit, the basis for the alternative emission limits is
questionable.
While hearing these concerns, the EPA judged that the rulemaking
had to continue forward. The EPA used the best data available. It
should be noted that this data was collected through Section 114
surveys and was used only after several rounds of clarifying questions
to better understand the data and improve it whenever possible. The EPA
is very interested in any better data that can be provided by the
limited number of companies that have applied secondary controls and
will give it full consideration in developing the final standard.
If further data is provided, the EPA requests specifics on the
concerns and issues described above. The basis for compliance
demonstration is presented in the preamble and the proposed rule. Data
provided to address the concerns related to the percent reduction
standard should express control device performance on the same basis
that will be used for compliance demonstrations. For the alternative
standard, emissions data provided by industry should account for the
expected or typical annual production, thereby providing a more
representative estimate of annual emissions. The source of data and the
limitations on its use should be clearly described.
The EPA anticipates receiving data on this topic only from
facilities operated by 9 companies that are identified in docket item
number II-B-12, Docket Number A-92-19, as having applied secondary
controls. Because this solicitation of data is directed at 9 companies,
and not an entire industry, the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act do not apply.
Separate Treatment of Reactor and Non-Reactor Batch Process Vents
As defined in the proposed rule, reactor batch process vents are
batch process vents originating from a reactor. Non-reactor batch
process vents are batch process vents originating from a unit operation
other than a reactor, and include, but are not limited to, batch
process vents from filter presses, surge control vessels, bottoms
receivers, weigh tanks, and distillation systems. All facilities
reported the presence of reactor batch process vents. Although many
facilities did not report the presence of non-reactor batch process
vents, the EPA judged that all facilities had some number of these
types of batch process vents because these unit operations are
necessary to manufacture amino/phenolic resins. As described in Section
V of this preamble, the EPA chose not to include non-reactor batch
process vents with reactor batch process vents, primarily because
development of a MACT floor regulating both types of batch process
vents may not be representative of the control level at existing
sources for non-reactor batch process vents.
The EPA is requesting comment on treating reactor and non-reactor
batch process vents separately. Further, the EPA is requesting
additional data concerning the presence, emissions, and control status
of non-reactor batch process vents at amino/phenolic resin process
units.
Use of FTIR and Method PS-15
The proposed rule provides an alternative emission limit for
storage vessels, continuous process vents, reactor batch process vents,
and non-reactor batch process vents that allow an owner or operator to
vent these kinds of emissions points to a control device that
continuously achieves an outlet concentration of 20 ppmv of organic
HAP. The proposed rule requires that continuous compliance with this
alternative emission limit be demonstrated through the use of an FTIR
(Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy) instrument and Method PS-15
of 40 CFR part 60, appendix B. The EPA is requesting comment on this
compliance demonstration procedure.
Methanol Emissions From Amino/Phenolic Resin Production
A concern has been raised by industry related to the possibility
that responses to the 1992 ICR did not include
[[Page 68853]]
emissions of methanol originating from the use of aqueous formaldehyde.
If emissions of methanol were not included, it is possible that the
alternative emission limits that accompany the percent reduction
standard for reactor batch process vents may not be representative of
actual emissions. The EPA is requesting data on this issue.
Use of Solvent-Based and Non-Solvent-Based Alternative Emission Limits
The EPA considered proposing two alternative emission limits to
accompany the percent reduction standards for reactor batch process
vents, but, as explained in Section V of this preamble, the available
data presented problems with this approach. The EPA is requesting
comment on how the use of two alternative emission limits (i.e., one
for solvent-based production and one for non-solvent-based production)
could be implemented and is requesting the data required to implement
such an approach.
Based on the available data, the EPA considered implementing the
two emission limit concept by declaring an affected source to be a
solvent-based producer or non-solvent-based producer based on the total
mass of product. Under the approach that was considered, if more than
50 percent of the product is solvent-based, the affected source would
be declared a solvent-based producer and would be required to meet the
percent reduction standard or the solvent-based alternative emission
limit. An alternative approach would be for an affected source to meet
the solvent-based emission limit whenever it is producing a solvent-
based resin and to meet the non-solvent-based emission limit for all
other production.
The EPA is requesting non-confidential data (i.e., emissions and
production data) that would allow the EPA to establish a solvent-based
and non-solvent-based alternative emission limit. In regard to the
alternative approach described above (i.e., meeting the solvent-based
emission limit when producing solvent-based resins and meeting the non-
solvent-based emission limit otherwise) the EPA is particularly
interested in receiving data that would distinguish emissions from the
production of solvent-based resins versus emissions from the production
of non-solvent-based resins.
Other Topics
Definitions of Amino and Phenolic Resin
The EPA is requesting comment on the definitions included in the
proposed rule for amino resin and for phenolic resin. [Note: while the
proposed rule includes an administrative action to combine the amino
and phenolic resin source categories into a single source category, the
EPA believes that separate definitions for the two types of resins are
required.] The EPA requests comments addressing whether or not products
commonly considered by the industry to be amino or phenolic resins are
included by the definitions and products commonly considered by the
industry not to be amino or phenolic resins are excluded by the
definitions.
Applicability Criteria Alternative for Storage Vessels
During the analysis of the MACT floor for storage vessels, the EPA
considered an alternative approach for developing the applicability
criteria (i.e., description of which storage vessels require control)
based on the approach used to develop storage vessel applicability
criteria under the Pesticides NESHAP. This alternative approach results
in the same control level requirement of 50 percent emission reduction
for storage vessels at existing affected sources. For storage vessels
at new affected sources, the control level would increase to 95 percent
emission reduction. For storage vessels at existing affected sources,
the alternative approach uses an uncontrolled emissions cutoff for the
applicability criteria, determined to be 812 Mg/yr. Therefore, storage
vessels at existing affected sources with uncontrolled emissions of 812
Mg/yr or greater would be required to apply controls. For storage
vessels at new affected sources, the alternative approach considers
storage vessel capacity and uncontrolled emissions. For storage vessels
at new affected sources, the alternative approach would require control
for storage vessels with capacities of 10,150 gallons or greater with
uncontrolled emissions of 222 lb/yr or greater.
The EPA is requesting comment on this alternative approach. The
alternative approach and the results described above are documented in
more detail in docket item II-B-13, available in Docket Number A-92-19.
Heat Exchange Systems
The EPA is requesting comment on the presence of heat exchange
systems in this industry. The EPA has found heat exchange systems to be
a potential source of emissions warranting controls. However, the EPA
does not wish to regulate a type of equipment that is not present in
the industry, and the EPA does not have adequate information to
determine whether or not heat exchange systems are present at amino/
phenolic resin process units.
VII. Summary of Environmental, Energy, Cost, and Economic Impacts
This section presents the air, non-air environmental (wastewater
and solid waste), energy, cost, and economic impacts resulting from the
control of organic HAP emissions under the proposed rule.
A. Facilities Affected by These NESHAP
The proposed rule would affect amino/phenolic resin facilities that
are major sources in themselves, or that are located within a major
source. Based on available information, 40 amino/phenolic resins
facilities were judged to be major sources.
Impacts are presented relative to a baseline reflecting the level
of control in the absence of the rule. The current level of control was
well understood because emissions and control data were collected on
each facility included in the analysis. The estimation of impacts was
determined for existing facilities only. Impacts for new facilities
were not estimated because no new facilities are projected to be
constructed.
The impacts for existing sources were estimated by applying the
controls necessary to bring each facility into compliance with the
proposed standards. For a facility or emission point within a facility
already in compliance with the proposed standards, no impacts were
estimated for that facility or emission point.
B. Primary Air Impacts
The proposed standards are estimated to reduce organic HAP
emissions from all existing sources by 356 Mg/yr from a baseline level
of 644 Mg/yr. This is a 55 percent reduction. Table 7 summarizes the
organic HAP emission reductions for each of the emission points.
[[Page 68854]]
Table 7.--Organic HAP Emission Reductions By Emission Point For Existing Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emissions
Baseline after Emission Percent
Emission point emissions proposed reduction reduction
(Mg/yr) rule (Mg/ (Mg/yr) (percent)
yr)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reactor Batch Process Vents............................. 202.4 20.0 182.4 90.1
Non-reactor Batch Process Vents......................... 109.0 49.1 59.9 55.0
Continuous Process Vents................................ 116.4 116.4 0 0
Storage Tanks........................................... 65.4 65.3 0.1 0.2
Wastewater.............................................. 6.1 6.1 0 0
Equipment Leaks......................................... 144.6 30.6 114.0 78.8
-------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................... 643.9 287.6 356.3 55.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Non-air Environmental Impacts
The proposed standards are not expected to increase the generation
of solid waste at any amino/phenolic resin facility.
The use of scrubbers to control emissions will increase water
consumption as a result of evaporation and bleed-off. Bleed-off is the
release of a small percentage of the recirculated scrubber water to
control buildup or accumulation of scale, or other contaminates.
Scrubbers designed to capture emissions from reactor and non-reactor
batch process vents are small in size and should require less than 100
gallons of bleed-off per day per reactor.
Many of the HAP being controlled by scrubbers are water soluble,
with very low evaporation rates once in water. Therefore, the EPA does
not expect the HAP to be released from the scrubber wastewater at a
point downstream from the scrubber.
In general, the EPA expects the adverse impact of the wastewater
generated by the scrubbers to be small to negligible. First, the HAP
contained in the wastewater from the scrubber are very susceptible to
being eaten by the various bacteria found in wastewater treatment
plants. Thus, for those facilities that send or will send the scrubber
wastewater to a wastewater treatment facility, there should be minimal
adverse impacts.
Some facilities may not be able to send their scrubber wastewater
to a treatment facility. These facilities may be able to recycle all of
the scrubber wastewater within the facility. From information gathered
through site visits and telephone conversations with industry, the EPA
determined that some facilities recycle wastewater containing the
predominant HAP emitted by batch process vents (i.e., formaldehyde,
methanol, and phenol). Three resin plants visited by the EPA collected
and reused their wastewater. The recovered wastewater contains the raw
materials used in the reactor process. Recycling wastewater into the
resin manufacturing process reduces the quantities of raw materials
required to be purchased, thus reducing costs. Based on telephone
conversations with industry, one resin manufacturer uses a water pit to
collect emissions from the reactor. Water is removed from the pit when
the formaldehyde concentration reaches approximately three percent and
is placed in a storage tank. The stored water is added to raw materials
in the reactors to establish the proper viscosity at the beginning of a
resin batch.
In summary, the EPA expects that affected facilities will be able
to either send the scrubber wastewater to a treatment facility or
recycle the scrubber wastewater back into the process. Therefore, the
use of scrubbers will result in minimal, if any, adverse wastewater
impacts.
D. Energy Impacts
Energy impacts include changes in energy use, typically increases,
and secondary air impacts associated with increased energy use.
Increases in energy use are associated with fuel for the operation of
control equipment; in this case, the use of scrubbers to control
reactor vents. Energy credits are attributable to the prevention of
organic HAP emissions from equipment leaks. Secondary air impacts
associated with increased energy use are the emission of particulates,
sulfur dioxides (SOX), and nitrogen oxide (NOX).
These secondary impacts are associated with power plants that would
supply the increased energy demand. (For more information on the
calculation of the estimated energy impacts, see the ``Estimated Energy
and Secondary Air Impacts'' memorandum, Docket Item II-B-16.)
As noted above, energy use is expected to increase due to the use
of scrubbers to control reactor vents which would be used to comply
with the proposed rule. The use of scrubbers is estimated to increase
energy use by approximately 2,340 barrels of oil per year for the 40
existing major sources. The emissions of secondary air pollutants from
power plants supplying the power for this energy increase are estimated
to be 3 Mg/yr of filterable particulate, 15 Mg/yr of SOX,
and 0.3 Mg/yr of NOX.
At the same time, the prevention of organic HAP emissions from
equipment leaks generates energy credits. These energy credits are
expected to be relatively small and have not been estimated.
Energy impacts related to the control of storage vessels were
estimated to be neglible (or zero) because many storage vessels would
be controlled through the use of internal floating roofs, which do not
have any associated energy impacts.
As stated above, the use of scrubbers results in an increase of oil
consumption per year for the 40 major existing sources. The net
increase will be smaller due to the energy credits generated by the
control of equipment leak emissions. Given the relatively small energy
impact projected from the control of batch process vents, the EPA has
judged the energy impacts associated with the proposed rule to be
acceptable.
E. Cost Impacts
Cost impacts include the capital costs of new control equipment,
the cost of energy (supplemental fuel and electricity) required to
operate control equipment, operation and maintenance costs, and the
cost savings generated by reducing the loss of valuable product in the
form of emissions. Also, cost impacts include the costs of monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting associated with the proposed standards.
Average cost effectiveness ($/Mg of pollutant removed) is also
presented as part of cost impacts and is determined by dividing the
annual cost by the annual emission reduction. Table 8 presents the
estimated capital and annual costs and average cost effectiveness by
existing affected sources. There are no estimated cost impacts for new
facilities, because no new facilities are expected to be constructed.
[[Page 68855]]
Under the proposed rule, it is estimated that total capital costs
for existing sources would be $2,211,700 (1989 dollars), and total
annual costs would be $2,502,800 (1989 dollars) per year. The use of
1989 dollars in estimating the costs associated with the proposed
standards was done in order to be consistent with the cost
effectiveness decisions reached for setting the HON standards, which
form the basis for most of the standards being proposed for the amino/
phenolic source category. The actual compliance cost impacts of the
proposed rule may be less than presented because of the potential to
use common control devices, to upgrade existing control devices, and to
vent emissions streams into current control devices. Because the effect
of such practices is highly site-specific and data were unavailable to
estimate how often the lower cost compliance practices could be
utilized, it is not possible to quantify the amount by which actual
compliance costs would be reduced.
Table 8.--Summary of Cost Impacts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total capital Total annual Average cost
Emission point costs costs effectiveness
($1,000) ($1,000) ($/Mg)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reactor and Non-reactor Batch Process Vents........................ 1,687 1,279 5,280
Continuous Process Vents........................................... 0 0 NA
Storage Tanks...................................................... 31.6 8.8 88,000
Wastewater......................................................... 0 0 NA
Equipment Leaks.................................................... 412.7 290.9 2,550
Monitoring, Recordkeeping, and Reporting, excluding equipment leaks 80 924.2 NA
--------------------------------------------
Total*......................................................... 2,211.7 2,502.8 7,024
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Totals may not sum due to rounding.
F. Economic Impacts
An economic impact analysis for the proposed rule estimated the
impacts to affected businesses in the amino/phenolic resins source
category. Prices for products from the 20 businesses that operate the
40 facilities affected by this rule are estimated to increase by 0.1
percent for amino resin businesses and 0.1 percent for phenolic resin
businesses. Output for these products are estimated to decrease by less
than 0.1 percent for amino resin businesses and less than 0.1 percent
for phenolic resin businesses. Revenues for the entire amino/phenolic
industry are estimated to increase by slightly less than 0.1 percent,
and this is due to the expected increase in product prices resulting
from the proposed rule that will be experienced by amino/phenolic resin
producers that are not affected by this rule. The level of employment
in these industries is estimated to fall by about 1 percent based on
estimates to adversely affected businesses only. Potentially, two
facilities are expected to incur closures of product lines from costs
associated with this proposed rule.
A preliminary version of the economic impact analysis showed that 5
affected resin product lines, 3 of them owned by small businesses, may
cease operations as a result of implementation of the proposed NESHAP.
As discussed in Section V.C.8 of this preamble, upon receiving these
results, the Agency reviewed the available cost, economic, and other
data on these affected businesses and facilities in order to develop a
less burdensome proposed rule. An approach utilizing an actual annual
production cutoff of 800 megagrams per year was developed and analyzed.
After removal of the equipment leak requirements for 4 of the 5
facilities originally predicted to cease operation, only 2 affected
resin product lines were shown to potentially cease operations. Neither
of these product lines were owned by small businesses. Therefore, the
addition of this 800 megagram per year equipment leaks applicability
cutoff leads to minimal adverse economic impacts associated with the
proposed rule, and no significant economic impact on any small
businesses.
The economic impact analysis shows that 2 affected resin product
lines may cease operations as a result of implementation of the
proposed NESHAP. The Agency considers these to be an overstatement of
the likely impacts of the proposal NESHAP for the following reasons:
(1) the resin product lines projected to close may be captive producers
that are not subject to the closure criteria employed by the economic
impact model; and (2) the resin product lines projected to close
produce small volumes of output so that the baseline characterization
of these lines may understate operating profits because they likely
produce specialty resins with higher market prices than used in the
economic impact model.
For more information, refer to the Economic Impact Analysis of the
Proposed National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants:
Manufacture of Amino/Phenolic Resins (contained in the docket for this
rule).
VIII. Administrative Requirements
A. Docket
The docket for the proposed rule is A-92-19. The docket is an
organized and complete file of all the information submitted to or
otherwise considered by the EPA in the development of this rulemaking.
The principal purposes of the docket are: (1) To allow interested
parties a means to identify and locate documents so that they can
effectively participate in the rulemaking process; and (2) To serve as
the record in case of judicial review (except for interagency review
materials (section 307(d)(7)(A) of the Act).
This docket contains copies of the regulatory text, Basis and
Purpose Document (BPD), BPD references, and technical memoranda
documenting the information considered by the EPA in the development of
the proposed rule. The docket is available for public inspection at the
EPA's Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, the location of
which is given in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An
Information Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared by EPA
(ICR No. 1869.01) and a copy may be obtained from Sandy Farmer by mail
at OPPE Regulatory Information Division; U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
[[Page 68856]]
(2137); 401 M St., SW; Washington, DC 20460; by e-mail at
[email protected]; or by calling (202) 260-2740. A copy may
also be downloaded off the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr.
Certain records and reports are necessary to enable the
Administrator to identify facilities subject to the standard and to
ensure that the standard, which is based on maximum achievable control
technology (MACT) specific to amino/phenolic resin facilities, is being
achieved. The information will be used by Agency enforcement personnel
to (1) identify new, modified, reconstructed, and existing facilities
subject to the standards; and (2) ensure that compliance is being
maintained and documented. Records and reports are necessary to enable
the Agency to identify facilities that are not in compliance with the
standards. Based on reported information, the EPA can decide which
facilities should be inspected and which records or processes should be
inspected at these facilities.
Amino/phenolic resin facilities would be required to submit the
initial Notification of Compliance Status within 5 months of the
compliance date of the standard. Records necessary to determine
compliance would be compiled and periodic reports would be submitted on
a semiannual basis.
All information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of
confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency
policies set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40,
Chapter 1, Part 2 Subpart B--Confidentiality of Business Information
(see 40 CFR 2.201 et seq.; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; amended by
43 FR 39999, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 28, 1978; 44 FR
17674, March 23, 1979; 50 FR 51661, Dec. 18, 1985; 58 FR 461, Jan. 5,
1993; 58 FR 5061, Jan. 19, 1993; 58 FR 7189, Feb. 5, 1993).
The total annual reporting and recordkeeping burden for this
collection averaged over the first 3 years is estimated to be
$1,062,900 per year for the entire source category. The average burden,
per respondent, is 806 hours per year with a one-time capital cost of
$2,000. After the initial response, responses would be required
semiannually. There are an estimated 40 respondents initially subject
to the proposed collection requirements. Burden means the total time,
effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate,
maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a
Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions;
develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the
purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information,
processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing
information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously
applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to
respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete
and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise
disclose the information.
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 EPA's
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.
Comments are requested on the Agency's need for this information,
the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested
methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of
automated collection techniques. Send comments on the ICR to the
Director, OPPE Regulatory Information Division; U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (2137); 401 M St., SW; Washington, DC 20460; and to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, 725 17th St., NW, Washington, DC 20503, marked ``Attention:
Desk Officer for EPA.'' Include the ICR number in any correspondence.
Because the OMB is required to make a decision concerning the ICR
between 30 and 60 days after December 14, 1998, a comment to OMB is
best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it by January
13, 1999. The final rule will respond to any OMB or public comments on
the information collection requirements contained in this proposal.
C. Executive Order 12866 Review
Under Executive Order 12866, the EPA must determine whether a
regulatory action is ``significant'' and, therefore, subject to OMB
review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines
``significant'' regulatory action as one that is likely to lead to a
rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities;
(2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients
thereof; or
(4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the Executive Order.
It has been determined by EPA and OMB that this rule is not a
``significant regulatory action'' within the meaning of the Executive
Order.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements 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 not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions. This proposed rule will not have a significant impact on
a substantial number of small entities for the following reasons: (1)
There are only 8 small businesses among the 20 businesses affected by
this rule that operate the 40 affected facilities; (2) a screening
analysis indicates no affected small business is likely to incur an
annual compliance cost of more than 1 percent as a percentage of sales;
(3) price increases and resulting production decreases may occur for
the small businesses' affected products after compliance is achieved
but neither is expected to exceed 0.1 percent; and (4) no facilities or
product lines owned by these small businesses are projected to be at
risk of closure from compliance with this proposed rule. Therefore, I
certify that this proposed action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
For more information on the results given in this section, please
refer to the Economic Impact Analysis of the Proposed National Emission
Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Manufacture of Amino/Phenolic
Resins (contained in the docket for this rule).
E. Unfunded Mandates
Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), the EPA must prepare a budgetary impact
statement to accompany any proposed rule, or any final rule for which a
notice of proposed rulemaking was published, that includes a Federal
mandate that may result in estimated costs to State,
[[Page 68857]]
local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private
sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. Under Section 205, if
a budgetary impact statement is required under section 202, the EPA
must select the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome
alternative that achieves the objective of the rule, unless the Agency
explains why this alternative is not selected or the selection of this
alternative is inconsistent with law. Section 203 requires the EPA to
establish a plan for informing and advising any small governments that
may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule. Section 204
requires the Agency to develop a process to allow elected state, local,
and tribal government officials to provide input in the development of
any proposal containing a significant Federal intergovernmental
mandate.
The EPA has determined that this proposed rule does not include a
Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or
more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or
to the private sector. The EPA has also determined that this proposed
rule does not significantly or uniquely impact small governments.
Therefore, the requirements of the Unfunded Mandates Act do not apply
to this action.
F. Executive Order 12875
Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local
or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office
of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior
consultation with representatives of affected State, local and tribal
governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected
officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
Today's rule does not create a mandate on State, local or tribal
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these
entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of Executive
Order 12875 do not apply to this rule.
G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (the NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C.
272 note), directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its
regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards
are technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods,
sampling procedures, business practices, etc.) that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standard bodies. The NTTAA requires EPA
to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides
not to use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
This proposed rulemaking includes technical standards.
Consequently, the EPA searched for applicable voluntary consensus
standards by searching the National Standards System Network (NSSN)
database. The NSSN is an automated service provided by the American
National Standards Institute for identifying available national and
international standards.
EPA searched for methods potentially equivalent to the methods
required by this proposed rule, all of which are methods previously
promulgated by EPA. The proposed rule includes methods that measure:
(1) Determination of actual oxygen concentration (%O2d)(EPA Method 3B);
(2) sampling site location (EPA Method 1 or 1A); (3) volumetric flow
rate for batch emission episode (EPA Methods 2, 2A, 2C, or 2D); (4) gas
analysis (EPA Method 3); (5) stack gas moisture (EPA Method 4); (6)
concentration of formaldehyde (EPA Method 316 or 320); (7)
concentration of all organic HAP other than formaldehyde (EPA Method
18); and (8) concentration of methanol (EPA Method 308 or 18). These
EPA methods are found in Appendix A to part 60.
No potentially equivalent methods for the methods in the proposal
were found in the NSSN database search. Therefore, the EPA proposes to
use the methods listed above. EPA welcomes comment on this aspect of
the proposed rulemaking and specifically invites the public to identify
potentially-applicable voluntary consensus standards and to explain why
this regulation should provide for the use of these standards. Methods
submitted for evaluation should be accompanied with a basis for the
recommendation, including method validation data and the procedure used
to validate the candidate method (if a method other than Method 301, 40
CFR part 63, Appendix A was used).
H. Executive Order 13045
Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that EPA determines (1)
``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866,
and (2) the environmental health or safety risk addressed by the rule
has a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health
or safety effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
This proposed rule is not subject to E.O. 13045, entitled
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it does not involve
decisions on environmental health risks or safety risks that may
disproportionately affect children.
I. Executive Order 13084
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded,
EPA must provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop
an effective process permitting elected and other representatives of
Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in
the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or
uniquely affect their communities.'' Today's rule does not
significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal
governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive
Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.
[[Page 68858]]
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: September 30, 1998.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part
63 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be 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.
2. It is proposed that part 63 be amended by adding subpart OOO to
read as follows:
Subpart OOO--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutant
Emissions: Manufacture of Amino/Phenolic Resins
Sec.
63.1400 Applicability and designation of affected sources.
63.1401 Compliance schedule and relationship to existing applicable
rules.
63.1402 Definitions.
63.1403 Emission standards.
63.1404 Storage vessel provisions.
63.1405 Continuous process vents provisions.
63.1406 Reactor batch process vents--standards.
63.1407 Non-reactor batch process vents--standards.
63.1408 Batch process vents--recordkeeping provisions.
63.1409 Batch process vents--reporting provisions.
63.1410 [Reserved]
63.1411 [Reserved]
63.1412 [Reserved]
63.1413 Heat exchange systems provisions.
63.1414 Wastewater provisions.
63.1415 Equipment leak provisions.
63.1416 [Reserved]
63.1417 Test methods and compliance procedures.
63.1418 Monitoring requirements.
63.1419 General recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
Table 1 to Subpart OOO of Part 63--Applicability of General
Provisions to Subpart OOO Affected Sources
Table 2 to Subpart OOO of Part 63--Group 1 Storage Vessels at
Existing and New Affected Sources
Table 3 to Subpart OOO of Part 63--Known Organic Hazardous Air
Pollutants (HAP) From the Manufacture of Amino/Phenolic Resins
Table 4 to Subpart OOO of Part 63--Batch Process Vent Monitoring
Requirements
Table 5 to Subpart OOO of Part 63--Operating Parameter Levels
Table 6 to Subpart OOO of Part 63--Reports Required by This Subpart
Subpart OOO--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutant Emissions: Manufacture of Amino/Phenolic Resins
Sec. 63.1400 Applicability and designation of affected sources.
(a) Definition of affected source. The provisions of this subpart
apply to each affected source. Affected sources are described in
paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) of this section.
(1) An affected source is either an existing affected source or a
new affected source. Existing affected source is defined in paragraph
(a)(3) of this section, and new affected source is defined in paragraph
(a)(4) of this section.
(2) Emission points and equipment. The affected source includes the
emission points and equipment specified in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through
(a)(2)(iv) of this section that are associated with each group of
amino/phenolic resin process units (APPU) making up an affected source.
(i) Each waste management unit.
(ii) Maintenance wastewater.
(iii) Each heat exchange system.
(iv) Equipment required by, or utilized as a method of compliance
with, this subpart which may include control devices and recovery
devices.
(3) An existing affected source is defined as each group of one or
more APPU, that is not part of a new affected source, as defined in
paragraph (a)(4) of this section, that is located at a plant site that
is a major source.
(4) A new affected source is defined as something that meets the
criteria of paragraph (a)(4)(i), (a)(4)(ii), or (a)(4)(iii) of this
section. The situation described in paragraph (a)(4)(i) of this section
is distinct from those situations described in paragraphs (a)(4)(ii)
and (a)(4)(iii) of this section and from any situation described in
paragraph (i)of this section.
(i) At a site previously without HAP emission points (i.e., a
``greenfield'' site), each group of one or more APPUs on which
construction commenced after December 14, 1998 that are part of a major
source;
(ii) An APPU meeting the criteria in paragraph (i)(1)(i) of this
section; or
(iii) A reconstructed affected source meeting the criteria in
paragraph (i)(2)(i) of this section.
(b) APPUs without organic HAP. The owner or operator of an APPU
that is part of an affected source, as defined in paragraph (a) of this
section, but that does not use or manufacture any organic HAP shall
comply with the requirements of either paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of
this section. Such an APPU is not subject to any other provisions of
this subpart and is not required to comply with the provisions of
subpart A of this part.
(1) The owner or operator shall retain information, data, and
analysis used to document the basis for the determination that the APPU
does not use or manufacture any organic HAP. Types of information that
could document this determination include, but are not limited to,
records of chemicals purchased for the process, analyses of process
stream composition, engineering calculations, or process knowledge.
(2) When requested by the Administrator, the owner or operator
shall demonstrate that the APPU does not use any organic HAP.
(c) Emission points not subject to the provisions of this subpart.
The affected source includes the emission points listed in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (c)(9) of this section, but these emission points are
not subject to the requirements of this subpart or to the provisions of
subpart A of this part:
(1) Equipment that does not contain organic HAP and is located
within an APPU that is part of an affected source;
(2) Stormwater from segregated sewers;
(3) Water from fire-fighting and deluge systems in segregated
sewers;
(4) Spills;
(5) Water from safety showers;
(6) Water from testing of deluge systems;
(7) Water from testing of firefighting systems;
(8) Vessels and equipment storing and/or handling material that
contain no organic HAP and/or organic HAP as impurities only; and
(9) Equipment that is intended to operate in organic HAP service
for less than 300 hours during the calendar year.
(d) Processes exempted from the affected source. The processes
specified in this paragraph (d) are exempted from the affected source:
Research and development facilities.
(e) [Reserved]
(f) Primary product determination and applicability. The primary
product of a process unit shall be determined according to the
procedures specified in paragraphs (f)(1) through (f)(2) of this
section. Paragraphs (f)(3) through (f)(4) of this section describe
whether or not a process unit is subject to this subpart. Paragraphs
(f)(5) through (f)(7) of this section discuss compliance for those
APPUs operated as flexible operation units, as specified in paragraph
(f)(2) of this section. For purpose of this
[[Page 68859]]
paragraph (f), amino resins and phenolic resins shall be considered to
be the same product. For purposes of this paragraph (f), the term
``product,'' when discussing amino resins or phenolic resins, shall
have the additional meaning of being either an amino resin, a phenolic
resin, or both. Additionally, the term amino/phenolic resin, as defined
in Sec. 63.1402, shall have the same meaning: either an amino resin, a
phenolic resin, or both.
(1) If a process unit only manufactures one product, then that
product shall represent the primary product of the process unit.
(2) If a process unit is designed and operated as a flexible
operation unit, the primary product shall be determined as specified in
paragraphs (f)(2)(i) or (f)(2)(ii) of this section based on the
anticipated operations for the 5 years following [date of publication
of final rule] for existing affected sources and for the first 5 years
after initial start-up for new affected sources.
(i) If the flexible operation unit will manufacture one product for
the greatest operating time over the five year period, then that
product shall represent the primary product of the flexible operation
unit.
(ii) If the flexible operation unit will manufacture multiple
products equally based on operating time, then the product with the
greatest production on a mass basis over the five year period shall
represent the primary product of the flexible operation unit.
(3) If the primary product of a process unit is an amino/phenolic
resin, then said process unit is considered an APPU. Said APPU is
either an affected source or part of an affected source comprised of
other APPU subject to this subpart at the same plant site. The status
of a process unit as an APPU and as an affected source or part of an
affected source shall not change regardless of what products are
produced in the future by said APPU, with the exception noted in
paragraph (f)(3)(i) of this section.
(i) If a process unit terminates the production of all amino/
phenolic resins and does not anticipate the production of any amino/
phenolic resins in the future, the process unit is no longer an APPU,
is no longer an affected source or part of an affected source, and is
not subject to this subpart after notification is made as specified in
paragraph (f)(3)(ii) of this section.
(ii) The owner or operator of a process unit that wishes to remove
the APPU designation from the process unit, as specified in paragraph
(f)(3)(i) of this section, shall notify the Administrator. This
notification shall be accompanied by a rationale for why it is
anticipated that no amino/phenolic resins will be produced in the
process unit in the future.
(iii) If a process unit meeting the criteria of paragraph (f)(3)(i)
of this section begins the production of an amino/phenolic resin in the
future, the owner or operator shall use the procedures in paragraph
(f)(4)(i) of this section to determine if the process unit is re-
designated as an APPU.
(4) If the primary product of a process unit is not an amino/
phenolic resin, then said process unit is not an APPU, nor is it an
affected source, nor is it part of any affected source subject to this
subpart. Said process unit is not subject to this subpart at any time,
regardless of what product is being produced. The status of a process
unit as not being an APPU, and therefore not an affected source nor
part of an affected source subject to this subpart, shall not change
regardless of what products are produced in the future by said process
unit, with the exception noted in paragraph (f)(4)(i) of this section.
(i) If, at any time beginning [date 5 years after date of
publication of final rule], the owner or operator determines that an
amino/phenolic resin is the primary product for the process unit based
on actual production data for any preceding consecutive five-year
period, then the process unit shall be designated as an APPU. If said
APPU is not subject to another subpart of this part 63, it is either an
affected source or part of an affected source. Said APPU shall be
subject to this subpart and shall comply with paragraph (f)(4)(ii) of
this section. Beginning on [date 5 years after the date of publication
of final rule] and each year thereafter on the anniversary of [date 5
years after the date of publication of final rule], the owner or
operator shall evaluate production data for the preceding consecutive
five-year period to determine if the primary product for the process
unit is an amino/phenolic resin.
(ii) If a process unit meets the criteria of paragraph (f)(4)(i) of
this section, the owner or operator shall notify the Administrator
within 6 months of making this determination. The APPU, as the entire
affected source or part of an affected source, shall be in compliance
with the provisions of this subpart within 3 years from the date of
such notification.
(5) Once the primary product of a process unit has been determined
to be an amino/phenolic resin and if the process unit is an affected
source or is part of an affected source as defined in paragraph (a) of
this section, the owner or operator of the affected source shall comply
with the provisions of this subpart. Owners or operators of flexible
operation units shall comply with this subpart regardless of what
product is being manufactured, except as specified in paragraph
(f)(5)(iii) of this section. Owners or operators shall comply with the
provisions of this subpart for continuous process vents, storage
vessels, and emission points associated with wastewater as specified in
either paragraph (f)(5)(i) or (f)(5)(ii) of this section. Owners or
operators shall comply with the provisions of this subpart for reactor
or non-reactor batch process vents at all time, regardless of what
product is being produced.
(i) Each owner or operator shall determine the group status of each
emission point that is part of said flexible operation unit based on
emission point characteristics when the primary product is being
manufactured. Based on this finding of group status, the owner or
operator shall comply with this subpart for each emission point, as
appropriate, at all times, regardless of what product is being
produced.
(ii) Alternatively, each owner or operator shall comply with this
subpart for individual emission points based on determinations of the
group status of each emission point made when each product produced by
the flexible operation unit is manufactured, regardless of whether said
product is an amino/phenolic resin or not. (Note: Under this scenario
it is possible that the group status, and therefore the requirement to
achieve emission reductions, for an emission point may change depending
on the product being produced.)
(iii) Whenever a flexible operation unit manufactures a product in
a way that meets the criteria of paragraph (b) of this section (i.e.,
does not use or manufacture any organic HAP), the owner or operator is
only required to comply with either paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this
section to demonstrate compliance for activities associated with the
manufacture of said product. This subpart does not require compliance
with the provisions of subpart A of this part for activities associated
with the manufacture of a product that meets the criteria of paragraph
(b) of this section.
(6) The determination of the primary product for a process unit, to
include the determination of applicability of this subpart to process
units that are designed and operated as flexible operation units, shall
be reported in the Notification of Compliance Status required by
Sec. 63.1419(e)(5) when the primary product is determined to be an
amino/phenolic resin. The Notification
[[Page 68860]]
of Compliance Status shall include the information specified in either
paragraph (f)(6)(i) or (f)(6)(ii) of this section. If the primary
product is determined to be something other than an amino/phenolic
resin, the owner or operator shall either retain all information, data,
and analyses used to document the basis for the determination that the
primary product is not an amino/phenolic resin, or, when requested by
the Administrator, demonstrate that the primary product for the process
unit is something other than an amino/phenolic resin.
(i) If the APPU manufactures only an amino/phenolic resin, a
statement of this fact.
(ii) If the APPU is designed and operated as a flexible operation
unit, the information specified in paragraphs (f)(6)(ii)(A) through
(f)(6)(ii)(C) of this section, as appropriate.
(A) Statement that amino/phenolic resin is the primary product.
(B) Information concerning operating time and/or production mass
for each product that was used to make the determination of the primary
product under paragraph (f)(2)(i) or (f)(2)(ii) of this section.
(C) Identification of which compliance option specified in
paragraphs (f)(5)(i) and (f)(5)(ii) of this section has been selected
by the owner or operator for continuous process vents, storage vessels,
and emission points associated with wastewater.
(7) To demonstrate compliance with this subpart during those
periods when an APPU operated as a flexible operation unit is producing
a product that is not an amino/phenolic resin, the owner or operator
shall comply with either paragraphs (f)(7)(i) through (f)(7)(ii) or
paragraph (f)(7)(iii) of this section.
(i) Establish parameter monitoring levels, as specified in
Sec. 63.1418, for those emission points designated as Group 1 and for
reactor and non-reactor batch process vents, as appropriate.
(ii) Submit the parameter monitoring levels developed under
paragraph (f)(7)(i) of this section and the basis for them in the
Notification of Compliance Status report as specified in
Sec. 63.1419(e)(5).
(iii) Demonstrate that the parameter monitoring levels established
for the amino/phenolic resin are also appropriate for those periods
when products other than the amino/phenolic resin are being produced.
Material demonstrating this finding shall be submitted in the
Notification of Compliance Status report as specified in
Sec. 63.1419(e)(5).
(g) Storage vessel ownership determination. The owner or operator
shall follow the procedures specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through
(g)(7) of this section to determine to which process unit a storage
vessel shall be assigned. Paragraph (g)(8) of this section specifies
when an owner or operator is required to redetermine to which process
unit a storage vessel is assigned.
(1) If a storage vessel is already subject to another subpart of
this part 63 on [date of publication of final rule], said storage
vessel shall be assigned to the process unit subject to the other
subpart.
(2) If a storage vessel is dedicated to a single process unit, the
storage vessel shall be assigned to that process unit.
(3) If a storage vessel is shared among process units, then the
storage vessel shall be assigned to that process unit located on the
same plant site as the storage vessel that has the greatest input into
or output from the storage vessel (i.e., said process unit has the
predominant use of the storage vessel).
(4) If predominant use cannot be determined for a storage vessel
that is shared among process units and if one or more of those process
units is an APPU subject to this subpart, the storage vessel shall be
assigned to any of the said APPU.
(5) [Reserved]
(6) If the predominant use of a storage vessel varies from year to
year, then predominant use shall be determined based on the utilization
that occurred during the year preceding [date of publication of final
rule] or based on the expected utilization for the 5 years following
[date of publication of final rule] for existing affected sources and
based on the expected utilization for the first 5 years after initial
start-up for new affected sources. The determination of predominant use
shall be reported in the Notification of Compliance Status, as required
by Sec. 63.1335(e)(5)(vi).
(7) Where a storage vessel is located at a major source that
includes one or more process units which place material into, or
receive materials from the storage vessel, but the storage vessel is
located in a tank farm (including a marine tank farm), the
applicability of this subpart shall be determined according to the
provisions in paragraphs (g)(7)(i) through (g)(7)(iv) of this section.
(i) The storage vessel may only be assigned to a process unit that
utilizes the storage vessel and does not have an intervening storage
vessel for that product (or raw material, as appropriate). With respect
to any process unit, an intervening storage vessel means a storage
vessel connected by hard-piping both to the process unit and to the
storage vessel in the tank farm so that product or raw material
entering or leaving the process unit flows into (or from) the
intervening storage vessel and does not flow directly into (or from)
the storage vessel in the tank farm.
(ii) If there is no process unit at the major source that meets the
criteria of paragraph (g)(7)(i) of this section with respect to a
storage vessel, this subpart does not apply to the storage vessel.
(iii) If there is only one process unit at the major source that
meets the criteria of paragraph (g)(7)(i) of this section with respect
to a storage vessel, the storage vessel shall be assigned to that
process unit.
(iv) If there are two or more process units at the major source
that meet the criteria of paragraph (g)(7)(i) of this section with
respect to a storage vessel, the storage vessel shall be assigned to
one of those process units according to the provisions of paragraphs
(g)(3) through (g)(6) of this section. The predominant use shall be
determined among only those process units that meet the criteria of
paragraph (g)(7)(i) of this section.
(8) If the storage vessel begins receiving material from (or
sending material to) a process unit that was not included in the
initial determination, or ceases to receive material from (or send
material to) a process unit, the owner or operator shall reevaluate the
applicability of this subpart to the storage vessel.
(h) [Reserved]
(i) Changes or additions to plant sites. The provisions of
paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(3) of this section apply to owners or
operators that change or add to their plant site or affected source.
Paragraph (i)(4) of this section provides examples of what are and are
not considered process changes for purposes of this paragraph (i).
Paragraph (i)(5) of this section discusses reporting requirements.
(1) Adding an APPU to a plant site. The provisions of paragraphs
(i)(1)(i) through (i)(1)(ii) of this section apply to owners or
operators that add APPUs to a plant site.
(i) If an APPU is added to a plant site, said addition shall be a
new affected source and shall be subject to the requirements for a new
affected source in this subpart upon initial start-up or by [date of
publication of final rule], whichever is later, if said addition meets
the criteria specified in paragraphs (i)(1)(i)(A) through (i)(1)(i)(C)
of this section:
(A) Said addition meets the definition of construction in
Sec. 63.2;
[[Page 68861]]
(B) Such construction commenced after December 14, 1998; and
(C) Said addition has the potential to emit 10 tons per year or
more of any HAP or 25 tons per year or more of any combination of HAP.
(ii) If an APPU is added to a plant site, said addition shall be
subject to the requirements for an existing affected source in this
subpart upon initial start-up or by [date 3 years after date of
publication of final rule], whichever is later, if said addition does
not meet the criteria specified in paragraph (i)(1)(i) of this section
and the plant site meets, or after the addition is completed will meet,
the definition of major source.
(2) Adding emission points or making process changes to existing
affected sources. The provisions of paragraphs (i)(2)(i) through
(i)(2)(ii) of this section apply to owners or operators that add
emission points or make process changes to an existing affected source.
(i) If any process change or addition is made to an existing
affected source and said process change or addition meets the criteria
specified in paragraphs (i)(2)(i)(A) through (i)(2)(i)(B) of this
section, said affected source shall be a new affected source and shall
be subject to the requirements for a new affected source in this
subpart upon initial start-up or by [date of publication of final
rule], whichever is later.
(A) Said process change or addition meets the definition of
reconstruction in Sec. 63.2; and
(B) Such reconstruction commenced after December 14, 1998.
(ii) If any process change is made that results in one or more
Group 1 emission points (i.e., either newly created Group 1 emission
points or emission points that change group status from Group 2 to
Group 1) or if any other emission point(s) is added to an existing
affected source (i.e., Group 2 emission point(s), batch process
vent(s), or equipment leak components subject to Sec. 63.1415) and said
process change or addition does not meet the criteria specified in
paragraphs (i)(2)(i)(A) through (i)(2)(i)(B) of this section, the
resulting emission point(s) shall be subject to the requirements for an
existing affected source in this subpart. Said emission point(s) shall
be in compliance upon initial start-up or by the compliance date
specified in Sec. 63.1401, whichever is later.
(3) [Reserved.]
(4) Determining what are and are not process changes. For purposes
of this paragraph (i), examples of process changes include, but are not
limited to, changes in feedstock type, or catalyst type, or whenever
there is a replacement, removal, or the addition of recovery equipment,
or changes that increase production capacity. For purposes of this
paragraph (i), process changes do not include: process upsets,
unintentional temporary process changes, and changes that are within
the equipment configuration and operating conditions documented in the
Notification of Compliance Status report required by
Sec. 63.1335(e)(5).
(5) Reporting requirements for owners or operators that change or
add to their plant site or affected source. Owners or operators that
change or add to their plant site or affected source, as discussed in
paragraphs (i)(1) and (i)(2) of this section, shall submit a report as
specified in Sec. 63.1419(e)(7)(iv).
(j) Applicability of this subpart during periods of start-up,
shutdown, malfunction, or non-operation. Paragraphs (j)(1) through
(j)(4) of this section shall be followed during periods of start-up,
shutdown, malfunction, or non-operation of the affected source or any
part thereof.
(1) The provisions set forth in this subpart and the provisions
referred to in this subpart shall apply at all times except during
periods of non-operation of the affected source (or specific portion
thereof) resulting in cessation of the emissions to which this subpart
applies. The emission limitations of this subpart shall not apply
during periods of start-up, shutdown, or malfunction. However, if a
start-up, shutdown, malfunction, or period of non-operation of one
portion of an affected source does not affect the ability of a
particular emission point to comply with the specific provisions to
which it is subject, then that emission point shall still be required
to comply with the applicable provisions of this subpart during the
start-up, shutdown, malfunction, or period of non-operation. For
example, if there is an overpressure in the reactor area, a storage
vessel that is part of the affected source would still be required to
be controlled in accordance with Sec. 63.1404.
(2) The provisions set forth in subpart H of this part 63, as
referred to in Sec. 63.1415, shall apply at all times except during
periods of non-operation of the affected source (or specific portion
thereof) in which the lines are drained and depressurized resulting in
cessation of the emissions to which Sec. 63.1415 applies, or during
periods of start-up, shutdown, malfunction, or process unit shutdown.
During periods of start-up, shutdown, malfunction, or process unit
shutdown, the owner or operator shall follow the applicable provisions
of the start-up, shutdown, and malfunction plan required by
Sec. 63.6(e)(3).
(3) The owner or operator shall not shut down items of equipment
that are required or utilized for compliance with this subpart during
periods of start-up, shutdown, or malfunction; or during times when
emissions (or, where applicable, wastewater streams or residuals) are
being routed to such items of equipment, if the shutdown would
contravene requirements of this subpart applicable to such items of
equipment. This paragraph (j)(3) does not apply if the item of
equipment is malfunctioning. This paragraph (j)(3) also does not apply
if the owner or operator shuts down the compliance equipment (other
than monitoring systems) to avoid damage due to a contemporaneous
start-up, shutdown, or malfunction of the affected source or portion
thereof. If the owner or operator has reason to believe that monitoring
equipment would be damaged due to a contemporaneous start-up, shutdown,
or malfunction of the affected source or portion thereof, the owner or
operator shall provide documentation supporting such a claim in the
operating permit application (or, where applicable, an application for
revision of the operating permit) for that affected source. The
permitting authority shall evaluate the supporting documentation and,
in the operating permit, may provide for that equipment to be shut down
during periods of start-up, shutdown, or malfunction only if such
equipment would be damaged by the contemporaneous start-up, shutdown,
or malfunction, in the permitting authority's judgement, based on the
information submitted.
(4) During start-ups, shutdowns, and when the requirements of this
subpart do not apply pursuant to paragraphs (j)(1) through (j)(3) of
this section, the owner or operator shall implement, to the extent
reasonably available, measures to prevent or minimize excess emissions
to the extent practical. For purposes of this paragraph, the term
``excess emissions'' means emissions in excess of those that would have
occurred if there were no start-up, shutdown, or malfunction and the
owner or operator complied with the relevant provisions of this
subpart. The measures to be taken shall be identified in the applicable
start-up, shutdown, and malfunction plan, and may include, but are not
limited to, air pollution control technologies, recovery technologies,
work practices, pollution prevention, monitoring, and/or changes in the
manner of operation of the affected source. Back-up control devices are
not required, but may be used if available.
[[Page 68862]]
Sec. 63.1401 Compliance schedule and relationship to existing
applicable rules.
(a) Affected sources are required to achieve compliance on or
before the dates specified in paragraphs (b) through (c) of this
section. Paragraph (e) of this section provides information on
requesting compliance extensions. Paragraphs (f) through (l) of this
section discuss the relationship of this subpart to subpart A of this
part and to other applicable rules. Where an override of another
authority of the Act is indicated in this subpart, only compliance with
the provisions of this subpart is required. Paragraph (m) of this
section specifies the meaning of time periods.
(b) New affected sources that commence construction or
reconstruction after December 14, 1998 shall be in compliance with this
subpart upon initial start-up or [date of publication of final rule],
whichever is later, as provided in Sec. 63.6(b).
(c) Existing affected sources shall be in compliance with this
subpart no later than 3 years after [date of publication of final
rule], as provided in Sec. 63.6(c), unless an extension has been
granted as specified in paragraph (e) of this section.
(d) [Reserved.]
(e) Pursuant to Section 112(i)(3)(B) of the Act, an owner or
operator may request an extension allowing the existing affected source
up to 1 additional year to comply with Section 112(d) standards. For
purposes of this subpart, a request for an extension shall be submitted
to the permitting authority as part of the operating permit application
or to the Administrator as a separate submittal or as part of the
Precompliance Report. Requests for extensions shall be submitted no
later than 120 days prior to the compliance dates specified in
paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section, except as provided in
paragraph (e)(3) of this section. The dates specified in Sec. 63.6(i)
for submittal of requests for extensions shall not apply to this
subpart.
(1) A request for an extension of compliance shall include the data
described in Sec. 63.6(i)(6)(i)(A), (B), and (D).
(2) The requirements in Sec. 63.6(i)(8) through (i)(14) shall
govern the review and approval of requests for extensions of compliance
with this subpart.
(3) An owner or operator may submit a compliance extension request
after the date specified in paragraph (e) of this section, provided
that the need for the compliance extension arose after that date, and
the need arose due to circumstances beyond reasonable control of the
owner or operator. This request shall include, in addition to the
information specified in paragraph (e)(1) of this section, a statement
of the reasons additional time is needed and the date when the owner or
operator first learned of the circumstances necessitating a request for
compliance extension under this paragraph (e)(3).
(f) Table 1 of this subpart specifies the provisions of subpart A
of this part that apply and those that do not apply to owners and
operators of affected sources subject to this subpart.
(g) After the compliance dates specified in this section, a storage
vessel that is assigned to an affected source subject to this subpart
that is also subject to and complying with the provisions of 40 CFR
part 60, subpart Kb, shall continue to comply with 40 CFR part 60,
subpart Kb. After the compliance dates specified in this section, a
storage vessel that is assigned to an affected source subject to this
subpart that is also subject to the provisions of 40 CFR part 60,
subpart Kb, but the owner or operator has not been required to apply
controls as part of complying with 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb, is
required to comply only with the provisions of this subpart. After the
compliance dates specified in this section, said storage vessel shall
no longer be subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb.
(h) Affected sources subject to this subpart that are also subject
to the provisions of subpart Q of this part shall comply with both
subparts.
(i) After the compliance dates specified in this section, an
affected source subject to this subpart that is also subject to the
provisions of 40 CFR part 60, subpart VV, or the provisions of subpart
H of this part 63, is required to comply only with the provisions of
this subpart. After the compliance dates specified in this section,
said source shall no longer be subject to 40 CFR part 60, subpart VV,
or subpart H of this part 63, as appropriate.
(j) [Reserved.]
(k) [Reserved.]
(l) Overlap with other regulations for monitoring, recordkeeping or
reporting with respect to combustion devices, recovery devices, or
recapture devices. After the compliance dates specified in this
subpart, if any combustion device, recovery device or recapture device
subject to this subpart is also subject to monitoring, recordkeeping,
and reporting requirements in 40 CFR part 264, subpart AA, BB, or CC,
or is subject to monitoring and recordkeeping requirements in 40 CFR
part 265, subpart AA, BB, or CC, and the owner or operator complies
with the periodic reporting requirements under 40 CFR part 264, subpart
AA, BB, or CC, that would apply to the device if the facility had
final-permitted status, the owner or operator may elect to comply
either with the monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements of
this subpart, or with the monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting
requirements in 40 CFR parts 264 and/or 265, as described in this
paragraph (l), which shall constitute compliance with the monitoring,
recordkeeping and reporting requirements of this subpart. If the owner
or operator elects to comply with the monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting requirements in 40 CFR parts 264 and/or 265, the owner or
operator shall report all information required by Sec. 63.1419(e)(6).
The owner or operator shall identify which option has been selected in
the Notification of Compliance Status required by Sec. 63.1419(e)(5).
(m) All terms in this subpart that define a period of time for
completion of required tasks (e.g., weekly, monthly, quarterly,
annual), unless specified otherwise, refer to the standard calendar
periods.
(1) Notwithstanding time periods specified in this subpart for
completion of required tasks, such time periods may be changed by
mutual agreement between the owner or operator and the Administrator,
as specified in subpart A of this part 63 (e.g., a period could begin
on the compliance date or another date, rather than on the first day of
the standard calendar period). For each time period that is changed by
agreement, the revised period shall remain in effect until it is
changed. A new request is not necessary for each recurring period.
(2) Where the period specified for compliance is a standard
calendar period, if the initial compliance date occurs after the
beginning of the period, compliance shall be required according to the
schedule specified in paragraph (m)(2)(i) or (m)(2)(ii) of this
section, as appropriate:
(i) Compliance shall be required before the end of the standard
calendar period within which the compliance deadline occurs, if there
remain at least 3 days for tasks that must be performed weekly, at
least 2 weeks for tasks that must be performed monthly, at least 1
month for tasks that must be performed each quarter, or at least 3
months for tasks that must be performed annually; or (ii) In all other
cases, compliance shall be required before the end of the first full
standard calendar period after the period within which the initial
compliance deadline occurs.
(3) In all instances where a provision of this subpart requires
completion of a task during each of multiple successive periods, an
owner or operator may
[[Page 68863]]
perform the required task at any time during the specified period,
provided that the task is conducted at a reasonable interval after
completion of the task during the previous period.
Sec. 63.1402 Definitions.
(a) The following terms used in this subpart shall have the meaning
given them in Secs. 63.2, 63.101, 63.111, and 63.161 as specified after
each term:
Act (Sec. 63.2)
Administrator (Sec. 63.2)
Annual average concentration (Sec. 63.111)
Annual average flow rate (Sec. 63.111)
Automated monitoring and recording system (Sec. 63.111)
Boiler (Sec. 63.111)
Bottoms receiver (Sec. 63.161)
By compound (Sec. 63.111)
By-product (Sec. 63.101)
Car-seal (Sec. 63.111)
Closed-vent system (Sec. 63.111)
Combustion device (Sec. 63.111)
Commenced (Sec. 63.2)
Compliance date (Sec. 63.2)
Connector (Sec. 63.161)
Construction (Sec. 63.2)
Continuous monitoring system (Sec. 63.2)
Distillation unit (Sec. 63.111)
Duct work (Sec. 63.161)
Emission standard (Sec. 63.2)
EPA (Sec. 63.2)
External floating roof (Sec. 63.111)
First attempt at repair (Sec. 63.111)
Flame zone (Sec. 63.111)
Floating roof (Sec. 63.111)
Flow indicator (Sec. 63.111)
Fuel gas (Sec. 63.101)
Fuel gas system (Sec. 63.101)
Hard-piping (Sec. 63.111)
Hazardous air pollutant (Sec. 63.2)
Impurity (Sec. 63.101)
In organic hazardous air pollutant service (Sec. 63.161)
Incinerator (Sec. 63.111)
Instrumentation system (Sec. 63.161)
Internal floating roof (Sec. 63.111)
Lesser quantity (Sec. 63.2)
Major source (Sec. 63.2)
Malfunction (Sec. 63.2)
Open-ended valve or line (Sec. 63.161)
Operating permit (Sec. 63.101)
Organic monitoring device (Sec. 63.111)
Owner or operator (Sec. 63.2)
Performance evaluation (Sec. 63.2)
Performance test (Sec. 63.2)
Permitting authority (Sec. 63.2)
Plant site (Sec. 63.101)
Potential to emit (Sec. 63.2)
Primary fuel (Sec. 63.111)
Process heater (Sec. 63.111)
Process unit shutdown (Sec. 63.161)
Process wastewater (Sec. 63.101)
Process wastewater stream (Sec. 63.111)
Reactor (Sec. 63.111)
Recapture device (Sec. 63.101)
Reconstruction (Sec. 63.2)
Routed to a process or route to a process (Sec. 63.161)
Run (Sec. 63.2)
Secondary fuel (Sec. 63.111)
Sensor (Sec. 63.161)
Specific gravity monitoring device (Sec. 63.111)
Start-up, shutdown, and malfunction plan (Sec. 63.101)
State (Sec. 63.2)
Surge control vessel (Sec. 63.161)
Temperature monitoring device (Sec. 63.111)
Test method (Sec. 63.2)
Total resource effectiveness (TRE) index value (Sec. 63.111)
Treatment process (Sec. 63.111)
Unit operation (Sec. 63.101)
Visible emission (Sec. 63.2)
(b) All other terms used in this subpart shall have the meaning
given them in this section. If a term is defined in Sec. 63.2,
Sec. 63.101, Sec. 63.111, or Sec. 63.161 and in this section, it shall
have the meaning given in this section for purposes of this subpart.
Air pollution control device or Control device means equipment
installed on a process vent, storage tank, wastewater treatment exhaust
stack, or combination thereof that reduces the mass of HAP emitted to
the air. The equipment may consist of an individual device or a series
of devices. Examples include, but are not limited to, incinerators,
carbon adsorption units, condensers, flares, boilers, process heaters,
and gas absorbers. Process condensers are not considered air pollution
control devices or control devices.
Affected source is defined in Sec. 63.1400(a).
Amino resin means a resin produced through the reaction of
formaldehyde, or a formaldehyde containing solution (e.g., aqueous
formaldehyde), with compound(s) that contain the amino group; these
compounds include melamine, urea, and urea derivatives.
Amino/phenolic resin means one or both of the following types of
products:
(1) Amino resin; or
(2) Phenolic resin.
Amino/phenolic resin process unit (APPU) means a collection of
equipment assembled and connected by hard-piping or ductwork used to
process raw materials and to manufacture an amino/phenolic resin as its
primary product. This collection of equipment includes process vents
from process vessels; equipment identified in Sec. 63.149; storage
vessels, as determined in Sec. 63.1400(g); and the equipment that is
subject to the equipment leak provisions as specified in Sec. 63.1415.
Utilities, lines and equipment not containing process fluids, and other
non-process lines, such as heating and cooling systems which do not
combine their materials with those in the processes they serve, are not
part of the amino/phenolic resin process unit. An amino/phenolic resin
process unit consists of more than one unit operation.
Batch cycle means the operational step or steps, from start to
finish, that occur as part of a batch unit operation.
Batch emission episode means a discrete emission venting episode
associated with a single batch unit operation. Multiple batch emission
episodes may occur from a single batch unit operation.
Batch mode means the discontinuous bulk movement of material
through a unit operation. Mass, temperature, concentration, and other
properties may vary with time. For a unit operation operated in a batch
mode (i.e., batch unit operation), the addition of material and
withdrawal of material do not typically occur simultaneously.
Batch process vent means a process vent from a batch unit operation
within an affected source. Batch process vents are either reactor batch
process vents or non-reactor batch process vents.
Batch unit operation means a unit operation operated in a batch
mode.
Block means the time period that comprises a single batch cycle.
Continuous mode means the continuous movement of material through a
unit operation. Mass, temperature, concentration, and other properties
typically approach steady-state conditions. For a unit operation
operated in a continuous mode (i.e., continuous unit operation), the
simultaneous addition of raw material and withdrawal of product is
typical.
Continuous process vent means a process vent from a continuous unit
operation within an affected source. The total organic HAP weight
percent is determined after the last recovery device, as described in
Sec. 63.115(a), and is determined as specified in Sec. 63.115(c).
Process vents that are serving as control devices are not subject to
additional control requirements.
Continuous record means documentation, either in hard copy or
computer readable form, of data values measured at least once every 15
minutes and recorded at the frequency specified in Sec. 63.1419(d) or
Sec. 63.1419(h).
Continuous recorder means a data recording device that either
records an instantaneous data value at least once every 15 minutes or
records 1-hour or more frequent block average values.
Continuous unit operation means a unit operation operated in a
continuous mode.
Controlled HAP emissions means the quantity of HAP discharged to
the atmosphere from an air pollution control device.
Emission point means an individual continuous process vent, batch
process vent, storage vessel, waste management unit, equipment leak,
heat exchange system, or equipment subject to Sec. 63.149.
[[Page 68864]]
Equipment means, for the purposes of the provisions in Sec. 63.1415
and the requirements in subpart H of this part that are referred to in
Sec. 63.1415, each pump, compressor, agitator, pressure relief device,
sampling connection system, open-ended valve or line, valve, connector,
and instrumentation system in organic hazardous air pollutant service;
and any control devices or systems required by subpart H of this part.
For purposes of this subpart, surge control vessels and bottom
receivers are not equipment for purposes of regulating equipment leak
emissions. Surge control vessels and bottoms receivers are regulated as
non-reactor batch process vents, for the purposes of this subpart.
Equipment leak is defined in Sec. 63.101, except that surge control
vessels and bottoms receivers are not sources of equipment leak
emissions for purposes of this subpart.
Existing affected source is defined in Sec. 63.1400(a)(3).
Flexible operation unit means a process unit that manufactures
different chemical products, polymers, or resins periodically by
alternating raw materials or operating conditions. These units are also
referred to as campaign plants or blocked operations.
Group 1 continuous process vent means a continuous process vent
from a new affected source releasing a gaseous emission stream that has
a total resource effectiveness index value, calculated according to the
procedures in Sec. 63.115 as qualified by Sec. 63.1405(e), less than or
equal to 1.2.
Group 1 storage vessel means a storage vessel at a new or existing
affected source that meets the applicability criteria specified in
Table 2 of this subpart.
Group 1 wastewater stream means a wastewater stream consisting of
process wastewater from a new affected source that meets the criteria
for Group 1 status in Sec. 63.132(c) and/or that meets the criteria for
Group 1 status in Sec. 63.132(d), with the exceptions listed in
Sec. 63.1414(h) for the purposes of this subpart (i.e., for organic HAP
listed on Table 3 of this subpart that are also listed on Table 9 and
Table 8 of subpart G of this part 63, as indicated on Table 3 of this
subpart, as appropriate).
Group 2 continuous process vent means a continuous process vent
that does not fall within the definition of a Group 1 continuous
process vent.
Group 2 storage vessel means a storage vessel that does not fall
within the definition of a Group 1 storage vessel.
Group 2 wastewater stream means any process wastewater stream that
does not meet the definition of a Group 1 wastewater stream.
Heat exchange system means any cooling tower system or once-through
cooling water system (e.g., river or pond water) designed and intended
to operate to not allow contact between the cooling medium and process
fluid or gases (i.e., a noncontact system). A heat exchange system can
include more than one heat exchanger and can include recirculating or
once-through cooling systems.
Highest-HAP recipe for a product means the recipe of the product
with the highest total mass of HAP charged to the reactor during the
production of a single batch of product.
Initial start-up means the first time a new or reconstructed
affected source begins production, or, for equipment added or changed
as described in Sec. 63.1400(i), the first time the equipment is put
into operation. Initial start-up does not include operation solely for
testing equipment. Initial start-up does not include subsequent start-
ups of an affected source or portion thereof following malfunctions or
shutdowns or following changes in product for flexible operation units
or following recharging of equipment in batch operation. Further, for
purposes of Sec. 63.1401 and Sec. 63.1415, initial start-up does not
include subsequent start-ups of affected sources or portions thereof
following malfunctions or process unit shutdowns.
Large control device means a control device that controls emission
points with total emissions of 10 tons of HAP per year or more before
control.
Maintenance wastewater is defined in Sec. 63.101, except that the
term ``amino/phenolic resin process unit'' shall apply wherever the
term ``chemical manufacturing process unit'' is used. Further, the
generation of wastewater from the routine rinsing or washing of
equipment in batch operation between batches is not maintenance
wastewater for the purposes of this subpart.
Maximum representative operating conditions means, for purposes of
testing or measurements required by Sec. 63.1417, those conditions
which reflect the highest HAP emissions reasonably expected to be
vented to the control device or emitted to the atmosphere. For affected
sources that produce the same product(s) using multiple recipes, the
production of the highest-HAP recipe is reflective of maximum
representative operating conditions.
Maximum true vapor pressure is defined in Sec. 63.111, except that
the terms ``transfer'' or ``transferred'' shall not apply for purposes
of this subpart.
Multicomponent system means, as used in conjunction with batch
process vents, a stream whose liquid and/or vapor contains more than
one compound.
Net positive heating value means the difference between the heat
value of the recovered chemical stream and the minimum heat value
required to ensure a stable flame in the combustion device. This
difference must have a positive value when used in the context of
``recovering chemicals for fuel value'' (e.g., in the definition of
``recovery device'' in this section).
New affected source is defined in Sec. 63.1400(a)(4).
Non-reactor batch process vent means a batch process vent
originating from a unit operation other than a reactor. Non-reactor
batch process vents include, but are not limited to, batch process
vents from filter presses, surge control vessels, bottoms receivers,
weigh tanks, and distillation systems.
On-site or On site means, with respect to records required to be
maintained by this subpart or required by another subpart referenced by
this subpart, that records are stored at a location within a major
source which encompasses the affected source. On-site includes, but is
not limited to, storage at the affected source or APPU to which the
records pertain, or storage in central files elsewhere at the major
source.
Operating day means the period defined by the owner or operator in
the Notification of Compliance Status required by Sec. 63.1419(e)(5).
The operating day is the period for which daily average monitoring
values and batch cycle daily average monitoring values are determined.
Organic hazardous air pollutant(s) (organic HAP) means one or more
of the chemicals listed in Table 3 of this subpart or any other
chemical which is:
(1) Knowingly produced or introduced into the manufacturing process
other than as an impurity; and
(2) Listed in Table 2 of subpart F of this part.
Phenolic resin means a resin that is a condensation product of
formaldehyde and phenol, or a formaldehyde substitute and/or a phenol
substitute. Substitutes for formaldehyde include acetaldehyde or
furfuraldehyde. Substitutes for phenol include other phenolic starting
compounds such as cresols, xylenols, p-tert-butylphenol, p-
phenylphenol, and nonylphenol.
Primary product is defined in and determined by the procedures
specified in Sec. 63.1400(f). For the purposes of the procedures in
Sec. 63.1400(f), amino resins and phenolic resins shall be considered
to be the same product.
[[Page 68865]]
Process condenser means a condenser whose primary purpose is to
recover material as an integral part of a unit operation(s). The
condenser must support a vapor-to-liquid phase change for periods of
equipment operation that are at or above the boiling or bubble point of
substance(s) at the liquid surface. Examples of process condensers
include distillation condensers, reflux condensers, and condensers used
in stripping or flashing operations. In a series of condensers, all
condensers up to and including the first condenser with an exit gas
temperature below the boiling or bubble point of the substance(s) at
the liquid surface are considered to be process condensers. All
condensers in line prior to a vacuum source are included in this
definition.
Process unit means a collection of equipment assembled and
connected by hardpiping or ductwork, used to process raw materials and
to manufacture a product.
Process vent means a gaseous emission stream from a unit operation
where the gaseous emission stream is discharged to the atmosphere
either directly or after passing through one or more control, recovery,
or recapture devices. Unit operations that may have process vents are
condensers, distillation units, reactors, or other unit operations
within the APPU. Emission streams that are undiluted and uncontrolled
containing less than 20 ppmv organic HAP, as determined through process
knowledge that no organic HAP are present in the emission stream or
using an engineering assessment as discussed in Sec. 63.1417(e)(3)(vi);
test data using the test methods specified in Sec. 63.1417(b); or any
other test method that has been validated according to the procedures
in Method 301 of appendix A of this part, are not considered process
vents. Process vents exclude relief valve discharges, gaseous streams
routed to a fuel gas system(s), and leaks from equipment regulated
under Sec. 63.1415. Process vents that are serving as control devices
are not subject to additional control requirements.
Product means a resin, produced using the same monomers and varying
in additives (e.g., initiators, terminators, etc.); catalysts; or in
the relative proportions of monomers, that is manufactured by a process
unit. With respect to resins, more than one recipe may be used to
produce the same product. Product also means a chemical that is not a
polymer, that is manufactured by a process unit. By-products, isolated
intermediates, impurities, wastes, and trace contaminants are not
considered products.
Reactor batch process vent means a batch process vent originating
from a reactor.
Recipe means a specific composition, from among the range of
possible compositions that may occur within a product, as defined in
this section. A recipe is determined by the proportions of monomers
and, if present, other reactants and additives that are used to make
the recipe. For example, a methylated amino resin and a non-methylated
amino resin are both different recipes of the same product, amino
resin.
Recovery device means an individual unit of equipment capable of
and normally used for the purpose of recovering chemicals for use;
reuse; fuel value (i.e., net heating value); or for sale for use,
reuse, or fuel value (i.e., net heating value). Examples of equipment
that may be recovery devices include absorbers, carbon adsorbers,
condensers, oil-water separators or organic-water separators, or
organic removal devices such as decanters, strippers, or thin-film
evaporation units. For the purposes of the monitoring, recordkeeping,
or reporting requirements of this subpart, recapture devices are
considered recovery devices.
Research and development facility means any stationary source whose
primary purpose is to conduct research and development into new
processes and products, where such source is operated under the close
supervision of technically trained personnel, and is not engaged in the
manufacture of products for commercial sale in commerce, except in a de
minimis manner.
Residual is defined in Sec. 63.111, except that when the definition
in Sec. 63.111 uses the term ``Table 9 compounds,'' the term ``organic
HAP listed on Table 3 of this subpart that are also listed on Table 9
of subpart G of this part, as indicated on Table 3 of this subpart''
shall apply for purposes of this subpart.
Safety device means a closure device such as a pressure relief
valve, frangible disc, fusible plug, or any other type of device which
functions exclusively to prevent physical damage or permanent
deformation to a unit or its air emission control equipment by venting
gases or vapors directly to the atmosphere during unsafe conditions
resulting from an unplanned, accidental, or emergency event. For the
purposes of this subpart, a safety device is not used for routine
venting of gases or vapors from the vapor headspace underneath a cover
such as during filling of the unit or to adjust the pressure in this
vapor headspace in response to normal daily diurnal ambient temperature
fluctuations. A safety device is designed to remain in a closed
position during normal operations and open only when the internal
pressure, or another relevant parameter, exceeds the device threshold
setting applicable to the air emission control equipment as determined
by the owner or operator based on manufacturer recommendations,
applicable regulations, fire protection and prevention codes, standard
engineering codes and practices, or other requirements for the safe
handling of flammable, combustible, explosive, reactive, or hazardous
materials.
Shutdown means for purposes including, but not limited to, periodic
maintenance, replacement of equipment, or repair, the cessation of
operation of an affected source, an APPU(s) within an affected source,
a waste management unit or unit operation within an affected source, or
equipment required or used to comply with this subpart, or the emptying
or degassing of a storage vessel. For purposes of the wastewater
provisions of Sec. 63.1414, shutdown does not include the routine
rinsing or washing of equipment in batch operation between batches. For
purposes of the batch process vent provisions in Secs. 63.1406 and
63.1407, the cessation of equipment in batch operation is not a
shutdown, unless the equipment undergoes maintenance, is replaced, or
is repaired.
Small control device means a control device that controls emission
points with total emissions less than 10 tons of HAP per year before
control.
Start-up means the setting into operation of an affected source, an
APPU(s) within an affected source, a waste management unit or unit
operation within an affected source, or equipment required or used to
comply with this subpart, or a storage vessel after emptying and
degassing. For both continuous and batch unit operations, start-up
includes initial start-up and operation solely for testing equipment.
For both continuous and batch unit operations, start-up does not
include the recharging of equipment in batch operation. For continuous
unit operations, start-up includes transitional conditions due to
changes in product for flexible operation units. For batch unit
operations, start-up does not include transitional conditions due to
changes in product for flexible operation units.
Steady-state conditions means that all variables (temperatures,
pressures, volumes, flow rates, etc.) in a process do not vary
significantly with time; minor
[[Page 68866]]
fluctuations about constant mean values may occur.
Storage vessel means a tank or other vessel that is used to store
liquids that contain one or more organic HAP. Storage vessels do not
include:
(1) vessels permanently attached to motor vehicles such as trucks,
railcars, barges, or ships;
(2) pressure vessels designed to operate in excess of 204.9
kilopascals and without emissions to the atmosphere;
(3) vessels with capacities smaller than 38 cubic meters;
(4) vessels and equipment storing and/or handling material that
contains no organic HAP and/or organic HAP as impurities only;
(5) wastewater storage tanks;
(6) surge control vessels or bottoms receivers; and
(7) vessels and equipment storing and/or handling amino/phenolic
resin.
Uncontrolled HAP emissions means a gaseous vent stream containing
HAP which has exited the unit operation (or process condenser, if any),
but which has not yet been introduced into an air pollution control
device to reduce the mass of HAP in the vent stream. If the gaseous
vent stream is not routed to an air pollution control device,
uncontrolled emissions are those HAP emissions released to the
atmosphere.
Vent stream, as used in reference to batch process vents,
continuous process vents, storage vessels, waste management units, and
in-process equipment subject to Sec. 63.149, means the emissions from
that emission point.
Waste management unit is defined in Sec. 63.111, except that where
the definition in Sec. 63.111 uses the term ``chemical manufacturing
process unit,'' the term ``APPU'' shall apply for purposes of this
subpart.
Wastewater is either a process wastewater or maintenance wastewater
and means water that:
(1) Contains either:
(i) An annual average concentration of organic HAP listed on Table
3 of this subpart that are also listed on Table 9 of subpart G of this
part 63, as indicated on Table 3 of this subpart, of at least 5 parts
per million by weight and has an annual average flow rate of 0.02 liter
per minute or greater; or
(ii) An annual average concentration of organic HAP listed on Table
3 of this subpart that are also listed on Table 9 of subpart G of this
part 63, as indicated on Table 3 of this subpart, of at least 10,000
parts per million by weight at any flow rate, and that;
(2) Is discarded from an APPU that is part of an affected source.
Wastewater stream means a stream that contains wastewater as
defined in this section.
Sec. 63.1403 Emission standards.
Each owner or operator of an affected source subject to the
provisions of this subpart shall control organic HAP emissions as
specified in this subpart on and after the compliance dates specified
in this section. Compliance with the emissions limits is demonstrated
initially through the provisions of Sec. 63.1417 (Test methods and
compliance procedures) and continuously through the provisions of
Sec. 63.1418 (Monitoring requirements).
(a) Except as allowed under paragraph (b) of this section, the
owner or operator of an affected source shall comply with the
provisions in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(9) of this section, as
appropriate. (Note: Sections 63.1410 through 63.1412 and Sec. 63.1416
are reserved.):
(1) Section 63.1404 for storage vessels for new affected sources;
(2) Section 63.1405 for continuous process vents for new affected
sources;
(3) Sections 63.1406 through 63.1409 for batch process vents for
existing and new affected sources;
(4) Section 63.1413 for heat exchange systems for existing and new
affected sources;
(5) Section 63.1414 for wastewater for new affected sources;
(6) Section 63.1415 for equipment leaks for existing and new
affected sources, except as specified in paragraph (c) of this section;
(7) Section 63.1417 for test methods and compliance procedures;
(8) Section 63.1418 for monitoring requirements; and
(9) Section 63.1419 for general recordkeeping and reporting
requirements.
(b) When emissions of different kinds (i.e., emissions from
continuous process vents, batch process vents, storage vessels, process
wastewater, and/or in-process equipment subject to Sec. 63.149) are
combined, and at least one of the vent streams would be required by
this subpart to apply controls in the absence of combination with other
vent streams, the owner or operator shall comply with the requirements
of either paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section, as appropriate.
For purposes of this paragraph (b), combined vent streams containing
one or more batch process vents and containing one or more continuous
process vents for which control is required by the provisions of
Sec. 63.1405 may comply with either paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this
section, as appropriate. For purposes of this paragraph (b), the owner
or operator of an affected source with combined vent streams containing
one or more batch process vents but not containing one or more
continuous process vents for which control is required by the
provisions of Sec. 63.1405 shall comply with paragraph (b)(3) of this
section:
(1) Comply with the applicable requirements of this subpart for
each kind of emission point in the vent stream as specified in
paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5) of this section.
(2) Comply with the first set of requirements identified in
paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (b)(2)(iv) of this section which applies
to any individual vent stream that is included in the combined vent
stream, where either that vent stream would be required by this subpart
to apply controls in the absence of combination with other vent
streams, or the owner or operator chooses to apply controls according
to the provisions of this subpart appropriate to that vent stream for
purposes of this paragraph. Compliance with the first applicable set of
requirements identified in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (b)(2)(iv) of
this section constitutes compliance with all other requirements in
paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (b)(2)(iv) of this section applicable to
other vent streams in the combined vent stream:
(i) The requirements of this subpart for Group 1 continuous process
vents subject to Sec. 63.1405, including applicable monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting;
(ii) The requirements of Sec. 63.139, as specified in Sec. 63.1414,
for control devices used to control emissions from waste management
units, including applicable monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting;
(iii) The requirements of Sec. 63.139, as specified in
Sec. 63.1414, for closed vent systems for control of emissions from in-
process equipment subject to Sec. 63.149, as specified in Sec. 63.1414,
including applicable monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting; or
(iv) The requirements of Sec. 63.119(e), as specified in
Sec. 63.1404, for control of emissions from Group 1 storage vessels,
including applicable monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting.
(3) The owner or operator of an affected source with combined vent
streams containing one or more batch process vents but not also
containing one or more continuous process vents required to apply
controls by the provisions of Sec. 63.1405 shall comply with paragraphs
(b)(3)(i) and (b)(3)(ii) of this section.
(i) The owner or operator of the affected source shall comply with
[[Page 68867]]
Sec. 63.1406 or Sec. 63.1407, as appropriate, for the batch process
vent(s).
(ii) The owner or operator of the affected source shall comply with
either paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section, as appropriate, for
the remaining vent streams.
(c) Exception from equipment leaks. Owners or operators of certain
affected sources are not required to comply with the equipment leak
provisions specified in Sec. 63.1415, as specified in paragraphs (c)(1)
through (c)(3) of this section.
(1) Affected sources with actual annual production of amino/
phenolic resin equal to or less than 800 megagrams per year for the 12-
month period preceeding December 14, 1998 publication of this proposed
rule are exempt from the equipment leak provisions specified in
Sec. 63.1415, except as specified in paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
(2) Owners or operators using the exemption provided by this
paragraph (c) shall comply with the following requirements:
(i) Submit a statement that includes the following information as
part of the Notification of Compliance Status required by
Sec. 63.1419(e)(5): a statement that the exemption provided by this
paragraph (c) is being utilized and a statement of the affected
source's actual annual production of amino/phenolic resins for the 12-
month period preceeding December 14, 1998.
(ii) Comply with the requirements of either paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A)
or (c)(2)(ii)(B) of this section.
(A) The owner or operator shall retain information, data, and
analysis used to document the basis for using the exemption provided by
this paragraph (c). Such information, data, and analysis shall be
retained for the 12-month period preceeding December 14, 1998 and for
each 12-month period the affected source is in operation and using the
exemption provided by this paragraph (c). The beginning of each 12-
month period shall be the anniversary of December 14, 1998.
(B) When requested by the Administrator, the owner or operator
shall demonstrate that actual annual production is equal to or less
than 800 megagrams per year of amino/phenolic resin for the 12-month
period preceeding December 14, 1998 and for each 12-month period the
affected source has been in operation and using the exemption provided
by this paragraph (c). The beginning of each 12-month period shall be
the anniversary of December 14, 1998.
(3) If an affected source using the exemption provided by this
paragraph (c) has an actual annual production of amino/phenolic resins
exceeding 800 megagrams per year for any 12-month period that begins on
the anniversary of December 14, 1998 starting with the 12-month period
following December 14, 1998, the owner or operator shall comply with
the provisions of Sec. 63.1415 for the life of the affected source
(i.e., regardless of actual annual production thereafter) or until the
affected source is no longer subject to the provisions of this subpart.
(d) Opening of a safety device. Opening of a safety device, as
defined in Sec. 63.1402, is allowed at any time conditions require it
to be opened to avoid unsafe conditions.
Sec. 63.1404 Storage vessel provisions.
(a) For each storage vessel located at an existing or new affected
source, the owner or operator shall comply with paragraph (b) of this
section. As an alternative to complying with paragraph (b) of this
section, an owner or operator may comply with paragraph (c) of this
section. The compliance date for storage vessels at affected sources
subject to the provisions of this section is specified in Sec. 63.1401.
(b) For each Group 1 storage vessel assigned, according to the
procedures in Sec. 63.1400(g), to a new affected source, the owner or
operator shall comply with the control requirements specified in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section and with the requirements of subpart G
of this part specified in paragraphs (b)(3) through (b)(6) of this
section, with the differences noted in paragraphs (d)(1) through
(d)(14) of this section for the purposes of this subpart, as
appropriate. For each Group 1 storage vessel assigned, according to the
procedures in Sec. 63.1400(g), to an existing affected source, the
owner or operator shall comply with the control requirements specified
in paragraph (b)(2) of this section and with the requirements of
subpart G of this part specified in paragraphs (b)(3) through (b)(6) of
this section, with the differences noted in paragraphs (d)(1) through
(d)(14) of this section for the purposes of this subpart, as
appropriate:
(1) For storage vessels containing aqueous formaldehyde, reduce
emissions of total organic HAP by 50 weight-percent using a closed vent
system and control device or, alternatively, comply with Sec. 63.119 G
of this part. For storage vessels containing other organic HAP, reduce
emissions of total organic HAP by 95 weight-percent using a closed vent
system and control device or, alternatively, comply with Sec. 63.119 of
subpart G of this part;
(2) Reduce emissions of total organic HAP by 50 weight-percent
using a closed vent system and control device or, alternatively, comply
with Sec. 63.119 of subpart G of this part;
(3) Section 63.120, Storage vessel provisions--procedures to
determine compliance;
(4) Section 63.121, Storage vessel provisions--alternative means of
emission limitation;
(5) Section 63.122, Storage vessel provisions--reporting;
(6) Section 63.123, Storage vessel provisions--recordkeeping.
(c) As an alternative standard, the owner or operator of an
existing or new affected source may comply with the storage tank
standards by routing storage tank vents to a control device achieving
an outlet organic HAP concentration of 20 ppmv or less. Compliance with
the outlet concentration shall be determined by the initial compliance
procedures of Sec. 63.1417(a)(6) and the continuous emission monitoring
requirements of Sec. 63.1418(i).
(d) The differences noted in paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(14) of
this section apply to owners or operators complying with certain
provisions of subpart G of this part, as specified in paragraph (b) of
this section.
(1) When the term ``storage vessel'' is used in Secs. 63.119
through 63.123 of subpart G of this part, the definition of this term
in Sec. 63.1402 shall apply for the purposes of this subpart.
(2) When the term ``Group 1 storage vessel'' is used in
Secs. 63.119 through 63.123 of subpart G of this part, the definition
of this term in Sec. 63.1402 shall apply for the purposes of this
subpart.
(3) When the term ``Group 2 storage vessel'' is used in
Secs. 63.119 through 63.123, the definition of this term in
Sec. 63.1402 shall apply for the purposes of this subpart.
(4) When December 31, 1992, is referred to in Sec. 63.119, December
14, 1998 shall apply instead, for the purposes of this subpart.
(5) When April 22, 1994, is referred to in Sec. 63.119,
[publication date of the final rule] shall apply instead, for the
purposes of this subpart.
(6) Each owner or operator referred to Sec. 63.120 by paragraph (b)
of this section, shall comply with this paragraph (d)(6) instead of
Sec. 63.120(d)(1)(ii) for the purposes of this subpart. If the control
device used to comply with paragraph (b)(1) of this section is also
used to comply with any of the requirements found in Sec. 63.1405,
Sec. 63.1406, Sec. 63.1407, or Sec. 63.1414, the performance test
required in or accepted by the applicable requirements of Sec. 63.1405,
Sec. 63.1414, or Sec. 63.1417 for batch process vents is acceptable for
demonstrating
[[Page 68868]]
compliance with paragraph (b)(1) of this section for the purposes of
this subpart. The owner or operator is not required to prepare a design
evaluation for the control device as described in Sec. 63.120(d)(1)(i),
if the performance test meets the criteria specified in paragraphs
(d)(6)(i) and (d)(6)(ii) of this section.
(i) The performance test demonstrates that the control device
achieves greater than or equal to the required control efficiency
specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section; and
(ii) The performance test is submitted as part of the Notification
of Compliance Status required by Sec. 63.1419(e)(5).
(7) When the term ``operating range'' is used in Sec. 63.120(d)(3)
of subpart G of this part, the term ``level'' shall apply instead, for
the purposes of this subpart.
(8) When the determination of equivalence criteria in
Sec. 63.102(b) of subpart F of this part is referred to in
Sec. 63.121(a) of subpart G of this part, the provisions in
Sec. 63.6(g) of subpart A of this part shall apply for the purposes of
this subpart.
(9) For purposes of this subpart, the monitoring plan required by
Sec. 63.120(d)(2) shall specify for which control devices the owner or
operator has elected to follow the procedures for continuous monitoring
specified in Sec. 63.1418. For those control devices for which the
owner or operator has elected to not follow the procedures for
continuous monitoring specified in Sec. 63.1418, the monitoring plan
shall include a description of the parameter or parameters to be
monitored to ensure that the control device is being properly operated
and maintained, an explanation of the criteria used for selection of
that parameter (or parameters), and the frequency with which monitoring
will be performed (e.g., when the liquid level in the storage vessel is
being raised), as specified in Sec. 63.120(d)(2)(i).
(10) For purposes of this subpart, the monitoring plan required by
Sec. 63.120(d)(2) shall be included in the Notification of Compliance
Status required by Sec. 63.1419(e)(5).
(11) When the Notification of Compliance Status requirements
contained in Sec. 63.152(b) are referred to in Secs. 63.120, 63.122,
and 63.123, the Notification of Compliance Status requirements
contained in Sec. 63.1419(e)(5) shall apply for the purposes of this
subpart.
(12) When the Periodic Report requirements contained in
Sec. 63.152(c) are referred to in Secs. 63.120, 63.122, and 63.123, the
Periodic Report requirements contained in Sec. 63.1419(e)(6) shall
apply for the purposes of this subpart.
(13) When other reports as required in Sec. 63.152(d) are referred
to in Sec. 63.122, the reporting requirements contained in
Sec. 63.1419(e)(7) shall apply for the purposes of this subpart.
(14) When the Initial Notification requirements contained in
Sec. 63.151(b) are referred to in Sec. 63.122, the owner or operator of
an affected source subject to this subpart need not comply with the
Initial Notification requirements contained in Sec. 63.151(b) for the
purposes of this subpart.
Sec. 63.1405 Continuous process vents provisions.
(a) For each continuous process vent located at a new affected
source, the owner or operator shall comply with paragraph (b) of this
section if the TRE value, as determined following the procedures
specified in paragraph (e) of this section, is greater than 1.0 but
less than or equal to 1.2. For each continuous process vent located at
a new affected source, the owner or operator shall comply with
paragraph (c) of this section if the TRE value, as determined following
the procedures specified in paragraph (e) of this section, is less than
or equal to 1.0. As an alternative to complying with paragraph (b) or
(c) of this section, as appropriate, an owner or operator may comply
with paragraph (f) of this section. Continuous process vents located at
existing affected sources are not subject to the provisions of this
section or any requirements of subpart A of this part. The compliance
date for continuous process vents subject to the provisions of this
section is specified in Sec. 63.1401.
(b) Owners or operators required to comply with this paragraph (b)
shall comply with the control requirements specified in paragraph
(b)(1) of this section and with the requirements of subpart G of this
part specified in paragraphs (b)(2) through (b)(6) of this section,
with the differences noted in paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(14) of this
section for the purposes of this subpart, as appropriate:
(1) Reduce emissions of total organic HAP by 85 weight-percent or
to a concentration of 20 parts per million by volume, whichever is less
stringent. For combustion devices, the emission reduction or
concentration shall be calculated on a dry basis, corrected to 3
percent oxygen. As an alternative, an owner or operator shall reduce
emissions of organic HAP using a flare;
(2) Section 63.114, Process vent provisions--monitoring
requirements;
(3) Section 63.115, Process vent provisions--methods and procedures
for process vent group determination;
(4) Section 63.116, Process vent provisions--performance test
methods and procedures to determine compliance;
(5) Section 63.117, Process vent provisions--reporting and
recordkeeping requirements for group and TRE determinations and
performance tests; and
(6) Section 63.118, Process vent provisions--periodic reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
(c) Owners or operators required to comply with this paragraph (c)
shall comply with the requirements of subpart G of this part specified
in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(6) of this section, with the
differences noted in paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(14) of this section
for the purposes of this subpart:
(1) Section 63.113, Process vent provisions--reference control
technology;
(2) Section 63.114, Process vent provisions--monitoring
requirements;
(3) Section 63.115, Process vent provisions--methods and procedures
for process vent group determination;
(4) Section 63.116, Process vent provisions--performance test
methods and procedures to determine compliance;
(5) Section 63.117, Process vent provisions--reporting and
recordkeeping requirements for group and TRE determinations and
performance tests; and
(6) Section 63.118, Process vent provisions--periodic reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
(d) The differences noted in paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(14) of
this section apply to owners or operators complying with certain
provisions of subpart G of this part, as specified in paragraph (b) or
(c) of this section.
(1) When the term ``process vent'' is used in Secs. 63.113 through
63.118, the term ``continuous process vent,'' and the definition of
this term in Sec. 63.1402 shall apply for the purposes of this subpart.
(2) When the term ``Group 1 process vent'' is used in Secs. 63.113
through 63.118, the term ``Group 1 continuous process vent,'' and the
definition of this term in Sec. 63.1402 shall apply for the purposes of
this subpart.
(3) When the term ``Group 2 process vent'' is used in Secs. 63.113
through 63.118, the term ``Group 2 continuous process vent,'' and the
definition of this term in Sec. 63.1402 shall apply for the purposes of
this subpart.
(4) When December 31, 1992, is referred to in Sec. 63.113, apply
the date
[[Page 68869]]
December 14, 1998 for the purposes of this subpart.
(5) When Sec. 63.151(f), alternative monitoring parameters, and
Sec. 63.152(e), submission of an operating permit, are referred to in
Secs. 63.114(c) and 63.117(e), Sec. 63.1419(f), alternative monitoring
parameters, and Sec. 63.1419(e)(8), submission of an operating permit,
respectively, shall apply for the purposes of this subpart.
(6) When the Notification of Compliance Status requirements
contained in Sec. 63.152(b) are referred to in Secs. 63.114 and 63.117,
the Notification of Compliance Status requirements contained in
Sec. 63.1419(e)(5) shall apply for the purposes of this subpart.
(7) When the Periodic Report requirements contained in
Sec. 63.152(c) are referred to in Secs. 63.117 and 63.118, the Periodic
Report requirements contained in Sec. 63.1419(e)(6) shall apply for the
purposes of this subpart.
(8) When the definition of excursion in Sec. 63.152(c)(2)(ii)(A) is
referred to in Sec. 63.118(f)(2), the provisions in Sec. 63.1418(j),
(k), and (l) shall apply for the purposes of this subpart.
(9) When Sec. 63.114(e) specifies that an owner or operator shall
submit the information required in Sec. 63.152(b) in order to establish
the parameter monitoring range, the owner or operator shall comply with
the provisions of Sec. 63.1418 for establishing the parameter
monitoring level and shall comply with Sec. 63.1419(e)(5) for purposes
of reporting information related to establishment of the parameter
monitoring level for purposes of this subpart. Further, the term
``level'' shall apply when the term ``range'' is used in Secs. 63.114,
63.117, and 63.118.
(10) When reports of process changes are required under
Sec. 63.118(g), (h), (i), or (j), paragraphs (d)(10)(i) through
(d)(10)(iv) of this section shall apply for the purposes of this
subpart. In addition, for the purposes of this subpart, paragraph
(d)(10)(v) of this section applies, and Sec. 63.118(k) does not apply
to owners or operators of affected sources.
(i) For the purposes of this subpart, whenever a process change, as
defined in Sec. 63.115(e), is made that causes a Group 2 continuous
process vent to become a Group 1 continuous process vent, the owner or
operator shall submit a report within 180 days after the process change
is made or with the next Periodic Report, whichever is later. A
description of the process change shall be submitted with the report of
the process change, and the owner or operator shall comply with the
Group 1 provisions in Secs. 63.113 through 63.118 in accordance with
Sec. 63.1400(i)(2)(ii).
(ii) Whenever a process change, as defined in Sec. 63.115(e), is
made that causes a Group 2 continuous process vent with a TRE greater
than 4.0 to become a Group 2 continuous process vent with a TRE less
than 4.0, the owner or operator shall submit a report within 180 days
after the process change is made or with the next Periodic Report,
whichever is later. A description of the process change shall be
submitted with the report of the process change, and the owner or
operator shall comply with the provisions in Sec. 63.113(d) by the
dates specified in Sec. 63.1401.
(iii) Whenever a process change, as defined in Sec. 63.115(e), is
made that causes a Group 2 continuous process vent with a flow rate
less than 0.005 standard cubic meter per minute to become a Group 2
continuous process vent with a flow rate of 0.005 standard cubic meter
per minute or greater and a TRE index value less than or equal to 4.0,
the owner or operator shall submit a report within 180 days after the
process change is made or with the next Periodic Report, whichever is
later. A description of the process change shall be submitted with the
report of the process change, and the owner or operator shall comply
with the provisions in Sec. 63.113(d) by the dates specified in
Sec. 63.1401.
(iv) Whenever a process change, as defined in Sec. 63.115(e), is
made that causes a Group 2 continuous process vent with an organic HAP
concentration less than 50 parts per million by volume to become a
Group 2 continuous process vent with an organic HAP concentration of 50
parts per million by volume or greater and a TRE index value less than
or equal to 4.0, the owner or operator shall submit a report within 180
days after the process change is made or with the next Periodic Report,
whichever is later. A description of the process change shall be
submitted with the report of the process change, and the owner or
operator shall comply with the provisions in Sec. 63.113(d) by the
dates specified in Sec. 63.1401.
(v) The owner or operator is not required to submit a report of a
process change if one of the conditions listed in paragraph
(d)(10)(v)(A), (d)(10)(v)(B), (d)(10)(v)(C), or (d)(10)(v)(D) of this
section is met:
(A) The process change does not meet the definition of a process
change in Sec. 63.115(e);
(B) The vent stream flow rate is recalculated according to
Sec. 63.115(e) and the recalculated value is less than 0.005 standard
cubic meter per minute;
(C) The organic HAP concentration of the vent stream is
recalculated according to Sec. 63.115(e) and the recalculated value is
less than 50 parts per million by volume; or
(D) The TRE index value is recalculated according to Sec. 63.115(e)
and the recalculated value is greater than 4.0.
(11) When the provisions of Sec. 63.116(c)(3) and (c)(4) specify
that Method 18, 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, shall be used, the methods
specified in Sec. 63.1417(b) shall be used for the purposes of this
subpart.
(12) When Sec. 63.118, periodic reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, refers to Sec. 63.152(f), the recordkeeping requirements
in Sec. 63.1419(d) shall apply for purposes of this subpart.
(13) When Sec. 63.115(c)(3)(ii)(B) and (d)(2)(iv) and
Sec. 63.116(c)(3)(ii)(B) and (c)(4)(ii)(C) refer to Table 2 of subpart
F of this part, the owner or operator shall only consider organic HAP
listed on Table 3 of this subpart for purposes of this subpart.
(14) In Sec. 63.116(a), instead of the reference to Sec. 63.11(b),
the requirements in Sec. 63.1417(g) for flares shall apply.
(e) For purposes of this subpart, TRE values shall be calculated
using the equations for a 70% heat recovery thermal incinerator, as
specified in Sec. 63.115(d)(3) and Table 1 of subpart G of this part.
(f) As an alternative standard, the owner or operator of a new
affected source may comply with the continuous process vent standards
by routing process vents to a control device achieving an outlet
organic HAP concentration of 20 ppmv or less. Any continuous process
vents that are not routed to this control device must be controlled in
accordance with the provisions of paragraphs (b) or (c) of this
section, as appropriate. Compliance with the outlet concentrations
shall be determined by the initial compliance procedures described in
Sec. 63.1417(a)(6) and the continuous emission monitoring requirements
described in Sec. 63.1418(i).
Sec. 63.1406 Reactor batch process vents--standards.
(a) Reactor batch process vents. Owners or operators of reactor
batch process vents located at new or existing affected sources shall
comply with the requirements in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section,
as appropriate. As an alternative to complying with paragraph (b) or
(c) of this section, as appropriate, an owner or operator may comply
with paragraph (d) of this section.
(b) Reactor batch process vents located at new affected sources.
The owner or operator of a reactor batch process vent located at a new
affected source shall comply with the
[[Page 68870]]
requirements of either paragraph (b)(1), (b)(2), or (b)(3) of this
section.
(1) For each reactor batch process vent, vent all emissions of
organic HAP to a flare. The flare shall comply with the requirements of
Sec. 63.1417(g).
(2) For each reactor batch process vent, reduce organic HAP
emissions for the batch cycle by 95 weight percent using a control
device. Owners or operators may achieve compliance with this paragraph
(b)(2) through the control of selected batch emission episodes or the
control of portions of selected batch emission episodes. Documentation
demonstrating how the 95 weight percent emission reduction is achieved
for the batch cycle is required by Secs. 63.1408(b)(2) and
63.1417(e)(5)(iii) and shall be submitted in the Notification of
Compliance Status required by Sec. 63.1419(e)(5).
(3) Organic HAP emissions from all reactor batch process vents
within the affected source shall be no greater than 0.01 kilogram of
HAP per megagram of product.
(c) Reactor batch process vents located at existing affected
sources. The owner or operator of a reactor batch process vent located
at an existing affected source shall comply with the requirements of
either paragraph (c)(1), (c)(2), or (c)(3) of this section.
(1) For each reactor batch process vent, vent all emissions of
organic HAP to a flare. The flare shall comply with the requirements of
Sec. 63.1417(g).
(2) For each reactor batch process vent, reduce organic HAP
emissions for the batch cycle by 93 weight percent using a control
device. Owners or operators may achieve compliance with this paragraph
(c)(2) through the control of selected batch emission episodes or the
control of portions of selected batch emission episodes. Documentation
demonstrating how the 93 weight percent emission reduction is achieved
for the batch cycle is required by Secs. 63.1408(b)(2) and
63.1417(e)(5)(iii) and shall be submitted in the Notification of
Compliance Status required by Sec. 63.1419(e)(5).
(3) Organic HAP emissions from all reactor batch process vents
within the affected source shall be no greater than 0.017 kilogram of
HAP per megagram of product.
(d) As an alternative standard, the owner or operator of an
existing or new affected source may comply with the requirements of
paragraph (b) or (c) of this section by venting all emissions from a
reactor batch process vent to a control device achieving an outlet
organic HAP concentration of 20 ppmv or less. Any reactor batch process
vents that are not vented to a control device meeting the conditions of
this paragraph (d) must be controlled in accordance with the provisions
of paragraphs (b) or (c) of this section. Compliance with the outlet
concentrations shall be determined by the initial compliance procedures
described in Sec. 63.1417(a)(6) and the continuous emission monitoring
requirements described in Sec. 63.1418(i).
(e) If a boiler or process heater is used to comply with the
requirements of paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, the reactor batch
process vent shall be introduced into the flame zone of such a device.
Sec. 63.1407 Non-reactor batch process vents--standards.
(a) Non-reactor batch process vents. Owners or operators of non-
reactor batch process vents located at new or existing affected sources
with 0.23 megagrams per year (0.25 tons per year) of uncontrolled HAP
emissions or greater from the collection of non-reactor batch process
vents within the affected source shall comply with the requirements in
paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, as appropriate. As an alternative
to complying with paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, as appropriate,
an owner or operator may comply with paragraph (d) of this section.
Owners or operators shall determine uncontrolled HAP emissions from the
collection of non-reactor batch process vents within the affected
source as specified in paragraph (f) of this section.
(b) Non-reactor batch process vents located at new affected
sources. The owner or operator of a non-reactor batch process vent
located at a new affected source shall comply with the requirements of
either paragraph (b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section.
(1) For the collection of non-reactor batch process vents within
the affected source, vent all emissions of organic HAP to a flare. The
flare shall comply with the requirements of Sec. 63.1417(g).
(2) For the collection of non-reactor batch process vents within
the affected source, reduce organic HAP emissions for the batch cycle
by 83 weight percent using a control device. Owners or operators may
achieve compliance with this paragraph (b)(2) through the control of
selected non-reactor batch process vents or the control of portions of
selected periods of emissions from all or selected non-reactor batch
process vents. Documentation demonstrating how the 83 weight percent
emission reduction is achieved is required by Secs. 63.1408(b)(2) and
63.1417(e)(5)(iii) and shall be submitted in the Notification of
Compliance Status required by Sec. 63.1419(e)(5).
(c) Non-reactor batch process vents located at existing affected
sources. The owner or operator of a non-reactor batch process vent
located at an existing affected source shall comply with the
requirements of either paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this section.
(1) For the collection of non-reactor batch process vents within
the affected source, vent all emissions of organic HAP to a flare. The
flare shall comply with the requirements of Sec. 63.1417(g).
(2) For the collection of non-reactor batch process vents within
the affected source, reduce organic HAP emissions for the batch cycle
by 68 weight percent using a control device. Owners or operators may
achieve compliance with this paragraph (c)(2) through the control of
selected non-reactor batch process vents or the control of portions of
selected periods of emissions from all or selected non-reactor batch
process vents. Documentation demonstrating how the 68 weight percent
emission reduction is achieved is required by Secs. 63.1408(b)(2) and
63.1417(e)(5)(iii) and shall be submitted in the Notification of
Compliance Status required by Sec. 63.1419(e)(5).
(d) As an alternative standard, the owner or operator of an
existing or new affected source may comply with the requirements of
paragraph (b) or (c) of this section by venting all emissions from a
non-reactor batch process vent to a control device achieving an outlet
organic HAP concentration of 20 ppmv or less. Any reactor batch process
vents that are not vented to a control device meeting the conditions of
this paragraph (d) must be controlled in accordance with the provisions
of paragraphs (b) or (c) of this section. Compliance with the outlet
concentrations shall be determined by the initial compliance procedures
described in Sec. 63.1417(a)(6) and the continuous emission monitoring
requirements described in Sec. 63.1418(i).
(e) If a boiler or process heater is used to comply with paragraph
(b) or (c) of this section, the reactor batch process vent shall be
introduced into the flame zone of such a device.
(f) Owners or operators shall determine uncontrolled HAP emissions
from the collection of non-reactor batch process vents within the
affected source based on engineering assessment as described in
Sec. 63.1417(e)(3)(vi). If the owner or operator finds that
uncontrolled HAP emissions from the collection of non-reactor batch
process vents within the affected source are less than 0.23 megagrams
per year (0.25 tons per year), the owner or operator shall keep records
as specified in Sec. 63.1408(a).
[[Page 68871]]
Sec. 63.1408 Batch process vents--recordkeeping provisions.
(a) Records of non-reactor batch process vent emissions cutoff. If
the owner or operator finds that uncontrolled HAP emissions from the
collection of non-reactor batch process vents within the affected
source are less than 0.23 megagrams per year (0.25 tons per year), the
owner or operator shall keep records as specified in paragraphs (a)(1)
or (a)(2) of this section.
(1) Retain information, data, and analysis used to document the
estimated emissions for the collection of non-reactor batch process
vents within the affected source.
(2) When requested by the Administrator, demonstrate that emissions
for the collection of non-reactor batch process vents within the
affected source are less than 0.23 megagrams per year (0.25 tons per
year).
(b) Compliance demonstration records. Each owner or operator of a
batch process vent complying with Sec. 63.1406 or Sec. 63.1407 shall
keep the following records, as applicable, readily accessible:
(1) If a batch process vent is in compliance with the alternative
20 ppmv limit specified in Sec. 63.1406(d) or Sec. 63.1407(d), results
of the initial compliance demonstration specified in
Sec. 63.1417(a)(6).
(2) If a batch process vent is in compliance with the percent
reduction requirements of Sec. 63.1406 or Sec. 63.1407, records
documenting the batch cycle percent reduction or overall percent
reduction, as appropriate, as specified in Sec. 63.1417(e)(5)(iii).
(3) When using a flare to comply with Sec. 63.1406 or Sec. 63.1407:
(i) The flare design (i.e., steam-assisted, air-assisted or non-
assisted);
(ii) All visible emission readings, heat content determinations,
flow rate measurements, and exit velocity determinations made during
the compliance determination required by Sec. 63.1417(g); and
(iii) Periods when all pilot flames were absent.
(4) The following information when using a control device to
achieve compliance with the percent reduction requirement of
Sec. 63.1406 or Sec. 63.1407:
(i) For an incinerator or non-combustion control device, the
percent reduction of organic HAP achieved for emissions vented to the
control device, as determined using the procedures specified in
Sec. 63.1417(e)(5);
(ii) For a boiler or process heater, a description of the location
at which the vent stream is introduced into the boiler or process
heater; and
(iii) For a boiler or process heater with a design heat input
capacity of less than 44 megawatts and where the vent stream is
introduced with combustion air or used as a secondary fuel and is not
mixed with the primary fuel, the percent reduction of organic HAP
achieved for emissions vented to the control device, as determined
using the procedures specified in Sec. 63.1417(e)(5).
(c) Establishment of parameter monitoring level records. For each
parameter monitored according to Sec. 63.1418(b) and Table 4 of this
subpart, or for alternate parameters and/or parameters for alternate
control devices monitored according to Sec. 63.1419(f) as allowed under
Sec. 63.1418(g), maintain documentation showing the establishment of
the level that indicates proper operation of the control device as
required by Sec. 63.1418(c) for parameters specified in Sec. 63.1418(b)
and as required by Sec. 63.1419(f) for alternate parameters. An owner
or operator may choose to monitor operating parameters for batch
process vents on a batch cycle daily average basis or on a block
average basis. The batch cycle daily average is based on parameter
monitoring accomplished during the operating day (i.e., a 24-hour
basis). The block average is based on the parameter monitoring
accomplished during a single batch cycle. As specified in Secs. 63.1402
and 63.1419(d)(3), the block shall be the period of time equal to the
batch cycle. Said documentation shall include the following:
(1) Parameter monitoring data used to establish the level;
(2) Identification that the parameter monitoring level is
associated with a batch cycle daily average or a block average; and
(3) A definition of the batch cycle or block, as appropriate.
(d) [Reserved]
(e) Controlled batch process vent continuous compliance records.
Continuous compliance records shall be kept as specified in paragraphs
(e)(1) through (e)(4), as appropriate.
(1) Each owner or operator of a batch process vent that uses a
control device to comply with the percent reduction requirement of
Sec. 63.1406 or Sec. 63.1407 shall keep the following records, as
applicable, readily accessible:
(i) Continuous records of the equipment operating parameters
specified to be monitored under Sec. 63.1418(b) as applicable, and
listed in Table 4 of this subpart, or specified by the Administrator in
accordance with Sec. 63.1419(f) as allowed under Sec. 63.1418(g). Said
records shall be kept as specified under Sec. 63.1419(d), except as
specified in paragraphs (e)(1)(i)(A) and (e)(1)(i)(B) of this section.
(A) For carbon adsorbers, the records specified in Table 4 of this
subpart shall be maintained in place of continuous records.
(B) For flares, the records specified in Table 4 of this subpart
shall be maintained in place of continuous records.
(ii) Records of the batch cycle daily average value or block
average value of each continuously monitored parameter, as specified in
Sec. 63.1419(d).
(2) Each owner or operator of a batch process vent that uses a
control device to comply with Sec. 63.1406 or Sec. 63.1407 shall keep
the following records, as applicable, readily accessible:
(i) Hourly records of whether the flow indicator for bypass lines
specified in Sec. 63.1418(h) was operating and whether a diversion was
detected at any time during the hour. Also, records of the times of all
periods when the vent is diverted from the control device or the flow
indicator specified in Sec. 63.1418(h) is not operating.
(ii) Where a seal or closure mechanism is used to comply with
Sec. 63.1418(h), hourly records of whether a diversion was detected at
any time are not required. The owner or operator shall record whether
the monthly visual inspection of the seals or closure mechanisms has
been done, and shall record the occurrence of all periods when the seal
mechanism is broken, the bypass line damper or valve position has
changed, or the key for a lock-and-key type configuration has been
checked out, and records of any car-seal that has broken.
(iii) Records specifying the times and duration of periods of
monitoring system breakdowns, repairs, calibration checks, and zero
(low-level) and high-level adjustments. In addition, records specifying
any other periods of process or control device operation when monitors
are not operating.
(3) Each owner or operator of a batch process vent in compliance
with the alternative 20 ppmv limit, as specified in Sec. 63.1406(d) or
Sec. 63.1407(d), shall keep the records of continuous emissions
monitoring described in Sec. 63.1418(i).
(4) Each owner or operator of a batch process vent in compliance
with the kilogram of HAP per megagram of product emission limits,
specified in Sec. 63.1406(b)(3) or Sec. 63.1406(c)(3), shall keep the
following records, as applicable, readily accessible:
(i) If there is a violation of the emission limit, as specified in
Sec. 63.1418(m), the individual monthly average and all the data used
to
[[Page 68872]]
calculate the individual monthly average, for the month in which the
violation occurs, and the rolling average monthly emission rate or the
12-month rolling average monthly emission rate, as appropriate.
(ii) If there is not a violation of the emission limit, as
specified in Sec. 63.1418(m), the rolling average monthly emission rate
or the 12-month rolling average monthly emission rate, as appropriate.
Sec. 63.1409 Batch process vents--reporting provisions.
(a) The owner or operator of an affected source shall submit the
information specified in Sec. 63.1408 (b) and (c), as applicable, for
batch process vents complying with Sec. 63.1406 or Sec. 63.1407, as
part of the Notification of Compliance Status specified in
Sec. 63.1419(e)(5).
(b) If an owner or operator uses a control device other than those
specified in Sec. 63.1418(b) and listed in Table 4 of this subpart or
requests approval to monitor a parameter other than those specified in
Sec. 63.1418(b) and listed in Table 4 of this subpart, the owner or
operator shall submit a description of planned reporting and
recordkeeping procedures, as specified in Sec. 63.1419(f), as part of
the Precompliance Report required under Sec. 63.1419(e)(3). The
Administrator will specify appropriate reporting and recordkeeping
requirements as part of the review of the Precompliance Report.
(c) Owners or operators complying with Sec. 63.1418(h), shall
comply with paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this section, as appropriate.
(1) Submit reports of the times of all periods recorded under
Sec. 63.1408(e)(2)(i) when the batch process vent is diverted from the
control device through a bypass line, with the next Periodic Report.
(2) Submit reports of all occurrences recorded under
Sec. 63.1408(e)(2)(ii) in which the seal mechanism is broken, the
bypass line damper or valve position has changed, or the key to unlock
the bypass line damper or valve was checked out, with the next Periodic
Report.
(d) Each owner or operator of a batch process vent in compliance
with the kilogram of HAP per megagram of product emission limits,
specified in Sec. 63.1406 (b)(3) or (c)(3), shall submit the
information specified in Sec. 63.1408(e)(4)(i) in the next Periodic
Report required in Sec. 63.1419(e)(6) when a violation of the emission
limit, as specified in Sec. 63.1418(m) occurs.
Sec. 63.1410 [Reserved]
Sec. 63.1411 [Reserved]
Sec. 63.1412 [Reserved]
Sec. 63.1413 Heat exchange systems provisions.
(a) The owner or operator of an affected source shall comply with
Sec. 63.104, with the differences noted in paragraphs (b) through (e)
of this section, for the purposes of this subpart. The compliance date
for heat exchange systems subject to the provisions of this section is
specified in Sec. 63.1401.
(b) When the term ``chemical manufacturing process unit'' is used
in Sec. 63.104, the term ``affected source'' shall apply for purposes
of this subpart. Further, when the phrase ``a chemical manufacturing
process unit meeting the conditions of Sec. 63.100(b)(1) through (b)(3)
of this subpart, except for chemical manufacturing units meeting the
condition specified in Sec. 63.100(c) of this subpart'' is used in
Sec. 63.104(a), the term ``an affected source'' shall apply for
purposes of this subpart.
(c) When Sec. 63.104 refers to Table 4 of subpart F of this part or
Table 9 of subpart G of this part, the owner or operator is only
required to consider organic HAP listed on Table 3 of this subpart that
are also listed on Table 4 of subpart F of this part or Table 9 of
subpart G of this part, as indicated on Table 3 of this subpart for
purposes of this subpart.
(d) When Sec. 63.104(f)(1) specifies that the monitoring plan and
records required by Sec. 63.104(f)(1)(i) through (f)(1)(iv) shall be
kept as specified in Sec. 63.103(c), the provisions of Sec. 63.1419(a)
and (h) shall apply for purposes of this subpart.
(e) When Sec. 63.104(f)(2) requires information to be reported in
the Periodic Reports required by Sec. 63.152(c), the owner or operator
should instead report the information specified in Sec. 63.104(f)(2) in
the Periodic Reports required by Sec. 63.1419(e)(6), for the purposes
of this subpart.
Sec. 63.1414 Wastewater provisions.
(a) With the differences noted in paragraphs (b) through (s) of
this section, the owner or operator of each new affected source shall
comply with the requirements of subpart G of this part specified in
paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(15) of this section for each process
wastewater stream originating at an affected source, and the
requirements of subpart G of this part 63 specified in paragraph
(a)(16) of this part for equipment that is subject to Sec. 63.149. The
owner or operator of each new affected source shall also comply with
paragraph (t) of this section for the control of maintenance
wastewater. The compliance date for process wastewater streams,
equipment that is subject to Sec. 63.149, and maintenance wastewater
subject to the provisions of this section is specified in Sec. 63.1401.
Wastewater at existing affected sources is not subject to the
provisions of this section or any requirements of subpart A of this
part:
(1) Section 63.132, Process wastewater provisions--general;
(2) Section 63.133, Process wastewater provisions--wastewater
tanks;
(3) Section 63.134, Process wastewater provisions--surface
impoundments;
(4) Section 63.135, Process wastewater provisions--containers;
(5) Section 63.136, Process wastewater provisions--individual drain
systems;
(6) Section 63.137, Process wastewater provisions--oil-water
separators;
(7) Section 63.138, Process wastewater provisions--performance
standards for treatment processes managing Group 1 wastewater streams
and/or residuals removed from Group 1 wastewater streams;
(8) Section 63.139, Process wastewater provisions--control devices;
(9) Section 63.140, Process wastewater provisions--delay or repair;
(10) Section 63.143, Process wastewater provisions--inspections and
monitoring of operations;
(11) Section 63.144, Process wastewater provisions--test methods
and procedures for determining applicability and Group 1/Group 2
determinations;
(12) Seciton 63.145, Process wastewater provisions--test methods
and procedures to determine compliance;
(13) Section 63.146, Process wastewater provisions--reporting;
(14) Section 63.147, Process wastewater provisions--recordkeeping;
(15) Section 63.148, Leak inspection provisions; and
(16) Section 63.149, Control requirements for certain liquid
streams in open systems within a chemical manufacturing process unit.
(b) When the determination of equivalence criteria in
Sec. 63.102(b) is referred to in Secs. 63.132, 63.133, and 63.137, the
provisions in Sec. 63.6(g) shall apply for the purposes of this
subpart.
(c) When the storage tank requirements contained in Secs. 63.119
through 63.123 are referred to in Secs. 63.132 through 63.149,
Secs. 63.120 through 63.123 are applicable, with the exception of the
differences referred to
[[Page 68873]]
in Sec. 63.1404, for the purposes of this subpart. Further, the
requirements of Sec. 63.1404(b)(1) are applicable instead of the
requirements of Sec. 63.119, for purposes of this subpart.
(d) When Sec. 63.146(a)(3) requires the submission of a request for
approval to monitor alternative parameters according to the procedures
specified in Sec. 63.151(g) or Sec. 63.152(e), owners or operators
requesting to monitor alternative parameters shall follow the
procedures specified in Sec. 63.1419(f) for the purposes of this
subpart.
(e) When Sec. 63.147(d) requires owners or operators to keep
records of the daily average value of each continuously monitored
parameter for each operating day as specified in Sec. 63.152(f), owners
and operators shall instead keep records of the daily average value of
each continuously monitored parameter as specified in Sec. 63.1419(d)
for the purposes of this subpart.
(f) When Secs. 63.132 through 63.149 refer to a ``new source,'' the
term ``new affected source,'' as defined in Sec. 63.1400(a), shall
apply for the purposes of this subpart.
(g) When Sec. 63.132 (a) and (b) refer to the ``applicable dates
specified in Sec. 63.100 of subpart F of this part,'' the compliance
dates specified in Sec. 63.1401 shall apply for the purposes of this
subpart.
(h) When Secs. 63.132 through 63.149 refer to Table 8 of subpart G
of this part, the owners or operator shall only consider organic HAP
listed on Table 3 of this subpart that are also listed on Table 8 of
subpart G of this part, as indicated on Table 3 of this subpart, for
purposes of this subpart. When Secs. 63.132 through 63.149 refer to
Table 9 or Table 36 of subpart G of this part, the owners or operator
shall only consider organic HAP listed on Table 3 of this subpart that
are also listed on Table 8 of subpart G of this part, as indicated on
Table 3 of this subpart, for the purposes of this subpart. In addition,
when Secs. 63.132 through 63.149 refer to List 1, List 2, and/or List
3, as listed in Table 36 of subpart G of this part, the owner or
operator is only required to consider organic HAP listed on Table 3 of
this subpart that are also listed on Table 8 of subpart G of this part,
as indicated on Table 3 of this subpart, for the purposes of this
subpart.
(i) Whenever Secs. 63.132 through 63.149 refer to a ``chemical
manufacturing process unit,'' owners or operators of affected sources
shall apply the term ``affected source,'' as defined in
Sec. 63.1400(a), for the purposes of this subpart. In addition, when
Secs. 63.132 through 63.149 refer to Sec. 63.100(b), Sec. 63.1400(a)
shall apply for the purposes of this subpart.
(j) Whenever Secs. 63.132 through 63.149 refer to a Group 1
wastewater stream or a Group 2 wastewater stream, the definitions of
these terms contained in Sec. 63.1402 shall apply for the purposes of
this subpart.
(k) When Sec. 63.149(d) refers to ``Sec. 63.100(f) of subpart F'',
the phrase ``Sec. 63.1400(d)'' shall apply for the purposes of this
subpart. In addition, where Sec. 63.149(d) states ``and the item of
equipment is not otherwise exempt from controls by the provisions of
subparts A, F, G, or H of this part'', the phrase ``and the item of
equipment is not otherwise exempt from controls by the provisions of
subpart A, F, G, or H of this part, or this subpart'' shall apply for
the purposes of this subpart.
(l) When Sec. 63.149(e)(1) and (e)(2) refer to ``a chemical
manufacturing process unit subject to the new source requirements of 40
CFR Sec. 63.100(l)(1) or 40 CFR 63.100 (l)(2),'' the phrase ``a new
affected source as described in 63.1400(a),'' shall apply for the
purposes of this subpart.
(m) When the Notification of Compliance Status requirements
contained in Sec. 63.152(b) are referred to in Secs. 63.138 and 63.146,
the Notification of Compliance Status requirements contained in
Sec. 63.1419(e)(5) shall apply for the purposes of this subpart. In
addition, when Secs. 63.132 through 63.149 require that information be
reported according to Sec. 63.152(b) in the Notification of Compliance
Status, the owner or operator of an affected source shall report the
specified information in the Notification of Compliance Status required
by Sec. 63.1419(e)(5) for the purposes of this subpart.
(n) When the Periodic Report requirements contained in
Sec. 63.152(c) are referred to in Sec. 63.146, the Periodic Report
requirements contained in Sec. 63.1419(e)(6) shall apply for the
purposes of this subpart. In addition, when Secs. 63.132 through 63.149
require that information be reported in the Periodic Reports required
in Sec. 63.152(c), the owner or operator of an affected source shall
report the specified information in the Periodic Reports required in
Sec. 63.1419(e)(6) for the purposes of this subpart.
(o) When Sec. 63.143(f) specifies that owners or operators shall
establish the range that indicates proper operations of the treatment
process or control device, the owner or operator shall instead comply
with the requirements of Sec. 63.1418 for establishing parameter level
maximums/minimums for the purposes of this subpart.
(p) When Secs. 63.146(b)(7) and 63.146(b)(8) require that ``the
information on parameter ranges specified in Sec. 63.152(b)(2)'' be
reported in the Notification of Compliance Status, owner and operators
of affected sources are instead required to report the information on
parameter levels as specified in Sec. 63.1335(e)(5)(ii) for the
purposes of this subpart.
(q) [Reserved]
(r) When the provisions of Sec. 63.139(c)(1)(ii),
Sec. 63.145(d)(4), or Sec. 63.145(i)(2) specify that Method 18, 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A, shall be used, the methods specified in
Sec. 63.1417(b) shall be used for the purposes of this subpart.
(s) In Sec. 63.145(j), instead of the reference to Sec. 63.11(b),
the requirements in Sec. 63.1417(g) for flares shall apply.
(t) For each new affected source, the owner or operator shall
comply with the requirements for maintenance wastewater in Sec. 63.105,
except that when Sec. 63.105(a) refers to ``organic HAPs,'' the
definition of organic HAP in Sec. 63.1402 shall apply for the purposes
of this subpart.
Sec. 63.1415 Equipment leak provisions.
The owner or operator of each affected source shall comply with the
requirements of subpart H of this part 63, with the differences noted
in paragraphs (a) through (r) of this section, except as specified in
Sec. 63.1403(c).
(a) If specific items of equipment, comprising part of a process
unit subject to this subpart, are managed by different administrative
organizations (e.g., different companies, affiliates, departments,
divisions, etc.), those items of equipment may be aggregated with any
APPU within the affected source for all purposes under subpart H of
this part, providing there is no delay in achieving the applicable
compliance date.
(b) When the terms ``equipment'' and ``equipment leak'' are used in
subpart H of this part, the definitions of these terms in Sec. 63.1402
shall apply for the purposes of this subpart.
(c) The compliance date for the equipment leak provisions contained
in this section is provided in Sec. 63.1401. Whenever subpart H of this
part refers to the compliance dates specified in Sec. 63.100(k), the
compliance dates listed in Sec. 63.1401 shall instead apply, for the
purposes of this subpart. In addition, whenever subpart H of this part
refers to sources subject to subpart F of this part, the subpart H
requirements shall instead apply to sources subject to this subpart,
for the purposes of this subpart.
[[Page 68874]]
(d) In addition to complying with the requirements specified in
Sec. 63.167(b), the owner or operator shall put in place the cap, blind
flange, plug, or second valve within 1 hour of cessation of operations
requiring process fluid flow through the open-ended valve or line, or
within 1 hour of cessation of maintenance or repair.
(e) In addition to the monitoring intervals specified in
Sec. 63.168(d), owners and operators may elect to monitor each valve in
APPUs with less than 0.25 percent leaking valves once every 2 years.
(f) For purposes of this subpart, the requirements of this
paragraph (f) apply instead of Sec. 63.168(e). At affected sources to
which this subpart applies, an owner or operator may choose to
subdivide, or subgroup, the valves in the APPUs that comprise the
affected source and apply the provisions of Sec. 63.168(d) to each
subgroup of valves, provided the overall performance of total valves in
the affected source is less than 2 percent leaking valves, as detected
according to Sec. 63.168(b) and as calculated according to paragraphs
(g)(1) and (g)(2) of this section. If the owner or operator elects to
subgroup the valves in the affected source, then the provisions of
paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(7) of this section apply.
(g) Subgrouping of Valves. The owner or operator who elects to
subgroup the valves in the affected source shall comply with the
provisions of paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(7) of this section.
(1) The initial assignment or subsequent reassignment of valves to
subgroups within the affected source shall be governed by the
provisions of paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through (g)(1)(iii) of this section.
(i) The owner or operator shall determine which valves are assigned
to each subgroup. Valves with less than 1 year of monitoring data or
valves not monitored within the last 12 months must be placed initially
into the most frequently monitored subgroup until at least 1 year of
monitoring data has been obtained.
(ii) Any valve or group of valves can be reassigned from a less
frequently monitored subgroup to a more frequently monitored subgroup
provided that the valves to be reassigned were monitored during the
most recent monitoring period for the less frequently monitored
subgroup. The monitoring results must be included with the less
frequently monitored subgroup's monitoring event and associated next
percent leaking valves calculation for that subgroup.
(iii) Any valve or group of valves can be reassigned from a more
frequently monitored subgroup to a less frequently monitored subgroup
provided that the valves to be reassigned have not leaked for the
period of the less frequently monitored subgroup (e.g., for the last 12
months, if the valve or group of valves is to be reassigned to a
subgroup being monitored annually). Nonrepairable valves may not be
reassigned to a less frequently monitored subgroup.
(2) The owner or operator shall determine every 6 months if the
overall performance of total valves in the affected source is less than
2 percent leaking valves and so indicate the performance in the next
periodic report. If the overall performance of total valves in the
affected source is 2 percent leaking valves or greater, the owner or
operator shall revert to the program required in Sec. 63.168(d). The
overall performance of total valves in the affected source shall be
calculated as a weighted average of the percent leaking valves of each
subgroup according to Equation 1:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.000
Where:
%VLO = overall performance of total valves in the affected
source.
%VLi = percent leaking valves in subgroup i, most recent
value calculated according to the procedures in paragraphs (h)(1) and
(h)(2) of this section.
Vi = number of valves in subgroup i.
n = number of subgroups.
(3) In addition to records required by Sec. 63.181, the owner or
operator shall maintain records specified in paragraphs (g)(3)(i)
through (g)(3)(iv) of this section:
(i) Which valves are assigned to each subgroup;
(ii) Monitoring results and calculations made for each subgroup for
each monitoring period;
(iii) Which valves are reassigned and when they were reassigned;
and
(iv) The results of the semiannual overall performance calculation
required in paragraph (g)(2) of this section.
(4) The owner or operator shall notify the Administrator no later
than 30 days prior to the beginning of the next monitoring period of
the decision to subgroup valves. The notification shall identify the
participating APPUs and the valves assigned to each subgroup.
(5) In addition to the information required by Sec. 63.182(d), the
owner or operator shall submit in the periodic reports the information
specified in paragraphs (g)(5)(i) and (g)(5)(ii) of this section:
(i) Valve reassignments occurring during the reporting period; and
(ii) Results of the semiannual overall performance calculation
required by paragraph (g)(2) of this section:
(6) To determine the monitoring frequency for each subgroup, the
calculation procedures of paragraph (h)(3) of this section shall be
used.
(7) Except for the overall performance calculations required by
paragraphs (f) and (g)(2) of this section, each subgroup shall be
treated as if it were a APPU for the purposes of applying the
provisions of this section.
(h)(1) Percent leaking valves for each APPU or subgroup shall be
determined by Equation 2:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.001
Where:
%VL = percent leaking valves.
VL = number of valves found leaking excluding nonrepairables
as provided in paragraph (h)(3)(i) of this section.
VT = total valves monitored, in a monitoring period
excluding valves monitored as required by Sec. 63.174(f)(3).
(2) When determining monitoring frequency for each APPU or subgroup
subject to monthly, quarterly, or semiannual monitoring frequencies,
the percent leaking valves shall be the arithmetic average of the
percent leaking valves from the last two consecutive monitoring
periods. When determining monitoring frequency for each APPU or
subgroup subject to annual or biennial (once every 2 years) monitoring
frequencies, the percent leaking valves shall be the arithmetic average
of the percent leaking valves from the last three consecutive
monitoring periods.
(3)(i) Nonrepairable valves shall be included in the calculation of
percent leaking valves the first time the valve is identified as
leaking and nonrepairable and as required to comply with paragraph
(h)(3)(ii) of this section. Otherwise, a number of nonrepairable valves
(identified and included in the percent leaking calculation in a
previous period) up to a maximum of 1 percent of the total number of
valves in organic HAP service at a process may be excluded from
calculation of percent leaking valves for subsequent monitoring
periods.
(ii) If the number of nonrepairable valves exceeds 1 percent of the
total
[[Page 68875]]
number of valves in organic HAP service at a process, the number of
nonrepairable valves exceeding 1 percent of the total number of valves
in organic HAP service shall be included in the calculation of percent
leaking valves.
(i) For purposes of this subpart, under Sec. 63.171(a), delay of
repair of equipment for which leaks have been detected is also allowed
if the owner or operator determines that repair personnel would be
exposed to an immediate danger if attempting to repair without a
process unit shutdown. Repair of this equipment delayed for this reason
shall also occur by the end of the next scheduled process unit
shutdown.
(j) Under Sec. 63.172, Closed-vent systems and control devices,
owners or operators may, instead of complying with the provisions of
Sec. 63.172(f), design a closed-vent system to operate at a pressure
below atmospheric pressure. The system shall be equipped with at least
one pressure gage or other pressure measurement device that can be read
from a readily accessible location to verify that negative pressure is
being maintained in the closed-vent system when the associated control
device is operating.
(k) Under Sec. 63.174(b), owners or operators shall use the
monitoring intervals specified in paragraphs (k)(1) through (k)(5) of
this section instead of the monitoring intervals specified in
Sec. 63.174(b)(3)(i) through (b)(3)(iv) for purposes of this subpart.
(1) Once per year (i.e., 12-month period), if the percent leaking
connectors in the APPU was 0.5 percent or greater during the last
required annual or biennial monitoring period.
(2) Once every 4 years, if the percent leaking connectors in the
APPU was less than 0.5 percent, but equal to or greater than 0.25
percent, during the last required monitoring period. An owner or
operator may comply with the requirements of this paragraph by
monitoring at least 40 percent of the connectors in the first 2 years
and the remainder of the connectors within the next 2 years.
(3) Once every 8 years, if the percent leaking connectors in the
APPU was less than 0.25 percent during the last required monitoring
period. An owner or operator shall monitor at least 50 percent of the
connectors in the first 4 years and the remainder of the connectors
within the next 4 years. If the percent leaking connectors in the first
4 years is equal to or greater than 0.35 percent, the monitoring
program shall revert at that time to the monitoring frequency specified
in paragraph (k)(2) of this section if the percent leaking connectors
is equal to or greater than 0.35 percent but less than 0.5 percent, the
monitoring frequency specified in paragraph (k)(4) of this section if
the percent leaking connectors is equal to or greater than 0.5 percent
but less than 1.0 percent, or the monitoring frequency specified in
paragraph (k)(5) of this section if the percent leaking connectors is
equal to or greater than 1.0 percent.
(4) The owner or operator shall increase the monitoring frequency
to once every 2 years for the next monitoring period if leaking
connectors comprise at least 0.5 percent but less than 1.0 percent of
the connectors monitored within the 4 years specified in paragraph
(k)(2) of this section or the first 4 years specified in paragraph
(k)(3) of this section. At the end of that 2 year monitoring period,
the owner or operator shall monitor once per year while the percent
leaking connectors is greater than or equal to 0.5 percent; if the
percent leaking connectors is less than 0.5 percent, the owner or
operator may return to monitoring once every 4 years or, if
appropriate, once every 8 years in accordance with paragraph (k)(3) of
this section.
(5) If an owner or operator complying with the requirements of
paragraph (k)(2) or (k)(3) of this section for a APPU determines that 1
percent or greater of the connectors are leaking, the owner or operator
shall increase the monitoring frequency to one time per year. The owner
or operator may again elect to use the provisions of paragraph (k)(2)
or (k)(3) of this section after a monitoring period in which less than
0.5 percent of the connectors are determined to be leaking.
(l) When complying with Sec. 63.174(c), days that the connectors
are not in organic HAP service shall not be considered part of the 3
month period in Sec. 63.174(e).
(m) In addition to the requirements of Sec. 63.181(b), the owner or
operator may develop a written procedure that identifies the conditions
that justify a delay of repair. The written procedures may be included
as part of the startup/shutdown/malfunction plan, required by
Sec. 63.1419(b)(1), for the source or may be part of a separate
document that is maintained at the plant site. Reasons for delay of
repair may be documented by citing the relevant sections of the written
procedure.
(n) Owners and operators of an affected source subject to this
subpart are not required to submit the Initial Notification required by
Secs. 63.182(a)(1) and 63.182(b).
(o) As specified in Sec. 63.1419(e)(5), the Notification of
Compliance Status required by paragraphs Secs. 63.182(a)(2) and
63.182(c) shall be submitted within 150 days (rather than 90 days) of
the applicable compliance date specified in Sec. 63.1401 for the
equipment leak provisions.
(p) The required information specified by Secs. 63.182(a)(3) and
63.182(d) (i.e., Periodic Reports) shall be submitted as part of the
Periodic Reports required by Sec. 63.1419(e)(6).
(q) In addition to the requirements of Sec. 63.181(b)(1)(i), the
owner or operator shall complete a list for each type of equipment no
later than the completion of the initial survey required for that
component. The list of identification numbers shall be updated, if
needed, to incorporate equipment changes within 15 calendar days of the
completion of each monitoring survey for the type of equipment
component monitored.
(r) When the provisions of subpart H of this part 63 specify that
Method 18, 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, shall be used, the methods
specified in Sec. 63.1417(b) shall be used for the purposes of this
subpart.
Sec. 63.1416 [Reserved]
Sec. 63.1417 Test methods and compliance procedures.
(a) General. Except as specified in paragraph (a)(5) of this
section, the procedures specified in paragraphs (c), (d), (e), and (f)
of this section are required to demonstrate initial compliance with
Secs. 63.1404, 63.1405, 63.1406 and 63.1407, and Sec. 63.1414,
respectively. The provisions in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) of
this section of this section also apply to design evaluations and
performance tests that are specified in paragraphs (c), (d), (e), and
(f) of this section. The provisions in paragraph (a)(6) of this section
are used to demonstrate initial compliance with the alternative
standards specified in Secs. 63.1404(c), 63.1405(f), 63.1406(d), and
63.1407(d). The provisions of paragraph (a)(7) of this section specify
testing requirements for condensers.
(1) Small control devices and large control devices. In meeting the
requirements of this section, owners or operators are not required to
conduct a performance test for a small control device. As specified in
the appropriate paragraphs within this section, owners or operators
shall either conduct a design evaluation following the procedures in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section or, for batch process vents only,
shall estimate emissions using the procedures in paragraph (e)(3) of
this section. An owner or operator may choose to conduct a performance
test for
[[Page 68876]]
a small control device and such a performance test shall follow the
procedures specified in paragraph (c), (d), (e), or (f), as
appropriate. Whenever a small control device becomes a large control
device, the owner or operator shall conduct a performance test to
verify continued compliance with this section. Notification that such a
performance test is required, the site-specific test plan, and the
results of the performance test shall be provided to the Administrator
as specified in Sec. 63.1419.
(2) Design evaluation. To demonstrate the organic HAP removal
efficiency for a control device, a design evaluation must address the
composition and organic HAP concentration of the vent stream(s)
entering the control device. A design evaluation also must address
other vent stream characteristics and control device operating
parameters as specified in any one of paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through
(a)(2)(vi) of this section, depending on the type of control device
that is used. If the vent stream(s) is not the only inlet to the
control device, the efficiency demonstration also must consider all
other vapors, gases, and liquids, other than fuels, received by the
control device.
(i) For a scrubber, the design evaluation shall consider the vent
stream composition; constituent concentrations; liquid-to-vapor ratio;
scrubbing liquid flow rate and concentration; temperature; and the
reaction kinetics of the constituents with the scrubbing liquid. The
design evaluation shall establish the design exhaust vent stream
organic compound concentration level and will include the additional
information in paragraphs (a)(2)(i)(A) and (a)(2)(i)(B) of this section
for trays and a packed column scrubber:
(A) Type and total number of theoretical and actual trays; and
(B) Type and total surface area of packing for entire column, and
for individual packed sections if column contains more than one packed
section.
(ii) For a condenser, the design evaluation shall consider the vent
stream flow rate, relative humidity, and temperature and shall
establish the design outlet organic HAP compound concentration level,
design average temperature of the condenser exhaust vent stream, and
the design average temperatures of the coolant fluid at the condenser
inlet and outlet. The temperature of the gas stream exiting the
condenser must be measured and used to establish the outlet organic HAP
concentration.
(iii) For a carbon adsorption system that regenerates the carbon
bed directly onsite in the control device such as a fixed-bed adsorber,
the design evaluation shall consider the vent stream flow rate,
relative humidity, and temperature and shall establish the design
exhaust vent stream organic compound concentration level, adsorption
cycle time, number and capacity of carbon beds, type and working
capacity of activated carbon used for carbon beds, design total
regeneration stream mass or volumetric flow over the period of each
complete carbon bed regeneration cycle, design carbon bed temperature
after regeneration, design carbon bed regeneration time, and design
service life of carbon. For vacuum desorption, the pressure drop shall
be included.
(iv) For a carbon adsorption system that does not regenerate the
carbon bed directly onsite in the control device such as a carbon
canister, the design evaluation shall consider the vent stream mass or
volumetric flow rate, relative humidity, and temperature and shall
establish the design exhaust vent stream organic compound concentration
level, capacity of carbon bed, type and working capacity of activated
carbon used for carbon bed, and design carbon replacement interval
based on the total carbon working capacity of the control device and
source operating schedule.
(v) For an enclosed combustion device with a minimum residence time
of 0.5 seconds and a minimum temperature of 760 deg.C, the design
evaluation must document that these conditions exist.
(vi) For a combustion control device that does not satisfy the
criteria in paragraph (a)(2)(v) of this section, the design evaluation
must address the following characteristics, depending on the type of
control device:
(A) For a thermal vapor incinerator, the design evaluation must
consider the autoignition temperature of the organic HAP, must consider
the vent stream flow rate, and must establish the design minimum and
average temperature in the combustion zone and the combustion zone
residence time.
(B) For a catalytic vapor incinerator, the design evaluation shall
consider the vent stream flow rate and shall establish the design
minimum and average temperatures across the catalyst bed inlet and
outlet.
(C) For a boiler or process heater, the design evaluation shall
consider the vent stream flow rate; shall establish the design minimum
and average flame zone temperatures and combustion zone residence time;
and shall describe the method and location where the vent stream is
introduced into the flame zone.
(3) Performance testing shall be conducted in accordance with
Sec. 63.7(a)(1), (a)(3), (d), (e)(1), (e)(2), (e)(4), (g), and (h),
with the exceptions specified in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through
(a)(3)(iv) of this section. Data shall be reduced in accordance with
the EPA approved methods specified in the applicable subpart or, if
other test methods are used, the data and methods shall be validated
according to the protocol in Method 301 of appendix A of this part.
Sections 63.1404 through 63.1414 also contain specific testing
requirements.
(i) Performance tests shall be conducted according to the
provisions of Sec. 63.7(e)(1) and (e)(2), except that performance tests
shall be conducted at maximum representative operating conditions
achievable during one of the time periods described in paragraph
(a)(3)(i)(A) or (a)(3)(i)(B) of this section, without necessitating
that the owner or operator make product in excess of demand:
(A) The 6-month period that ends on the date that the Notification
of Compliance Status is due, according to Sec. 63.1419(e)(5); or
(B) The 6-month period that begins 3 months before the performance
test and ends 3 months after the performance test.
(ii) When Sec. 63.7(g) references the Notification of Compliance
Status requirements in Sec. 63.9(h), the requirements in
Sec. 63.1419(e)(5) shall apply for purposes of this subpart.
(iii) The owner or operator shall notify the Administrator of the
intention to conduct a performance test at least 30 days before the
performance test is scheduled to allow the Administrator the
opportunity to have an observer present during the test.
(iv) Performance tests shall be performed no later than 150 days
after the compliance dates specified in this subpart (i.e., in time for
the results to be included in the Notification of Compliance Status),
rather than according to the time periods in Sec. 63.7(a)(2) of subpart
A.
(v) A site-specific test plan shall be submitted to the
Administrator for approval prior to testing in accordance with
Secs. 63.7(c) and 63.1419(e)(7)(ii). The test plan shall include a
description of the planned test and rationale for why the planned
performance test will provide adequate and representative results for
demonstrating the performance of the control device. If required, the
test plan shall include an emission profile and rationale for why the
selected test period is representative.
[[Page 68877]]
(4) Percent oxygen correction for combustion control devices. If
the control device is a combustion device, total organic HAP
concentrations must be corrected to 3 percent oxygen. The integrated
sampling and analysis procedures of Method 3B of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A, shall be used to determine the actual oxygen concentration
(%02d). The samples shall be taken during the same time that
the total organic HAP samples are taken. The concentration corrected to
3 percent oxygen (Cc) shall be computed using Equation 3 of
this subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.004
Where:
Cc = concentration of total organic HAP corrected to 3
percent oxygen, dry basis, ppmv.
Cm = total concentration of TOC in vented gas stream,
average of samples, dry basis, ppmv.
%02d = concentration of oxygen measured in vented gas
stream, dry basis, percent by volume.
(5) Exemptions from compliance demonstrations. An owner or operator
using any control device specified in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) through
(a)(5)(iv) of this section is exempt from the initial compliance
provisions in paragraphs (c), (d), (e), and (f) of this section.
(i) A boiler or process heater with a design heat input capacity of
44 megawatts or greater.
(ii) A boiler or process heater into which the vent stream is
introduced with the primary fuel or is used as the primary fuel.
(iii) A boiler or process heater burning hazardous waste for which
the owner or operator:
(A) Has been issued a final permit under 40 CFR part 270 and
complies with the requirements of 40 CFR part 266, subpart H; or
(B) Has certified compliance with the interim status requirements
of 40 CFR part 266, subpart H.
(iv) A hazardous waste incinerator for which the owner or operator
has been issued a final permit under 40 CFR part 270 and complies with
the requirements of 40 CFR part 264, subpart O, or has certified
compliance with the interim status requirements of 40 CFR part 265,
subpart O.
(6) Initial compliance with alternative standard. Initial
compliance with the alternative standards in Secs. 63.1404(c),
63.1405(f), 63.1406(d), and 63.1407(d) is demonstrated when the outlet
organic HAP concentration is 20 ppmv or less. To demonstrate initial
compliance, the owner or operator shall be in compliance with the
monitoring provisions in Sec. 63.1418(i) on the initial compliance
date.
(7) Testing requirements for condensers. For vent streams
controlled using condensers, continuous direct measurement of condenser
outlet gas temperature to be used in determining concentrations is
allowed in lieu of concentration measurements.
(b) Test methods. When directed by any section of this subpart to
conduct a performance test using the procedures specified in this
paragraph (b), the owner or operator shall use the test methods
specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(8) of this section.
Otherwise, the owner or operator shall use the test methods
specifically referred to by other sections of this subpart, or
specifically referred to by sections of other subparts of this part
referenced by sections of this subpart.
(1) Method 1 or 1A, 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, as appropriate,
shall be used for selection of the sampling sites if the flow measuring
device is a pitot tube. No traverse is necessary when Method 2A or 2D,
40 CFR part 60, appendix A, is used to determine gas stream volumetric
flow rate.
(2) Determination of the average batch vent flow rate for a batch
emission episode shall be made using the procedures specified in
paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (b)(2)(iii) of this section.
(i) The volumetric flow rate (FRi) for a batch emission
episode, in standard cubic meters per minute (scmm) at 20 deg. C, shall
be determined using Method 2, 2A, 2C, or 2D, 40 CFR part 60, appendix
A, as appropriate.
(ii) The volumetric flow rate of a representative batch emission
episode shall be measured every 15 minutes.
(iii) The average batch vent flow rate for a batch emission episode
shall be calculated using Equation 4 of this subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.002
Where:
AFRepisode = Average batch vent flow rate for the batch
emission episode, scmm.
FRi = Flow rate for individual measurement i, scmm.
n = Number of flow rate measurements taken during the batch emission
episode.
(3) EPA Method 2, 2A, 2C, or 2D of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, is
used for velocity and volumetric flow rates.
(4) EPA Method 3 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, is used for gas
analysis.
(5) EPA Method 4 of 40 CFR, part 60, appendix A, is used for stack
gas moisture.
(6) The methods specified in paragraphs (b)(6)(i) through
(b)(6)(iii) of this section shall be used to determine the HAP
concentration.
(i) Method 316 or Method 320 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, shall
be used to determine the concentration of formaldehyde.
(ii) Method 18 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, shall be used to
determine the concentration of all organic HAP other than formaldehyde.
(iii) Method 308 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, may be used as an
alternative to Method 18 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, to determine
the concentration of methanol.
(7) If an integrated sample is taken over the entire batch emission
episode to determine the average batch vent concentration of total
organic HAP, emissions shall be calculated using Equation 5 of this
subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.003
Where:
Eepisode = Emissions, kg/episode.
K = Constant, 2.494 x 10 -6 (ppmv)-1 (gm-mole/
scm) (kg/gm) (min/hr), where standard temperature is 20 deg.C.
Cj = Average batch vent concentration of sample organic HAP
component j of the gas stream, dry basis, ppmv.
Mj = Molecular weight of sample organic HAP component j of
the gas stream, gm/gm-mole.
AFR = Average batch vent flow rate of gas stream, dry basis, scmm.
Th = Hours/episode.
n = Number of organic HAP in stream.
(8) If grab samples are taken to determine the average batch vent
[[Page 68878]]
concentration of total organic HAP, emissions shall be calculated
according to paragraphs (b)(8)(i) and (b)(8)(ii) of this section.
(i) For each measurement point, the emission rate shall be
calculated using Equation 6 of this subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.005
Where:
Epoint = Emission rate for individual measurement point, kg/
hr.
K = Constant, 2.494 x 10-6 (ppmv)-1 (gm-mole/scm) (kg/gm)
(min/hr), where standard temperature is 20 deg.C.
Cj = Concentration of sample organic HAP component j of the
gas stream, dry basis, ppmv.
Mj = Molecular weight of sample organic HAP component j of
the gas stream, gm/gm-mole.
FR = Flow rate of gas stream for the measurement point, dry basis,
scmm.
n = Number of organic HAP in stream.
(ii) The emissions per batch emission episode shall be calculated
using Equation 7 of this subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.006
Where:
Eepisode = Emissions, kg/episode.
DUR = Duration of the batch emission episode, hr/episode.
Ei = Emissions for measurement point i, kg/hr.
n = Number of measurements.
(c) Initial compliance with storage tank provisions. As specified
in Sec. 63.1404, initial compliance with the control requirements of
Sec. 63.1404 shall be demonstrated using the procedures specified in
Secs. 63.120 and 63.121, as appropriate. For owners or operators
complying with Sec. 63.1404(f), initial compliance with the alternative
standard shall be demonstrated as specified in paragraph (a)(6) of this
section.
(d) Initial compliance with continuous process vent provisions. As
specified in Sec. 63.1405, initial compliance with the control
requirements of Sec. 63.1405 shall be demonstrated using the procedures
specified in Sec. 63.116. For owners or operators complying with
Sec. 63.1405(f), initial compliance with the alternative standard shall
be demonstrated as specified in paragraph (a)(6) of this section.
(e) Initial compliance with batch process vent provisions. An owner
or operator of an affected source complying with the batch process vent
standards in Sec. 63.1406 or Sec. 63.1407 shall demonstrate compliance
using the procedures described in paragraphs (e)(1) through (e)(6) of
this section.
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(5) of this section, initial
compliance with the batch process vent standards in Sec. 63.1406 or
Sec. 63.1407 shall be demonstrated as specified in paragraphs (e)(1)(i)
through (e)(1)(iii), as applicable.
(i) Initial compliance with the alternative standard specified in
Secs. 63.1406(d) and 63.1407(d) shall be demonstrated as specified in
paragraph (a)(6) of this section.
(ii) Initial compliance with the kilogram of HAP per megagram of
product emission limits in Sec. 63.1406 shall be demonstrated using the
procedures in paragraph (e)(2) of this section.
(iii) Initial compliance with the percent reduction requirements in
Sec. 63.1406 or Sec. 63.1407 shall be demonstrated using the procedures
in paragraph (e)(5) of this section.
(2) Each owner or operator shall determine continuous compliance
with the kilogram of HAP per megagram of product emission limits
specified in Sec. 63.1406 by using the procedures in paragraphs
(e)(2)(i) through (e)(2)(iii) of this section. For the first year, the
owner or operator shall calculate a rolling average monthly emission
rate each month based on the available data points (e.g., 5 data points
after 5 months of operation). After the first year, a 12-month rolling
average monthly emission rate shall be calculated each month based on
the previous 12 monthly averages. Each month the average monthly
emission rate shall be compared to the emission limit specified in
Sec. 63.1406. If the average monthly emission rate is greater than the
specified emission limit, a violation of the emission limit has
occurred, as described in Sec. 63.1418(l).
(i) The monthly emission rate, kilograms of HAP per megagram of
product, shall be determined at the end of each month using Equation 8
of this subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.007
Where:
ER = Emission rate of organic HAP from reactor batch process vents, kg
of HAP/Mg product.
Ei = Emission rate of organic HAP from reactor batch process
vent i as determined using the procedures specified in paragraph
(e)(2)(ii) of this section, kg/month.
RPM = Amount of resin produced in one month as determined
using the procedures specified in paragraph (e)(2)(iii) of this
section, Mg/month.
n = Number of batch process vents.
(ii) The emission rate of organic HAP, in kilograms per batch
cycle, from an individual batch process vent shall be determined based
on either a performance test or design evaluation, as specified in
paragraph (e)(2)(ii)(A) or (e)(2)(ii)(B) of this section. The monthly
emission rate of organic HAP, in kilograms per month, from an
individual batch process vent shall be determined 0using Equation 9 of
this subpart and the procedures specified in paragraph (e)(2)(ii)(C) of
this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.008
Where:
Ei = Monthly emissions from a batch process vent, kg/month.
Ni = Number of type i batch cycles performed monthly,
cycles/month.
Ecycle i = Emissions from the batch process vent associated
with a single type i batch cycle, as determined using the procedures
specified in either paragraph (e)(2)(ii)(A) or (e)(2)(ii)(B) of this
section, kg/batch cycle.
n = Number of different types of batch cycles that cause the emission
of organic HAP from the batch process vent.
(A) For reactor batch process vents estimated through engineering
assessment, as described in paragraph (e)(3)(vi) of this section, to
emit less than 10 tons per year of uncontrolled emissions, the owner or
operator may use either the procedures specified in paragraph (e)(3) of
this section or engineering assessment to determine the emissions per
batch cycle.
(B) For reactor batch process vents estimated through engineering
assessment, as described in paragraph (e)(3)(vi) of this section, to
emit 10 tons per year or greater of uncontrolled emissions, emissions
shall be estimated using the procedures specified in paragraph (e)(3)
of this section.
(C) Once emissions for a reactor batch process vent have been
estimated as specified in either paragraph (e)(2)(ii)(A) or
(e)(2)(ii)(B) of this section, the owner or operator may use the
estimated emissions to determine Ei using Equation 9 of this
subpart until the estimated emissions are no longer representative due
to a process change or other reason known to the owner or operator.
[[Page 68879]]
(iii) The rate of resin produced, RPM (Mg/month), shall
be determined based on production records certified by the owner or
operator to represent actual production for the month. A sample of the
records selected by the owner or operator for this purpose shall be
provided to the Administrator in the Precompliance Report, as specified
in Sec. 63.1419(e)(3).
(3) Uncontrolled emissions. Uncontrolled emissions for individual
reactor batch process vents or individual non-reactor batch process
vents shall be determined using the procedures specified in paragraphs
(e)(3)(i) through (e)(3)(viii) of this section. To estimate emissions
from a batch emissions episode, owners or operators may use either the
emissions estimation equations in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through
(e)(3)(iv) of this section, or direct measurement as specified in
paragraph (e)(3)(v) of this section. Engineering assessment may be used
to estimate emissions from a batch emission episode only under the
conditions described in paragraph (e)(3)(vi) of this section. In using
the emissions estimation equations in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through
(e)(3)(iv) of this section, individual component vapor pressure and
molecular weight may be obtained from standard references. Methods to
determine individual HAP partial pressures in multicomponent systems
are described in paragraph (e)(3)(ix) of this section. Other variables
in the emissions estimation equations may be obtained through direct
measurement, as defined in paragraph (e)(3)(v) of this section, through
engineering assessment, as defined in paragraph (e)(3)(vi)(B) of this
section, by process knowledge, or by any other appropriate means.
Assumptions used in determining these variables must be documented.
Once emissions for the batch emission episode have been determined
using either the emissions estimation equations, direct measurement, or
engineering assessment, emissions from a batch cycle shall be
calculated in accordance with paragraph (e)(3)(vii) of this section,
and annual emissions from the batch process vent shall be calculated in
accordance with paragraph (e)(3)(viii) of this section.
(i) Organic HAP emissions from the purging of an empty vessel shall
be calculated using Equation 10 of this subpart. Equation 10 of this
subpart does not take into account evaporation of any residual liquid
in the vessel:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.009
Where:
E episode = Emissions, kg/episode.
Vves = Volume of vessel, m\3\.
P = Total organic HAP partial pressure, kPa.
MWwavg = Weighted average molecular weight of organic
HAP in vapor, determined in accordance with paragraph (e)(3)(iv)(A)(4)
of this section, kg/kmol.
R = Ideal gas constant, 8.314 m3kPa/kmolK.
T = Temperature of vessel vapor space, K.
m = Number of volumes of purge gas used.
(ii) Organic HAP emissions from the purging of a filled vessel shall be
calculated using Equation 11 of this subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.010
Where:
Eepisode = Emissions, kg/episode.
y = Saturated mole fraction of all organic HAP in vapor phase.
Vdr = Volumetric gas displacement rate, m3/min.
P = Pressure in vessel vapor space, kPa.
MWwavg = Weighted average molecular weight of organic HAP in
vapor, determined in accordance with paragraph (e)(3)(iv)(A)(4) of this
section, kg/kmol.
R = Ideal gas constant, 8.314 m3kPa/kmolK.
T = Temperature of vessel vapor space, K.
Pi = Vapor pressure of individual organic HAP i, kPa.
xi = Mole fraction of organic HAP i in the liquid.
n = Number of organic HAP in stream.
Tm = Minutes/episode.
(iii) Emissions from vapor displacement due to transfer of material
into or out of a vessel shall be calculated using Equation 12 of this
subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.011
Where:
Eepisode = Emissions, kg/episode.
y = Saturated mole fraction of all organic HAP in vapor phase.
V = Volume of gas displaced from the vessel, m\3\.
P = Pressure in vessel vapor space, kPa.
MWwavg = Weighted average molecular weight of organic HAP in
vapor, determined in accordance with paragraph (e)(3)(iv)(A)(4) of this
section, kg/kmol.
R = Ideal gas constant, 8.314 m\3\kPa/kmolK.
T = Temperature of vessel vapor space, K.
(iv) Emissions caused by the heating of a vessel shall be
calculated using the procedures in either paragraph (e)(3)(iv)(A),
(e)(3)(iv)(B), or (e)(3)(iv)(C) of this section, as appropriate.
[[Page 68880]]
(A) If the final temperature to which the vessel contents is heated
is lower than 50 K below the boiling point of the HAP in the vessel,
then emissions shall be calculated using the equations in paragraphs
(e)(3)(iv)(A)(1) through (e)(3)(iv)(A)(4) of this section.
(1) Emissions caused by heating of a vessel shall be calculated
using Equation 13 of this subpart. The assumptions made for this
calculation are atmospheric pressure of 760 millimeters of mercury (mm
Hg) and the displaced gas is always saturated with volatile organic
compounds (VOC) vapor in equilibrium with the liquid mixture:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.012
Where:
Eepisode = Emissions, kg/episode.
(Pi)T1, (Pi)T2 = Partial
pressure (kPa) of each organic HAP i in the vessel headspace at initial
(T1) and final (T2) temperature.
n = Number of organic HAP in stream.
= Number of kilogram-moles (kg-moles) of gas
displaced, determined in accordance with paragraph (e)(3)(iv)(A)(2) of
this section.
101.325 = Constant, kPa.
(MWWAVG,T1), (MWWAVG,T2) = Weighted average
molecular weight of total organic HAP in the displaced gas stream,
determined in accordance with paragraph (e)(3)(iv)(A)(4) of this
section, kg/kmol.
(2) The moles of gas displaced, , is calculated
using Equation 14 of this subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.013
Where:
= Number of kg-moles of gas displaced.
Vfs = Volume of free space in the vessel, m\3\.
R = Ideal gas constant, 8.314 m\3\kPa/kmolK.
Pa1 = Initial noncondensible gas partial pressure in the
vessel, kPa.
Pa2 = Final noncondensible gas partial pressure, kPa.
T1 = Initial temperature of vessel, K.
T2 = Final temperature of vessel, K.
(3) The initial and final pressure of the noncondensible gas in the
vessel shall be calculated using Equation 15 of this subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.014
Where:
Pa = Initial or final partial pressure of noncondensible gas in the
vessel headspace, kPa.
101.325 = Constant, kPa.
(Pi)T = Partial pressure of each organic HAP i in
the vessel headspace, kPa, at the initial or final temperature (T1 or
T2).
n = Number of organic HAP in stream.
(4) The weighted average molecular weight of organic HAP in the
displaced gas, MWwavg, shall be calculated using Equation 16
of this subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.015
Where:
C = Organic HAP component.
n = Number of organic HAP components in stream.
(B) If the vessel contents are heated to a temperature greater than
50 K below the boiling point, then emissions from the heating of a
vessel shall be calculated as the sum of the emissions calculated in
accordance with paragraphs (e)(3)(iv)(B)(1) and (e)(3)(iv)(B)(2) of
this section.
(1) For the interval from the initial temperature to the
temperature 50 K below the boiling point, emissions shall be calculated
using Equation 13 of this subpart, where T2 is the
temperature 50 K below the boiling point.
(2) For the interval from the temperature 50 K below the boiling
point to the final temperature, emissions shall be calculated as the
summation of emissions for each 5 K increment, where the emissions for
each increment shall be calculated using Equation 13 of this subpart.
(i) If the final temperature of the heatup is at or lower than 5 K
below the boiling point, the final temperature for the last increment
shall be the final temperature for the heatup, even if the last
increment is less than 5 K.
(ii) If the final temperature of the heatup is higher than 5 K
below the boiling point, the final temperature for the last increment
shall be the temperature 5 K below the boiling point, even if the last
increment is less than 5 K.
(iii) If the vessel contents are heated to the boiling point and
the vessel is not operating with a condenser, the final temperature for
the final increment shall be the temperature 5 K below the
[[Page 68881]]
boiling point, even if the last increment is less than 5 K.
(C) If the vessel is operating with a condenser, and the vessel
contents are heated to the boiling point, the process condenser, as
defined in Sec. 63.1402, is considered part of the process. Emissions
shall be calculated as the sum of emissions calculated using Equation
13 of this subpart, which calculates emissions due to heating the
vessel contents to the temperature of the gas existing the condenser,
and emissions calculated using Equation 12 of this subpart, which
calculates emissions due to the displacement of the remaining saturated
noncondensible gas in the vessel. The final temperature in Equation 13
of this subpart shall be set equal to the exit gas temperature of the
condenser. Equation 12 of this subpart shall be used as written below
in Equation 17 of this subpart, using free space volume, and T is set
equal to the condenser exit gas temperature:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.016
Where:
Eepisode = Emissions, kg/episode.
y = Saturated mole fraction of all organic HAP in vapor phase.
Vfs = Volume of the free space in the vessel, m\3\.
P = Pressure in vessel vapor space, kPa.
MWwavg = Weighted average molecular weight of organic HAP in
vapor, determined in accordance with paragraph (e)(3)(iv)(A)(4) of this
section, kg/kmol.
R = Ideal gas constant, 8.314 m\3\kPa/kmolK.
T = Temperature of condenser exit stream, K.
(v) The owner or operator may estimate annual emissions for a batch
emission episode by direct measurement. The procedures specified in
paragraph (b) of this section shall be used for direct measurement. If
direct measurement is used, the owner or operator shall perform a test
for the duration of a representative batch emission episode.
Alternatively, the owner or operator may perform a test during only
those periods of the batch emission episode for which the emission rate
for the entire episode can be determined or for which the emissions are
greater than the average emission rate of the batch emission episode.
The owner or operator choosing either of these alternative options
shall develop an emission profile for the entire batch emission
episode, based on either process knowledge or test data collected, to
demonstrate that test periods are representative. The emission profile
shall be included in the site-specific test plan required by
Sec. 63.1419(e)(7)(ii), as specified by paragraph (a)(3)(v) of this
section. Examples of information that could constitute process
knowledge include calculations based on material balances and process
stoichiometry. Previous test results may be used to develop the
emission profile provided the results are still relevant to the current
batch process vent conditions.
(vi) Engineering assessment may be used to estimate emissions from
a batch emission episode, if the criteria in paragraph (e)(3)(vi)(A) of
this section are met. Data or other information used to demonstrate
that the criteria in paragraph (e)(3)(vi)(A) of this section have been
met shall be reported as specified in paragraph (e)(3)(vi)(C) of this
section. Paragraph (e)(3)(vi)(B) of this section defines engineering
assessment, for the purposes of estimating emissions from a batch
emissions episode. All data, assumptions, and procedures used in an
engineering assessment shall be documented.
(A) If the criteria specified in paragraphs (e)(3)(vi)(A)(1),
(e)(3)(vi)(A)(2), and (e)(3)(vi)(A)(3) of this section are met for a
specific batch emission episode, the owner or operator may use
engineering assessment, as described in paragraph (e)(3)(vi)(B) of this
section, to estimate emissions from that batch emission episode, and
the owner or operator is not required to use the emissions estimation
equations described in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (e)(3)(iv) of this
section to estimate emissions from that batch emission episode.
(1) Previous test data, where the measurement of organic HAP
emissions was an outcome of the test, show a greater than 20 percent
discrepancy between the test value and the value estimated using the
applicable equations in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (e)(3)(iv) of this
section. Paragraphs (e)(3)(vi)(A)(1)(i) and (e)(3)(vi)(A)(1)(ii) of
this section describe test data that will be acceptable under this
paragraph (e)(3)(vi)(A)(1).
(i) Test data for the batch emission episode obtained during
production of the product for which the demonstration is being made.
(ii) Test data obtained for a batch emission episode from another
process train, where the test data were obtained during production of
the product for which the demonstration is being made. Test data from
another process train may be used only if the owner or operator can
demonstrate that the data are representative of the batch emission
episode for which the demonstration is being made, taking into account
the nature, size, operating conditions, production rate, and sequence
of process steps (e.g., reaction, distillation, etc.) of the equipment
in the other process train.
(2) Previous test data obtained during the production of the
product for which the demonstration is being made, for the batch
emission episode with the highest organic HAP emissions on a mass
basis, show a greater than 20 percent discrepancy between the test
value and the value estimated using the applicable equations in
paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (e)(3)(iv) of this section. If the
criteria in this paragraph (e)(3)(vi)(A)(2) are met, then engineering
assessment may be used for all batch emission episodes associated with
that batch cycle for the batch unit operation.
(3) The owner or operator has requested and been granted approval
to use engineering assessment to estimate emissions from a batch
emissions episode. The request to use engineering assessment to
estimate emissions from a batch emissions episode shall contain
sufficient information and data to demonstrate to the Administrator
that engineering assessment is an accurate means of estimating
emissions for that particular batch emissions episode. The request to
use engineering assessment to estimate emissions for a batch emissions
episode shall be submitted in the Precompliance Report required under
Sec. 63.1419(e)(3).
(B) Engineering assessment includes, but is not limited to, the
following:
(1) Previous test results, provided the tests are representative of
current operating practices;
(2) Bench-scale or pilot-scale test data obtained under conditions
representative of current process operating conditions;
(3) Flow rate or organic HAP emission rate specified or implied
within a
[[Page 68882]]
permit limit applicable to the batch process vent; and
(4) Design analysis based on accepted chemical engineering
principles, measurable process parameters, or physical or chemical laws
or properties. Examples of analytical methods include, but are not
limited to:
(i) Use of material balances;
(ii) Estimation of flow rate based on physical equipment design
such as pump or blower capacities;
(iii) Estimation of organic HAP concentrations based on saturation
conditions; and
(iv) Estimation of organic HAP concentrations based on grab samples
of the liquid or vapor.
(C) Data or other information used to demonstrate that the criteria
in paragraph (e)(3)(vi)(A) of this section have been met shall be
reported as specified in paragraphs (e)(3)(vi)(C)(1) and
(e)(3)(vi)(C)(2) of this section.
(1) Data or other information used to demonstrate that the criteria
in paragraphs (e)(3)(vi)(A)(1) and (e)(3)(vi)(A)(2) of this section
have been met shall be reported in the Notification of Compliance
Status, as required in Sec. 63.1419(e)(5).
(2) The request for approval to use engineering assessment to
estimate emissions from a batch emissions episode as allowed under
paragraph (e)(3)(vi)(A)(3) of this section, and sufficient data or
other information for demonstrating to the Administrator that
engineering assessment is an accurate means of estimating emissions for
that particular batch emissions episode, shall be submitted with the
Precompliance Report, as required in Sec. 63.1419(e)(3).
(vii) For each batch process vent, the organic HAP emissions
associated with a single batch cycle shall be calculated using Equation
18 of this subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.017
Where:
Ecycle = Emissions for an individual batch cycle, kg/batch
cycle.
Eepisode i = Emissions from batch emission episode i, kg/
episode.
n = Number of batch emission episodes for the batch cycle.
(viii) Annual organic HAP emissions from a batch process vent shall
be calculated using Equation 19 of this subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.018
Where:
AE = Annual emissions from a batch process vent, kg/yr.
Ni = Number of type i batch cycles performed annually,
cycles/year.
Ecycle i = Emissions from the batch process vent associated
with a single type i batch cycle, as determined in paragraph
(e)(3)(vii) of this section, kg/batch cycle.
n = Number of different types of batch cycles that cause the emission
of organic HAP from the batch process vent.
(ix) Individual HAP partial pressures in multicomponent systems
shall be determined using the appropriate method specified in
paragraphs (e)(3)(ix)(A) through (e)(3)(ix)(C) of this section:
(A) If the components are miscible, use Raoult's law to calculate
the partial pressures;
(B) If the solution is a dilute aqueous mixture, use Henry's law
constants to calculate partial pressures;
(C) If Raoult's law or Henry's law are not appropriate or
available, the owner or operator may use any of the options in
paragraphs (e)(3)(ix)(C)(1), (e)(3)(ix)(C)(2), and (e)(3)(ix)(C)(3) of
this section:
(1) Experimentally obtained activity coefficients, Henry's law
constants, or solubility data;
(2) Models, such as group-contribution models, to predict activity
coefficients; or
(3) Assume the components of the system behave independently and
use the summation of all vapor pressures from the HAPs as the total HAP
partial pressure.
(4) [Reserved]
(5) Batch process vent testing and procedures for compliance with
Sec. 63.1406 or Sec. 63.1407. Owners or operators shall comply with the
procedures specified in paragraph (e)(5)(i) or (e)(5)(ii) of this
section in order to determine the control efficiency of the control
device. Owners or operators using a small control device shall follow
the procedures in paragraph (e)(5)(i) of this section. Owners or
operators using a large control device shall follow the procedures in
paragraph (e)(5)(ii) of this section. An owner or operator shall
determine the percent reduction for the batch cycle for an individual
reactor batch process vent when complying with Sec. 63.1406, and shall
determine the overall percent reduction for the collection of non-
reactor batch process vents within the affected source when complying
with Sec. 63.1407, using the procedures specified in paragraph
(e)(5)(iii) of this section. For purposes of this paragraph (e)(5), the
term ``batch emission episode'' shall have the meaning ``period of the
batch emission episode selected for control,'' which may be the entire
batch emission episode or may only be a portion of the batch emission
episode.
(i) Small control devices. The control efficiency for a small
control device shall be determined through the design evaluation
procedures described in paragraphs (e)(5)(i)(A) through (e)(5)(i)(C) of
this section or by conducting a performance test in accordance with
paragraph (e)(5)(ii) of this section.
(A) Design evaluation. The design evaluation shall include
documentation demonstrating the control device efficiency to be used in
paragraph (e)(5)(iii) of this section for determining the percent
reduction for the batch cycle for an individual reactor batch process
vent when complying with Sec. 63.1406 or the overall percent reduction
for the collection of non-reactor batch process vents within the
affected source when complying with Sec. 63.1407. This documentation
shall comply with the provisions in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
The design evaluation shall also include the value(s) and basis for the
parameter monitoring level(s) required by Sec. 63.1418. The design
evaluation shall comply with either paragraph (e)(5)(i)(B) or
(e)(5)(i)(C) of this section. Owners or operators shall comply with
paragraph (e)(5)(i)(B) of this section when the control device
efficiency to be used in paragraph (e)(5)(iii) of this section varies
between batch emission episodes or varies within a batch emission
episode. Paragraph (e)(5)(i)(C) of this section shall be complied with
when an owner or operator chooses to demonstrate that the control
device achieves the same or better efficiency for all emissions
selected for control.
(B) The design evaluation shall address the control device
efficiency for each batch emission episode that the owner or operator
selects to control.
(C) The design evaluation shall demonstrate that the control device
achieves the same or higher efficiency for all emissions that the owner
or operator selects to control.
(ii) Large control devices. The control efficiency for a large
control device shall be determined by conducting a performance test.
Performance tests shall be conducted as specified in paragraph
(e)(5)(ii)(A) or (e)(5)(ii)(B) of this section. An owner or operator
may test some batch emission episodes following the procedures in
paragraph (e)(5)(ii)(A) of this section and may test others following
paragraph (e)(5)(ii)(B) of this section; the procedures in
[[Page 68883]]
paragraphs (e)(5)(ii)(A) and (e)(5)(ii)(B) of this section are not
exclusive of each other. Emissions per batch emission episode shall be
determined as specified in paragraphs (e)(5)(ii)(C) and (e)(5)(ii)(D)
of this section. The control efficiency of the control device shall be
determined as specified in paragraphs (e)(5)(ii)(E) and (e)(5)(ii)(F)
of this section.
(A) A performance test shall be performed for each batch emission
episode, or portion thereof, in the batch cycle for an individual
reactor batch process vent that the owner or operator selects to
control as part of achieving the required percent reduction for the
batch cycle specified in Sec. 63.1406. A performance test shall be
performed for each batch emission episode, or portion thereof, from
each non-reactor batch process vent within the affected source that the
owner or operator selects to control as part of achieving the overall
percent reduction specified in Sec. 63.1407. Performance tests shall be
conducted using the procedures specified in paragraph (b) of this
section and following the procedures in paragraphs (e)(5)(ii)(A)(1)
through (e)(5)(ii)(A)(4) of this section.
(1) Only one test (i.e., only one run) is required for each batch
emission episode selected by the owner or operator for control.
(2) Except as specified in paragraph (e)(5)(ii)(A)(3) of this
section, the performance test shall be conducted over the entire period
of emissions selected by the owner or operator for control.
(3) An owner or operator may choose to test only those periods of
the batch emission episode during which the emission rate for the
entire batch emission episode can be determined or during which the
emissions are greater than the average emission rate of the batch
emission episode. The owner or operator choosing either of these
options shall develop an emission profile for the entire batch emission
episode, based on either process knowledge or test data collected, to
demonstrate that test periods are representative. The emission profile
shall be included in the site-specific test plan required by
Sec. 63.1419(e)(7)(ii), as specified by paragraph (a)(3)(v) of this
section. Examples of information that could constitute process
knowledge include calculations based on material balances and process
stoichiometry. Previous test results may be used to develop the
emission profile provided the results are still relevant to the current
batch process vent conditions.
(4) When choosing sampling sites using the methods specified in
paragraph (b)(1) of this section, inlet sampling sites shall be located
as specified in paragraphs (e)(5)(ii)(A)(4)(i) and (e)(5)(ii)(A)(4)(ii)
of this section. Outlet sampling sites shall be located at the outlet
of the control device prior to release to the atmosphere.
(i) The control device inlet sampling site shall be located at the
exit from the batch unit operation, after any process condensers and
before any control device.
(ii) If a batch process vent is introduced with the combustion air
or as a secondary fuel into a boiler or process heater with a design
capacity less than 44 megawatts, selection of the location of the inlet
sampling sites shall ensure the measurement of total organic HAP
concentrations in all batch process vents and primary and secondary
fuels introduced into the boiler or process heater.
(B) An owner or operator is not required to conduct a performance
test for each batch emission episode if the owner or operator can
demonstrate that control device efficiency determined from a
performance test on a single batch emission episode is equivalent to or
less than the control device efficiency that will be achieved for other
batch emission episodes. Performance tests shall be conducted using the
procedures specified in paragraph (b) of this section and as specified
in paragraphs (e)(5)(ii)(B)(1) and (e)(5)(ii)(B)(2) of this section.
Owners or operators complying with this paragraph (e)(5)(ii)(B) shall
comply with paragraphs (e)(5)(ii)(B)(3) through (e)(5)(ii)(B)(5) of
this section. An owner or operator using the procedures specified in
this paragraph (e)(5)(ii)(B) is restricted to the control device
efficiency demonstrated during the performance test for the purposes of
paragraph (e)(5)(iii) of this section.
(1) A performance test shall be conducted for the batch emission
episode for which the owner or operator demonstrates that performance
of the control device will be of equivalent or greater efficiency for
all other batch emission episodes. For purposes of this paragraph
(e)(5)(ii)(B)(1), the phrase ``all other batch emission episodes'' is
restricted to those batch emission episodes for which the owner or
operator shall use the control device efficiency determined from the
performance test for compliance demonstration purposes.
(2) The procedures specified in paragraphs (e)(5)(ii)(A)(1) through
(e)(5)(ii)(A)(4) shall be followed.
(3) The owner or operator shall develop an emission profile for the
emissions venting to the control device in order to demonstrate the
representativeness of the planned test. The emission profile shall
include HAP loading rate, expressed as mass per unit time, versus time
for all batch emission episodes that could vent to the control device.
The emission profile shall cover a period of time that is sufficient to
include all batch emission episodes venting to the control device and
shall consider production scheduling. The HAP emissions for batch
emission episodes shall be calculated using the procedures specified in
paragraph (e)(3) of this section. The HAP loading rates for batch
emission episodes shall be calculated by dividing HAP emissions by the
duration of the emission events. The emission profile shall be included
in the site-specific test plan required by Sec. 63.1419(e)(7)(ii), as
specified by paragraph (a)(3)(v) of this section. Previous test results
may be used to develop the emission profile provided the results are
still relevant to the current batch process vent conditions.
(4) The concept provided by paragraph (e)(5)(ii)(B) of this section
may be used multiple times to address different sets of batch emission
episodes within a batch process vent.
(5) The concept provided by paragraph (e)(5)(ii)(B) of this section
may be used to address a subset of the total batch emission episodes
within a batch process vent.
(C) If an integrated sample is taken over the entire test period to
determine average batch vent concentration of total organic HAP,
emissions per batch emission episode shall be calculated using
Equations 20 and 21 of this subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.019
[[Page 68884]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.020
Where:
Eepisode = Inlet or outlet emissions, kg/episode.
K = Constant, 2.494 x 10-6 (ppmv)-1 (gm-mole/
scm) (kg/gm) (min/hr), where standard temperature is 20 deg.C.
Cj = Average inlet or outlet concentration of sample organic
HAP component j of the gas stream for the batch emission episode, dry
basis, ppmv.
Mj = Molecular weight of sample organic HAP component j of
the gas stream, gm/gm-mole.
AFR = Average inlet or outlet flow rate of gas stream for the batch
emission episode, dry basis, scmm.
Th = Hours/episode.
n = Number of organic HAP in stream.
(D) If grab samples are taken to determine average batch vent
concentration of total organic HAP, emissions shall be calculated
according to paragraphs (e)(5)(ii)(D)(1) and (e)(5)(ii)(D)(2) of this
section.
(1) For each measurement point, the emission rates shall be
calculated using Equations 22 and 23 of this subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.022
Where:
Epoint = Inlet or outlet emission rate for the measurement
point, kg/hr.
K = Constant, 2.494 x 10-6 (ppmv)-1 (gm-mole/scm)
(kg/gm) (min/hr), where standard temperature is 20 deg.C.
Cj = Inlet or outlet concentration of sample organic HAP
component j of the gas stream, dry basis, ppmv.
Mj = Molecular weight of sample organic HAP component j of
the gas stream, gm/gm-mole.
FR = Inlet or outlet flow rate of gas stream for the measurement point,
dry basis, scmm.
n = Number of organic HAP in stream.
(2) The emissions per batch emission episode shall be calculated
using Equations 24 and 25 of this subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.024
Where:
Eepisode = Inlet or outlet emissions, kg/episode.
DUR = Duration of the batch emission episode, hr/episode.
Epoint, i = Inlet or outlet emissions for measurement point
i, kg/hr.
n = Number of measurements.
(E) The control efficiency for the control device shall be calculated
using Equation 26 of this subpart:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.027
Where:
R = Control efficiency of control device, percent.
Einlet = Mass rate of total organic HAP for batch emission
episode i at the inlet to the control device as calculated under
paragraph (e)(5)(ii)(C) or (e)(5)(ii)(D) of this section, kg/hr.
Eoutlet = Mass rate of total organic HAP for batch emission
episode i at the outlet of the control device, as calculated under
paragraph (e)(5)(ii)(C) or (e)(5)(ii)(D) of this section, kg/hr.
n = Number of batch emission episodes in the batch cycle selected to be
controlled.
(F) If the batch process vent entering a boiler or process heater with
a design capacity less than 44 megawatts is introduced with the
combustion air or as a secondary fuel, the weight-percent reduction of
total organic HAP across the device shall be determined by comparing
the total organic HAP in all combusted batch process vents and primary
and secondary fuels with the total organic HAP exiting the combustion
device, respectively.
(iii) The percent reduction for the batch cycle for an individual
reactor batch process vent and the overall percent reduction for the
collection of non-reactor batch process vents within the affected
source shall be determined using Equation 27 of this subpart and the
control device efficiencies specified in paragraphs (e)(5)(iii)(A)
through (e)(5)(iii)(C) of
[[Page 68885]]
this section. All information used to calculate the batch cycle percent
reduction for an individual reactor batch process vent, including a
definition of the batch cycle identifying all batch emission episodes,
shall be recorded as specified in Sec. 63.1408(b)(2). All information
used to calculate the overall percent reduction for the collection of
non-reactor batch process vents within the affected source, including a
list of all batch emission episodes from the collection of non-reactor
batch process vents within the affected source, shall be recorded as
specified in Sec. 63.1408(b)(2). This information shall include
identification of those batch emission episodes, or portions thereof,
selected for control. This information shall include estimates of
uncontrolled emissions for those batch emission episodes, or portions
thereof, that are not selected for control, determined as specified in
paragraph (e)(5)(iii)(D) or (e)(5)(iii)(E) of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP14DE98.025
Where:
PR = Percent reduction.
Eunc = Mass rate of total organic HAP for uncontrolled batch
emission episode i, kg/hr.
Einlet, con = Mass rate of total organic HAP for controlled
batch emission episode i at the inlet to the control device, kg/hr.
R = Control efficiency of control device as specified in paragraphs
(e)(5)(iii)(A) through (e)(5)(iii)(C) of this section. The value of R
may vary between batch emission episodes.
n = Number of uncontrolled batch emission episodes, controlled batch
emission episodes, and control devices. The value of n is not
necessarily the same for these three items.
(A) If a performance test is required by paragraph (e)(5)(ii) of
this section, or if an owner or operator chooses to conduct a
performance test using the procedures specified in paragraph
(e)(5)(ii)(A) or (e)(5)(ii)(B) of this section, the control efficiency
of the control device shall be as determined in paragraph (e)(5)(ii)(E)
of this section.
(B) If a performance test is not required by paragraph (e)(5)(ii)
of this section for a combustion control device, as specified in
paragraph (a)(5) or (e)(6) of this section, the control efficiency
shall be 98 percent. The control efficiency for a flare shall be 98
percent.
(C) If a performance test is not required by paragraph (e)(5) of
this section, the control efficiency shall be based on the design
evaluation specified in paragraph (e)(5)(i) of this section.
(D) For batch emission episodes estimated through engineering
assessment, as described in paragraph (e)(3)(vi) of this section, to
emit less than 10 tons per year of uncontrolled emissions, the owner or
operator may use either the procedures specified in paragraph (e)(3) of
this section or engineering assessment to determine the emissions per
batch cycle.
(E) For batch emission episodes estimated through engineering
assessment, as described in paragraph (e)(3)(vi) of this section, to
emit 10 tons per year or greater of uncontrolled emissions, emissions
shall be estimated using the procedures specified in paragraph (e)(3)
of this section.
(6) An owner or operator is not required to conduct a performance
test for the following:
(i) Any control device for which a performance test was conducted
for determining compliance with a regulation promulgated by the EPA and
the test was conducted using the same Methods specified in this section
and either no deliberate process changes have been made since the test,
or the owner or operator can demonstrate that the results of the
performance test, with or without adjustments, reliably demonstrate
compliance despite process changes. The results of the previous
performance test shall be used to demonstrate compliance.
(ii) A condenser system that is equipped with a temperature sensor
and recorder, such that the condenser exit gas temperature can be
measured at 15-minute intervals when the condenser is functioning in
cooling a vent stream. The condenser exit gas temperature shall be used
to calculate removal efficiency of the condenser in demonstrating
compliance.
(f) Initial compliance with wastewater provisions. As specified in
Sec. 63.1414, initial compliance with the control requirements of
Sec. 63.1414 shall be demonstrated using the procedures specified in
Secs. 63.143 and 63.145, as appropriate.
(g) Notwithstanding any other provision of this subpart, if an
owner or operator uses a flare to comply with any of the requirements
of this subpart, the owner or operator shall comply with paragraphs
(g)(1) through (g)(3) of this section. The owner or operator is not
required to conduct a performance test to determine percent emission
reduction or outlet organic HAP concentration. If a compliance
demonstration has been conducted previously for a flare, using the
techniques specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(3) of this
section, that compliance demonstration may be used to satisfy the
requirements of this paragraph if either no deliberate process changes
have been made since the compliance demonstration, or the results of
the compliance demonstration reliably demonstrate compliance despite
process changes:
(1) Conduct a visible emission test using the techniques specified
in Sec. 63.11(b)(4);
(2) Determine the net heating value of the gas being combusted,
using the techniques specified in Sec. 63.11(b)(6); and
(3) Determine the exit velocity using the techniques specified in
either Sec. 63.11(b)(7)(i) (and Sec. 63.11(b)(7)(iii), where
applicable) or Sec. 63.11(b)(8), as appropriate.
Sec. 63.1418 Monitoring requirements.
(a) General requirements. Each owner or operator of an emission
point located at an affected source that uses a control device to
comply with the requirements of this subpart and has one or more
parameter monitoring level requirements specified under this subpart,
shall install the monitoring equipment specified in paragraph (b) of
this section in order to demonstrate continued compliance with the
provisions of this subpart. All monitoring equipment shall be
installed, calibrated, maintained, and operated according to
manufacturer's specifications or other written
[[Page 68886]]
procedures that provide adequate assurance that the equipment would
reasonably be expected to monitor accurately.
(1) This monitoring equipment shall be in operation at all times
when emissions that the owner or operator has selected to control, as
allowed under Secs. 63.1406 and 63.1407, are vented to the control
device and shall be in operation at all times when emissions that are
required to be controlled, as required under Secs. 63.1404, 63.1405,
and 63.1414, are vented to the control device.
(2) Except as otherwise provided in this subpart, the owner or
operator shall operate control devices such that the daily average,
batch cycle daily average, or block average of monitored parameters,
established as specified in paragraph (c) of this section, remains
above the minimum level or below the maximum level, as appropriate. The
option of conducting parameter monitoring for batch process vents on a
batch cycle daily average basis or a block average basis is described
in Sec. 63.1408(c).
(3) As specified in Sec. 63.1419(e)(5), all established parameter
monitoring levels, along with their supporting documentation and the
definition of an operating day or block, shall be approved as part of
and incorporated into the Notification of Compliance Status. The
definition of operating day or block shall specify the times at which
an operating day or block begins and ends.
(4) Parameter monitoring levels may be based upon a prior
performance test conducted for determining compliance with a regulation
promulgated by EPA, and the owner or operator is not required to
conduct a performance test, provided that the prior performance test
was conducted using the same Methods specified in this subpart and
either no deliberate process changes have been made since the test, or
the owner or operator can demonstrate that the results of the
performance test, with or without adjustments, reliably demonstrate
compliance despite process changes.
(5) For batch process vents complying with Sec. 63.1417(e)(5),
parameter monitoring levels established as specified in this section
shall reflect the control efficiency determined to be required during
the initial compliance demonstration so that the specified percent
reduction from Sec. 63.1406 or Sec. 63.1407, as appropriate, is met.
(6) For control devices controlling less than 1 ton per year of
uncontrolled HAP emissions, monitoring shall consist of a daily
verification that the control device is operating properly. If the
control device is used to control batch process vents alone or in
combination with other emission points, the verification may be on a
per batch cycle basis. This verification shall include, but not be
limited to, a daily or per batch demonstration that the unit is working
as designed. The procedure for this demonstration shall be submitted
for review and approval as part of the Precompliance Report required by
Sec. 63.1419(e)(3).
(7) Nothing in this section shall be construed to allow a
monitoring parameter excursion caused by an activity that violates
other applicable provisions of subpart A, F, or G of this part.
(b) Monitoring equipment. The monitoring equipment specified in
paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(8) of this section shall be installed as
specified in paragraph (a) of this section. The parameters to be
monitored are specified in Table 4 of this subpart.
(1) Where a scrubber is used, the following monitoring equipment is
required.
(i) A pH monitoring device equipped with a continuous recorder to
monitor the pH of the scrubber effluent.
(ii) A flow measurement device equipped with a continuous recorder
shall be located at the scrubber influent for liquid flow. Gas stream
flow shall be determined using one of the procedures specified in
paragraphs (b)(1)(ii)(A) through (b)(1)(ii)(C) of this section.
(A) The owner or operator may determine gas stream flow using the
design blower capacity, with appropriate adjustments for pressure drop.
(B) If the scrubber is subject to regulations in 40 CFR parts 264
through 266 that have required a determination of the liquid to gas (L/
G) ratio prior to the applicable compliance date for this subpart, the
owner or operator may determine gas stream flow by the method that had
been utilized to comply with those regulations. A determination that
was conducted prior to the compliance date for this subpart may be
utilized to comply with this subpart if it is still representative.
(C) The owner or operator may prepare and implement a gas stream
flow determination plan that documents an appropriate method which will
be used to determine the gas stream flow. The plan shall require
determination of gas stream flow by a method which will at least
provide a value for either a representative or the highest gas stream
flow anticipated in the scrubber during representative operating
conditions other than start-ups, shutdowns, or malfunctions. The plan
shall include a description of the methodology to be followed and an
explanation of how the selected methodology will reliably determine the
gas stream flow, and a description of the records that will be
maintained to document the determination of gas stream flow. The owner
or operator shall maintain the plan as specified in Sec. 63.1419(a).
(2) Where an absorber is used, a scrubbing liquid temperature
monitoring device and a specific gravity monitoring device are
required, each equipped with a continuous recorder.
(3) Where a condenser is used, a condenser exit temperature
(product side) monitoring device equipped with a continuous recorder is
required.
(4) Where a carbon adsorber is used, an integrating regeneration
steam flow or nitrogen flow, or the vacuum level monitoring device
having an accuracy of 10 percent of the flow rate or level,
or better, capable of recording the total regeneration steam flow or
nitrogen flow, or the vacuum level for each regeneration cycle; and a
carbon bed temperature monitoring device, capable of recording the
carbon bed temperature after each regeneration and within 15 minutes of
completing any cooling cycle are required.
(5) Where an incinerator is used, a temperature monitoring device
equipped with a continuous recorder is required.
(i) Where an incinerator other than a catalytic incinerator is
used, the temperature monitoring device shall be installed in the
firebox or in the ductwork immediately downstream of the firebox in a
position before any substantial heat exchange occurs.
(ii) Where a catalytic incinerator is used, temperature monitoring
devices shall be installed in the gas stream immediately before and
after the catalyst bed.
(6) Where a flare is used, a device (including but not limited to a
thermocouple, ultra-violet beam sensor, or infrared sensor) capable of
continuously detecting the presence of a pilot flame is required.
(7) Where a boiler or process heater of less than 44 megawatts
design heat input capacity is used, a temperature monitoring device in
the firebox equipped with a continuous recorder is required. Any boiler
or process heater in which all vent streams are introduced with the
primary fuel or are used as the primary fuel is exempt from this
requirement.
(8) As an alternate to paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(7) of this
section, the owner or operator may install an organic monitoring device
equipped with a
[[Page 68887]]
continuous recorder. Said organic monitoring device shall meet the
requirements of Performance Specification 8 or 9 of 40 CFR part 60,
appendix B, and shall be installed, calibrated, and maintained
according to Sec. 63.6.
(c) Establishment of parameter monitoring levels. The owner or
operator of a control device that has one or more parameter monitoring
level requirements specified under this subpart, or specified under
subparts referenced by this subpart, shall establish a maximum or
minimum level, as denoted on Table 5 of this subpart, for each measured
parameter using the procedures specified in paragraph (d) or (e) of
this section and as specified in paragraph (c)(1) or (c)(2) of this
section.
(1) Small control devices. Except as provided in paragraph (a)(6)
of this section, for control devices controlling less than 10 tons per
year of uncontrolled HAP emissions for which a performance test is not
required, the parameter monitoring levels shall be set based on the
design evaluation required in Sec. 63.1417(a)(1). When setting the
parameter monitoring level(s) based on the design evaluation, the owner
or operator shall submit the information specified in
Sec. 63.1419(e)(3) for review and approval as part of the Precompliance
Report.
(2) Large control devices. For control devices controlling 10 tons
per year of uncontrolled HAP emissions or more, the parameter shall be
established as specified in paragraph (d) or (e) of this section. When
setting the parameter monitoring level(s) using the procedures
specified in paragraph (e) of this section, the owner or operator shall
submit the information specified in Sec. 63.1419(e)(3) for review and
approval as part of the Precompliance Report.
(d) Establishment of parameter monitoring levels based on
performance tests. Level(s) established under this paragraph (d) shall
be based on the parameter values measured during the performance test.
(1) [Reserved]
(2) Emission points other than batch process vents. During initial
compliance testing, the appropriate parameter shall be continuously
monitored during the required 1-hour test runs. The monitoring level(s)
shall then be established as the average of the maximum (or minimum)
point values from the three test runs. The average of the maximum
values shall be used when establishing a maximum level, and the average
of the minimum values shall be used when establishing a minimum level.
(3) Batch process vents. The monitoring level(s) shall be
established using the procedures specified in paragraph (d)(3)(i) or
(d)(3)(ii) of this section.
(i) If more than one batch emission episode or more than one
portion of a batch emission episode has been selected to be controlled,
a single level for the batch cycle shall be calculated as follows:
(A) During initial compliance testing, the appropriate parameter
shall be monitored continuously and recorded once every 15 minutes at
all times when batch emission episodes, or portions thereof, selected
to be controlled are vented to the control device. A minimum of three
recorded values must be obtained for each batch emission episode, or
portion thereof, regardless of the length of time emissions are
occurring.
(B) The average monitored parameter value shall be calculated for
each batch emission episode, or portion thereof, in the batch cycle
selected to be controlled. The average shall be based on all values
measured during the required performance test.
(C) If the level to be established is a maximum operating
parameter, the level shall be defined as the minimum of the average
parameter values from each batch emission episode, or portion thereof,
in the batch cycle selected to be controlled (i.e., identify the
emission episode, or portion thereof, which requires the lowest
parameter value in order to assure compliance; the average parameter
value that is necessary to assure compliance for that emission episode,
or portion thereof, shall be the level for all emission episodes, or
portions thereof, in the batch cycle that are selected to be
controlled).
(D) If the level to be established is a minimum operating
parameter, the level shall be defined as the maximum of the average
parameter values from each batch emission episode, or portion thereof,
in the batch cycle selected to be controlled (i.e., identify the
emission episode, or portion thereof, which requires the highest
parameter value in order to assure compliance; the average parameter
value that is necessary to assure compliance for that emission episode,
or portion thereof, shall be the level for all emission episodes, or
portions thereof, in the batch cycle that are selected to be
controlled).
(E) Alternatively, an average monitored parameter value shall be
calculated for the entire batch cycle based on all values recorded
during each batch emission episode, or portion thereof, selected to be
controlled.
(ii) Instead of establishing a single level for the batch cycle, as
described in paragraph (d)(3)(i) of this section, an owner or operator
may establish separate levels for each batch emission episode, or
portion thereof, selected to be controlled. Each level shall be
determined as specified in paragraphs (d)(3)(i)(A) and (d)(3)(i)(B) of
this section.
(iii) The batch cycle shall be defined in the Notification of
Compliance Status, as specified in Sec. 63.1419(e)(5). Said definition
shall include an identification of each batch emission episode. The
definition of batch cycle shall also include the information required
to determine parameter monitoring compliance for partial batch cycles
(i.e., when part of a batch cycle is accomplished during two different
operating days) for those parameters averaged on a batch cycle daily
average basis.
(e) Establishment of parameter monitoring levels based on
performance tests, engineering assessments, and/or manufacturer's
recommendations. Parameter monitoring levels may be established based
on the parameter values measured during the performance test
supplemented by engineering assessments and/or manufacturer's
recommendations. Performance testing is not required to be conducted
over the entire range of expected parameter values.
(f) [Reserved]
(g) Alternative monitoring parameters. An owner or operator may
request approval to monitor parameters other than those required by
paragraph (b) of this section. The request shall be submitted according
to the procedures specified in Sec. 63.1419(f). Approval shall be
requested if the owner or operator:
(1) Uses a control device other than those included in paragraph
(b) of this section; or
(2) Uses one of the control devices included in paragraph (b) of
this section, but seeks to monitor a parameter other than those
specified in Table 4 of this subpart and paragraph (b) of this section.
(h) Monitoring of bypass lines. Owners or operators using a vent
system that contains bypass lines that could divert emissions away from
a control device used to comply with the provisions of this subpart
shall comply with either paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this section.
Equipment such as low leg drains, high point bleeds, analyzer vents,
open-ended valves or lines, and pressure relief valves needed for
safety purposes are not subject to this paragraph (h):
[[Page 68888]]
(1) Properly install, maintain, and operate a flow indicator that
takes a reading at least once every 15 minutes. Records shall be
generated as specified in Sec. 63.1408(e)(3). The flow indicator shall
be installed at the entrance to any bypass line that could divert
emissions away from the control device and to the atmosphere; or
(2) Secure the bypass line damper or valve in the non-diverting
position with a car-seal or a lock-and-key type configuration. A visual
inspection of the seal or closure mechanism shall be performed at least
once every month to ensure that the damper or valve is maintained in
the non-diverting position and emissions are not diverted through the
bypass line. Records shall be generated as specified in
Sec. 63.1408(e)(4).
(i) Monitoring for the alternative standards. For control devices
that are used to comply with the provisions of Sec. 63.1404(c),
Sec. 63.1405(f), Sec. 63.1406(d), or Sec. 63.1407(d), the owner or
operator shall monitor and record the outlet organic HAP concentration
every 15 minutes during the period in which the device is functioning
in achieving the HAP removal required by this subpart. Continuous
monitoring of outlet organic HAP concentration shall be accomplished
using an FTIR (Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy) instrument
following Method PS-15 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix B.
(j) Exceedances of operating parameters. An exceedance of an
operating parameter is defined as one of the following:
(1) If the parameter, averaged over the operating day or block, is
below a minimum value established during the initial compliance
demonstration.
(2) If the parameter, averaged over the operating day or block, is
above the maximum value established during the initial compliance
demonstration.
(3) If all flames at the pilot light of a flare are absent or the
monitor is not working.
(k) Excursions. Excursions are defined by either of the two cases
listed in paragraph (k)(1) or (k)(2) of this section.
(1) When the period of control device operation is 4 hours or
greater in an operating day and monitoring data are insufficient to
constitute a valid hour of data, as defined in paragraph (k)(3) of this
section, for at least 75 percent of the operating hours.
(2) When the period of control device operation is less than 4
hours in an operating day and more than one of the hours during the
period of operation does not constitute a valid hour of data due to
insufficient monitoring data.
(3) Monitoring data are insufficient to constitute a valid hour of
data, as used in paragraphs (k)(1) and (k)(2) of this section, if
measured values are unavailable for any of the 15-minute periods within
the hour. For data compression systems approved under
Sec. 63.1419(g)(3), monitoring data are insufficient to calculate a
valid hour of data if there are less than four data measurements made
during the hour.
(l) Violations. Exceedances of parameters monitored according to
the provisions of paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(4) through (b)(7)
of this section or excursions as defined in paragraph (j) of this
section constitute violations of the operating limit, except as
specified in paragraph (l)(1) of this section. Exceedances of the
condenser outlet gas temperature limit monitored according to the
provisions of paragraph (b)(3) of this section or exceedances of the
outlet concentrations monitored according to the provisions of
paragraph (b)(8) of this section constitute violations of the emission
limit, except as specified in paragraph (l)(1) of this section.
Exceedances of the emission limit monitored according to the procedures
specified in Sec. 63.1417(e)(2) and paragraph (i) of this section
constitute violations of the emission limit, except as specified in
paragraph (l)(1) of this section. Exceedances of the outlet
concentrations monitored according to the provisions of paragraph (i)
of this section constitute violations of the emission limit, as
specified in paragraphs (l)(1) and (l)(2) of this section.
(1) If the daily average value of a monitored parameter is above
the maximum level or below the minimum level established, or if
monitoring data cannot be collected during monitoring device
calibration check or monitoring device malfunction, or if monitoring
data are not collected during periods of start-up, shutdown, or
malfunction, or if monitoring data are not collected during periods of
nonoperation of the affected source or portion thereof (resulting in
cessation of the emissions to which the monitoring applies), but the
affected source is operated during the periods of start-up, shutdown,
or malfunction in accordance with the affected source's Start-up,
Shutdown, and Malfunction Plan, then the event shall not be considered
a violation.
(2) Except as provided in paragraph (l)(1) of this section,
exceedances of the 20 ppmv organic HAP outlet emission limit, averaged
over the operating day, will result in no more than one violation per
day per control device.
(m) Monitoring for emission limits. The owner or operator of any
affected source complying with the kilogram of HAP per megagram of
product emission limit specified in Sec. 63.1406 shall demonstrate
continuous compliance using the procedures specified in
Sec. 63.1417(e)(2). When the rolling average monthly emission rate or
the 12-month rolling average monthly emission rate, as appropriate,
exceeds the specified emission limit, a violation of the emission limit
has occurred.
Sec. 63.1419 General recordkeeping and reporting requirements.
(a) Data retention. Unless otherwise specified in this subpart,
each owner or operator of an affected source shall keep copies of all
applicable records and reports required by this subpart for at least 5
years, as specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, with the
exception listed in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(1) All applicable records shall be maintained in such a manner
that they can be readily accessed. The most recent 6 months of records
shall be retained on site or shall be accessible from a central
location by computer or other means that provides access within 2 hours
after a request. The remaining 4 and one-half years of records may be
retained offsite. Records may be maintained in hard copy or computer-
readable form including, but not limited to, on paper, microfilm,
computer, floppy disk, CD-ROM, optical disc, magnetic tape, or
microfiche.
(2) If an owner or operator submits copies of reports to the
appropriate EPA Regional Office, the owner or operator is not required
to maintain copies of reports. If the EPA Regional Office has waived
the requirement of Sec. 63.10(a)(4)(ii) for submittal of copies of
reports, the owner or operator is not required to maintain copies of
those reports.
(b) Requirements of subpart A of this part. The owner or operator
of an affected source shall comply with the applicable recordkeeping
and reporting requirements in subpart A of this part as specified in
Table 1 of this subpart. These requirements include, but are not
limited to, the requirements specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2)
of this section.
(1) Start-up, shutdown, and malfunction plan. The owner or operator
of an affected source shall develop and implement a written start-up,
shutdown, and malfunction plan as specified in Sec. 63.6(e)(3). This
plan shall describe, in detail, procedures for operating and
maintaining the affected source during periods of start-up, shutdown,
and malfunction and a program for corrective action for malfunctioning
process and air
[[Page 68889]]
pollution control equipment used to comply with this subpart. A
provision for ceasing to collect, during a start-up, shutdown, or
malfunction, monitoring data that would otherwise be required by the
provisions of this subpart may be included in the start-up, shutdown,
and malfunction plan only if the owner or operator can demonstrate that
the monitoring system could be damaged or destroyed if it were not shut
down during the start-up, shutdown, or malfunction. The affected source
shall keep the start-up, shutdown, and malfunction plan on-site.
Records associated with the plan shall be kept as specified in
paragraphs (b)(1)(i)(A) through (b)(1)(i)(C) of this section. Reports
related to the plan shall be submitted as specified in paragraph
(b)(1)(ii) of this section.
(i) Records of start-up, shutdown, and malfunction. The owner or
operator shall keep the records specified in paragraphs (b)(1)(i)(A)
through (b)(1)(i)(C) of this section.
(A) Records of the occurrence and duration of each start-up,
shutdown, and malfunction of operation of process equipment or control
devices or recovery devices or continuous monitoring systems used to
comply with this subpart during which excess emissions (as defined in
Sec. 63.1400(j)(4)) occur.
(B) For each start-up, shutdown, or malfunction during which excess
emissions (as defined in Sec. 63.1400(j)(4)) occur, records that the
procedures specified in the affected source's start-up, shutdown, and
malfunction plan were followed, and documentation of actions taken that
are not consistent with the plan. For example, if a start-up, shutdown,
and malfunction plan includes procedures for routing a control device
to a backup control device (e.g., a halogenated stream could be routed
to a flare during periods when the primary control device is out of
service), records shall be kept of whether the plan was followed. These
records may take the form of a ``checklist,'' or other form of
recordkeeping that confirms conformance with the start-up shutdown, and
malfunction plan for the event.
(C) Records specified in paragraphs (b)(1)(i)(A) through
(b)(1)(i)(B) of this section are not required if they pertain solely to
Group 2 emission points.
(ii) Reports of start-up, shutdown, and malfunction. For the
purposes of this subpart, the semiannual start-up, shutdown, and
malfunction reports shall be submitted on the same schedule as the
Periodic Reports required under paragraph (e)(6) of this section
instead of being submitted on the schedule specified in
Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(i). Said reports shall include the information
specified in paragraphs (b)(1)(i)(A) through (b)(1)(i)(B) of this
section and shall contain the name, title, and signature of the owner
or operator or other responsible official who is certifying its
accuracy.
(2) Application for approval of construction or reconstruction. For
new affected sources, each owner or operator shall comply with the
provisions in Sec. 63.5 regarding construction and reconstruction,
excluding the provisions specified in Sec. 63.5(d)(1)(ii)(H),
(d)(1)(iii), (d)(2), and (d)(3)(ii).
(c) [Reserved]
(d) Recordkeeping and documentation. Owners or operators required
to comply with Sec. 63.1418 and, therefore, required to keep continuous
records shall keep records as specified in paragraphs (d)(1) through
(d)(7) of this section, unless an alternative recordkeeping system has
been requested and approved as specified in paragraph (g) or (h) of
this section. If a monitoring plan for storage vessels pursuant to
Sec. 63.1404(d)(9) requires continuous records, the monitoring plan
shall specify which provisions, if any, of paragraphs (d)(1) through
(d)(7) of this section apply. As described in Sec. 63.1404(d)(9),
certain storage vessels are not required to comply with Sec. 63.1418
and, therefore, are not required to keep continuous records as
specified in this paragraph (d). Owners and operators of such storage
vessels shall keep records as specified in the monitoring plan required
by Sec. 63.1404(d)(9). Paragraphs (d)(8) and (d)(9) of this section
specify documentation requirements.
(1) The monitoring system shall measure data values at least once
every 15 minutes.
(2) The owner or operator shall record either each measured data
value or average values for 1 hour or shorter periods calculated from
all measured data values during each period. If values are measured
more frequently than once per minute, a single value for each minute
may be used to calculate the hourly (or shorter period) average instead
of all measured values. Owners or operators of batch process vents
shall record each measured data value; if values are measured more
frequently than once per minute, a single value for each minute may be
recorded instead of all measured values.
(3) Daily average, batch cycle daily average, or block average
values of each continuously monitored parameter shall be calculated for
each operating day as specified in paragraphs (d)(3)(i) through
(d)(3)(ii) of this section, except as specified in paragraphs (d)(6)
and (d)(7) of this section. The option of conducting parameter
monitoring for batch process vents on a batch cycle daily average basis
or a block average basis is described in Sec. 63.1408(c).
(i) The daily average value, batch cycle daily average, or block
average shall be calculated as the average of all parameter values
recorded during the operating day, or batch cycle, as appropriate,
except as specified in paragraph (d)(7) of this section. For batch
process vents, only parameter values recorded during those batch
emission episodes, or portions thereof, in the batch cycle that the
owner or operator has chosen to control shall be used to calculate the
average. The calculated average shall cover a 24-hour period if
operation is continuous, or the number of hours of operation per
operating day if operation is not continuous for daily average values
or batch cycle daily average values. The calculated average shall cover
the entire period of the batch cycle for block average values. As
specified in Sec. 63.1418(d)(3)(iii), the owner or operator shall
provide the information needed to calculate batch cycle daily averages
for operating days that include partial batch cycles.
(ii) The operating day shall be the period the owner or operator
specifies in the operating permit or the Notification of Compliance
Status for purposes of determining daily average values or batch cycle
daily average values of monitored parameters. The block shall be the
entire period of the batch cycle, as specified by the owner or operator
in the operating permit or the Notification of Compliance Status for
purposes of determining block average values of monitored parameters.
(4) [Reserved]
(5) [Reserved]
(6) Records required when all recorded values are within the
established limits. If all recorded values for a monitored parameter
during an operating day or block are above the minimum level or below
the maximum level established in the Notification of Compliance Status
or operating permit, the owner or operator may record that all values
were above the minimum level or below the maximum level rather than
calculating and recording a daily average, or block average, for that
operating day. For these operating days or blocks, the records required
in paragraph (d)(2) of this section shall also be retained for 5 years.
(7) Monitoring data recorded during periods identified in
paragraphs (d)(7)(i) through (d)(7)(v) of this section shall not
[[Page 68890]]
be included in any average computed under this subpart. Records shall
be kept of the times and durations of all such periods and any other
periods during process or control device or recovery device operation
when monitors are not operating:
(i) Monitoring system breakdowns, repairs, calibration checks, and
zero (low-level) and high-level adjustments;
(ii) Start-ups;
(iii) Shutdowns;
(iv) Malfunctions; and
(v) Periods of non-operation of the affected source (or portion
thereof), resulting in cessation of the emissions to which the
monitoring applies.
(8) For continuous monitoring systems used to comply with this
subpart, records documenting the completion of calibration checks, and
records documenting the maintenance of continuous monitoring systems
that are specified in the manufacturer's instructions or that are
specified in other written procedures that provide adequate assurance
that the equipment would reasonably be expected to monitor accurately.
(9) The owner or operator of an affected source granted a waiver
under Sec. 63.10(f) shall maintain any information demonstrating
whether an affected source is meeting the requirements for a waiver of
recordkeeping or reporting requirements.
(e) Reporting and notification. In addition to the reports and
notifications required by subpart A of this part as specified in Table
1 of this subpart, the owner or operator of an affected source shall
prepare and submit the reports listed in paragraphs (e)(3) through
(e)(8) of this section, as applicable. All reports required by this
subpart, and the schedule for their submittal, are listed in Table 6 of
this subpart.
(1) Owners and operators shall not be in violation of the reporting
requirements of this paragraph (e) for failing to submit information
required to be included in a specified report if the owner or operator
meets the requirements in paragraphs (e)(1)(i) through (e)(1)(iii) of
this section. Examples of circumstances where this paragraph (e)(1) may
apply include information related to newly-added equipment or emission
points, changes in the process, changes in equipment required or
utilized for compliance with the requirements of this subpart, or
changes in methods or equipment for monitoring, recordkeeping, or
reporting:
(i) The information was not known in time for inclusion in the
report specified by this subpart;
(ii) The owner or operator has been diligent in obtaining the
information; and
(iii) The owner or operator submits a report according to the
provisions of paragraphs (e)(1)(iii)(A) through (e)(1)(iii)(C) of this
section.
(A) If this subpart expressly provides for supplements to the
report in which the information is required, the owner or operator
shall submit the information as a supplement to that report. The
information shall be submitted no later than 60 days after it is
obtained, unless otherwise specified in this subpart.
(B) If this subpart does not expressly provide for supplements, but
the owner or operator must submit a request for revision of an
operating permit pursuant to part 70 or part 71, due to circumstances
to which the information pertains, the owner or operator shall submit
the information with the request for revision to the operating permit.
(C) In any case not addressed by paragraph (e)(1)(iii)(A) or
(e)(1)(iii)(B) of this section, the owner or operator shall submit the
information with the first Periodic Report, as required by this
subpart, which has a submission deadline at least 60 days after the
information is obtained.
(2) All reports required under this subpart shall be sent to the
Administrator at the appropriate address listed in Sec. 63.13. If
acceptable to both the Administrator and the owner or operator of an
affected source, reports may be submitted on electronic media.
(3) Precompliance Report. Owners or operators of affected sources
requesting an extension for compliance; or requesting approval to use
alternative monitoring parameters, alternative continuous monitoring
and recordkeeping, or alternative controls; requesting approval to use
engineering assessment to estimate emissions from a batch emissions
episode, as described in Sec. 63.1417(e)(3)(vi)(A)(3); or establishing
parameter monitoring levels according to the procedures contained in
Sec. 63.1418(c)(1) or (e); or following the procedures in
Sec. 63.1417(e)(2) shall submit a Precompliance Report according to the
schedule described in paragraph (e)(3)(i) of this section. The
Precompliance Report shall contain the information specified in
paragraphs (e)(3)(ii) through (e)(3)(viii) of this section, as
appropriate. If required, supplements to the Precompliance Report shall
be submitted as specified in paragraph (e)(3)(xi) of this section.
(i) Submittal dates. The Precompliance Report shall be submitted to
the Administrator no later than 12 months prior to the compliance date.
Unless the Administrator objects to a request submitted in the
Precompliance Report within 45 days after its receipt, the request
shall be deemed approved. For new affected sources, the Precompliance
Report shall be submitted to the Administrator with the application for
approval of construction or reconstruction required in paragraph (b)(2)
of this section. Supplements to the Precompliance Report may be
submitted as specified in paragraph (e)(3)(xi) of this section.
(ii) A request for an extension for compliance, as specified in
Sec. 63.1401(e), may be submitted in the Precompliance Report. The
request for a compliance extension will include the data outlined in
Sec. 63.6(i)(6)(i)(A), (B), and (D), as required in Sec. 63.1401(e)(1).
(iii) The alternative monitoring parameter information required in
paragraph (f) of this section shall be submitted in the Precompliance
Report if, for any emission point, the owner or operator of an affected
source seeks to comply through the use of a control technique other
than those for which monitoring parameters are specified in this
subpart or in subpart G of this part or seeks to comply by monitoring a
different parameter than those specified in this subpart or in subpart
G of this part.
(iv) If the affected source seeks to comply using alternative
continuous monitoring and recordkeeping as specified in paragraph (g)
of this section, the information requested in paragraph (e)(3)(iv)(A)
or (e)(3)(iv)(B) of this section shall be submitted in the
Precompliance Report:
(A) The owner or operator shall submit notification of the intent
to use the provisions specified in paragraph (g) of this section; or
(B) The owner or operator shall submit a request for approval to
use alternative continuous monitoring and recordkeeping provisions as
specified in paragraph (g) of this section.
(v) The owner or operator shall report the intent to use
alternative controls to comply with the provisions of this subpart in
the Precompliance Report. Alternative controls must be deemed by the
Administrator to be equivalent to the controls required by the
standard, under the procedures outlined in Sec. 63.6(g).
(vi) If an owner or operator demonstrates that the emissions
estimation equations contained in Sec. 63.1417(e)(3) are inappropriate
as specified in Sec. 63.1417(e)(3)(vi)(A)(3), the information required
by Sec. 63.1417(e)(3)(vi)(C)(2) shall be submitted in the Precompliance
Report.
(vii) If an owner or operator establishes parameter monitoring
levels
[[Page 68891]]
according to the procedures contained in Sec. 63.1418(c)(1) or (e), the
following information shall be submitted in the Precompliance Report:
(A) Identification of which procedures (i.e., Sec. 63.1418(c)(1) or
(e)) are to be used; and
(B) A description of how the parameter monitoring level is to be
established. If the procedures in Sec. 63.1418(e) are to be used, a
description of how performance test data will be used shall be
included.
(viii) If an owner or operator is complying with the emission limit
specified in Sec. 63.1406 following the procedures specified in
Sec. 63.1417(e)(2), the information specified in
Sec. 63.1417(e)(2)(iii) shall be submitted in the Precompliance Report.
(ix) [Reserved]
(x) [Reserved]
(xi) Supplements to the Precompliance Report may be submitted as
specified in paragraph (e)(3)(xi)(A) or (e)(3)(xi)(B) of this section.
Unless the Administrator objects to a request submitted in a supplement
to the Precompliance Report within 45 days after its receipt, the
request shall be deemed approved.
(A) Supplements to the Precompliance Report may be submitted to
clarify or modify information previously submitted.
(B) Supplements to the Precompliance Report may be submitted to
request approval to use alternative monitoring parameters, as specified
in paragraph (e)(3)(iii) of this section; alternative continuous
monitoring and recordkeeping, as specified in paragraph (e)(3)(iv) of
this section; alternative controls, as specified in paragraph (e)(3)(v)
of this section; engineering assessment to estimate emissions from a
batch emissions episode, as specified in paragraph (e)(3)(vi) of this
section; or to establish parameter monitoring levels according to the
procedures contained in Sec. 63.1418(c)(1) or (e), as specified in
paragraph (e)(3)(vii) of this section.
(4) [Reserved]
(5) Notification of Compliance Status. For existing and new
affected sources, a Notification of Compliance Status shall be
submitted within 150 days after the compliance dates specified in
Sec. 63.1401. For equipment leaks subject to Sec. 63.1415, the owner or
operator shall submit the information required in Sec. 63.182(c) in the
Notification of Compliance Status. For all other emission points, the
Notification of Compliance Status shall contain the information listed
in paragraphs (e)(5)(i) through (e)(5)(vi) of this section.
(i) The results of any emission point group determinations,
performance tests, design evaluations, inspections, continuous
monitoring system performance evaluations, any other information used
to demonstrate compliance, and any other information, as appropriate,
required to be included in the Notification of Compliance Status under
Sec. 63.1401(l); under Sec. 63.122, as referred to in Sec. 63.1404, and
Sec. 63.1404 for storage vessels; under Sec. 63.117, as referred to in
Sec. 63.1405, for continuous process vents; under Sec. 63.146, as
referred to in Sec. 63.1414, for process wastewater; and Sec. 63.1409
for batch process vents. In addition, each owner or operator shall
comply with paragraphs (e)(5)(i)(A) and (e)(5)(i)(B) of this section.
(A) For performance tests, group determinations, and estimates of
emissions that are based on measurements, the Notification of
Compliance Status shall include one complete test report, as described
in paragraph (e)(5)(i)(B) of this section, for each test method used
for a particular kind of emission point. For additional tests performed
for the same kind of emission point using the same method, the results
and any other required information shall be submitted, but a complete
test report is not required.
(B) A complete test report shall include a brief process
description, sampling site description, description of sampling and
analysis procedures and any modifications to standard procedures,
quality assurance procedures, record of operating conditions during the
test, record of preparation of standards, record of calibrations, raw
data sheets for field sampling, raw data sheets for field and
laboratory analyses, documentation of calculations, and any other
information required by the test method.
(ii) For each monitored parameter for which a maximum or minimum
level is required to be established, the Notification of Compliance
Status shall contain the information specified in paragraphs
(e)(5)(ii)(A) through (e)(5)(ii)(D) of this section, unless this
information has been established and provided in the operating permit.
Further, as described in Sec. 63.1404(d)(9), for those storage vessels
for which the monitoring plan required by Sec. 63.1404(d)(9) specifies
compliance with the provisions of Sec. 63.1418, the owner or operator
shall provide the information specified in paragraphs (e)(5)(ii)(A)
through (e)(5)(ii)(D) of this section for each monitored parameter,
unless this information has been established and provided in the
operating permit. For those storage vessels for which the monitoring
plan required by Sec. 63.1404(d)(9) does not require compliance with
the provisions of Sec. 63.1418, the owner or operator shall provide the
information specified in Sec. 63.120(d)(3) as part of the Notification
of Compliance Status, unless this information has been established and
provided in the operating permit.
(A) The required information shall include the specific maximum or
minimum level of the monitored parameter(s) for each emission point.
(B) The required information shall include the rationale for the
specific maximum or minimum level for each parameter for each emission
point, including any data and calculations used to develop the level
and a description of why the level indicates proper operation of the
control device.
(C) The required information shall include a definition of the
affected source's operating day, as specified in paragraph (d)(3)(ii)
of this section, for purposes of determining daily average values or
batch cycle daily average values of monitored parameters. The required
information shall include a definition of the affected source's
block(s), as specified in paragraph (d)(3)(ii) of this section, for
purposes of determining block average values of monitored parameters.
(D) For batch process vents, the required information shall include
a definition of each batch cycle that requires the control of one or
more batch emission episodes during the cycle, as specified in
Sec. 63.1417(e)(5)(iii) and Sec. 63.1418(d)(3)(iii).
(iii) The determination of applicability for flexible operation
units as specified in Sec. 63.1400(f)(6).
(iv) The parameter monitoring levels for flexible operation units,
and the basis on which these levels were selected, or a demonstration
that these levels are appropriate at all times, as specified in
Sec. 63.1400(f)(7).
(v) The results for each predominant use determination for storage
vessels belonging to an affected source subject to this subpart that is
made under Sec. 63.1400(g)(6).
(vi) Notification that the owner or operator has elected to comply
with paragraph (h) of this section.
(vii) Notification that an affected source is exempt from the
equipment leak provisions of Sec. 63.1415 according to the provisions
of Sec. 63.1403(c). Notification shall include the information
specified in Sec. 63.1403(c)(2)(i).
(viii) If any emission point is subject to this subpart and to
other standards as specified in Sec. 63.1401 and if the provisions of
Sec. 63.1401 of this subpart allow the owner or operator to choose
which testing, monitoring, reporting,
[[Page 68892]]
and recordkeeping provisions will be followed, then the Notification of
Compliance Status shall indicate which rule's requirements will be
followed for testing, monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping.
(ix) An owner or operator who transfers a Group 1 wastewater stream
or residual removed from a Group 1 wastewater stream for treatment
pursuant to Sec. 63.132(g) shall include in the Notification of
Compliance Status the name and location of the transferee and a
description of the Group 1 wastewater stream or residual sent to the
treatment facility.
(6) Periodic Reports. For existing and new affected sources, each
owner or operator shall submit Periodic Reports as specified in
paragraph (e)(6)(i) of this section. In addition, for equipment leaks
subject to Sec. 63.1415, the owner or operator shall submit the
information specified in Sec. 63.182(d), and for heat exchange systems
subject to Sec. 63.1413, the owner or operator shall submit the
information specified in Sec. 63.104(f)(2). Section 63.1418 shall
govern the use of monitoring data to determine compliance for emissions
points required to apply controls by the provisions of this subpart,
with the following exception: As discussed in Sec. 63.1404(d)(9), for
storage vessels to which the provisions of Sec. 63.1418 do not apply as
specified in the monitoring plan required by Sec. 63.1404(d)(9), the
owner or operator is required to comply with the requirements set out
in the monitoring plan and monitoring records may be used to determine
compliance.
(i) Except as specified in paragraph (e)(6)(xii) of this section, a
report containing the information in paragraph (e)(6)(ii) of this
section or containing the information in paragraphs (e)(6)(iii) through
(e)(6)(xi) of this section, as appropriate, shall be submitted
semiannually no later than 60 days after the end of each 180 day
period. The first report shall be submitted no later than 240 days
after the date the Notification of Compliance Status is due and shall
cover the 6-month period beginning on the date the Notification of
Compliance Status is due. Subsequent reports shall cover each preceding
6-month period.
(ii) If none of the compliance exceptions specified in paragraphs
(e)(6)(iii) through (e)(6)(xi) of this section occurred during the 6-
month period, the Periodic Report required by paragraph (e)(6)(i) of
this section shall be a statement that the affected source was in
compliance for the preceding 6-month period and no activities specified
in paragraphs (e)(6)(iii) through (e)(6)(xi) of this section occurred
during the preceding 6-month period.
(iii) For an owner or operator of an affected source complying with
the provisions of Secs. 63.1404 through 63.1414 for any emission point,
Periodic Reports shall include:
(A) All information specified in Sec. 63.122 for storage vessels;
Secs. 63.117 and 63.118 for continuous process vents; Sec. 63.1409 for
batch process vents; Sec. 63.104 for heat exchange systems; and
Sec. 63.146 for process wastewater;
(B) The daily average values, batch cycle daily average values, or
block average values of monitored parameters for exceedances of
operating parameters, as specified in Sec. 63.1418(j), and for
excursions, as specified in Sec. 63.1418(k). For excursions, as
specified in Sec. 63.1418(k), the duration of periods when monitoring
data were not collected shall be specified;
(C) The periods when monitoring data were not collected shall be
specified;
(D) The information in paragraphs (e)(6)(iii)(D)(1) through
(e)(6)(iii)(D)(4) of this section, as applicable:
(1) [Reserved]
(2) Notification if a process change is made such that the group
status of any emission point changes from Group 2 to Group 1. The owner
or operator is not required to submit a notification of a process
change if that process change caused the group status of an emission
point to change from Group 1 to Group 2. However, until the owner or
operator notifies the Administrator that the group status of an
emission point has changed from Group 1 to Group 2, the owner or
operator is required to continue to comply with the Group 1
requirements for that emission point.
(3) Notification if one or more emission point(s) or one or more
APPU is added to an affected source. The owner or operator shall submit
the information contained in paragraphs (e)(6)(iii)(D)(3)(i) through
(e)(6)(iii)(D)(3)(ii) of this section:
(i) A description of the addition to the affected source;
(ii) Notification of the group status of the additional emission
point, if appropriate, or notification of all emission points in the
added APPU.
(4) For process wastewater streams sent for treatment pursuant to
Sec. 63.132(g), reports of changes in the identity of the treatment
facility or transferee.
(E) The information in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section for
reports of start-up, shutdown, and malfunction.
(iv) [Reserved]
(v) If any performance tests are reported in a Periodic Report, the
following information shall be included:
(A) One complete test report shall be submitted for each test
method used for a particular kind of emission point tested. A complete
test report shall contain the information specified in paragraph
(e)(5)(i)(B) of this section.
(B) For additional tests performed for the same kind of emission
point using the same method, results and any other information required
shall be submitted, but a complete test report is not required.
(vi) The Periodic Report shall include the results for each change
made to a primary product determination for an amino/phenolic resin
made under Sec. 63.1400(f)(6).
(vii) The Periodic Report shall include the results for each change
made to a predominant use determination for a storage vessel belonging
to an affected source subject to this subpart that is made under
Sec. 63.1400(g)(6).
(viii) [Reserved]
(ix) The Periodic Report required by Sec. 63.1415(p) may be
submitted as part of the Periodic Report required by paragraph (e)(6)
of this section.
(x) Notification that the owner or operator has elected to comply
with paragraph (h) of this section.
(xi) Notification that the owner or operator has elected to not
retain the daily average, batch cycle daily average, or block average
values, as appropriate, as specified in paragraph (h)(2)(i) of this
section.
(xii) The owner or operator of an affected source shall submit
quarterly reports for particular emission points as specified in
paragraphs (e)(6)(xii)(A) through (e)(6)(xii)(D) of this section.
(A) The owner or operator of an affected source shall submit
quarterly reports for a period of 1 year for an emission point if the
Administrator requests the owner or operator to submit quarterly
reports for the emission point.
(B) The quarterly reports shall include all information specified
in paragraphs (e)(6)(iii) through (e)(6)(xi) of this section applicable
to the emission point for which quarterly reporting is required under
paragraph (e)(6)(xii)(A) of this section. Information applicable to
other emission points within the affected source shall be submitted in
the semiannual reports required under paragraph (e)(6)(i) of this
section.
(C) Quarterly reports shall be submitted no later than 60 days
after the end of each quarter.
(D) After quarterly reports have been submitted for an emission
point for 1 year, the owner or operator may return to semiannual
reporting for the emission point unless the Administrator requests the
owner or operator to continue to submit quarterly reports.
[[Page 68893]]
(7) Other reports. Other reports shall be submitted as specified in
paragraphs (e)(7)(i) through (e)(7)(v) of this section.
(i) For storage vessels, the notifications of inspections required
by Sec. 63.1404 shall be submitted as specified in Sec. 63.122(h)(1)
and (h)(2).
(ii) The site-specific test plan required by Sec. 63.1417(a)(3)(v)
shall be submitted no later than 90 days before the planned date for
the performance test. Unless the Administrator requests changes to the
site-specific test plan within 45 days after its receipt, the site-
specific test plan shall be deemed approved.
(iii) When the conditions of Sec. 63.1400(f)(3)(i) or (f)(4)(i) are
met, reports of changes to the primary product for an APPU or process
unit as required by Sec. 63.1400(f)(3)(ii) or (f)(4)(ii), respectively,
shall be submitted.
(iv) Owners or operators of APPU or emission points (other than
equipment leak components subject to Sec. 63.1415) that are subject to
Sec. 63.1400(i)(1) or (i)(2) shall submit a report as specified in
paragraphs (e)(7)(iv)(A) and (B) of this section.
(A) Reports shall include:
(1) A description of the process change or addition, as
appropriate;
(2) The planned start-up date and the appropriate compliance date,
according to Sec. 63.1400(i)(1) or (2); and
(3) Identification of the emission points (except equipment leak
components subject to Sec. 63.1415), and group status if applicable,
specified in paragraphs (e)(7)(iv)(A)(3)(i) through
(e)(7)(iv)(A)(3)(iii) of this section, as applicable.
(i) All the emission points in the added APPU as described in
Sec. 63.1400(i)(1).
(ii) All the emission points in an affected source designated as a
new affected source under Sec. 63.1400(i)(2)(i).
(iii) All the added or created emission points as described in
Sec. 63.1400(i)(2)(ii).
(4) If the owner or operator wishes to request approval to use
alternative monitoring parameters, alternative continuous monitoring or
recordkeeping, alternative controls, engineering assessment to estimate
emissions from a batch emissions episode, or wishes to establish
parameter monitoring levels according to the procedures contained in
Sec. 63.1418(c)(1) or (e), a Precompliance Report shall be submitted in
accordance with paragraph (e)(7)(iv)(B) of this section.
(B) Reports shall be submitted as specified in paragraphs
(e)(7)(iv)(B)(1) through (e)(7)(iv)(B)(3) of this section, as
appropriate.
(1) Owners or operators of an added APPU subject to
Sec. 63.1400(i)(1) shall submit a report no later than 180 days prior
to the compliance date for the APPU.
(2) Owners or operators of an affected source designated as a new
affected source under Sec. 63.1400(i)(2)(i) shall submit a report no
later than 180 days prior to the compliance date for the affected
source.
(3) Owners or operators of any emission point (other than equipment
leak components subject to Sec. 63.1415) subject to
Sec. 63.1400(i)(2)(ii) shall submit a report no later than 180 days
prior to the compliance date for those emission points.
(v) The information specified in Sec. 63.1417(a)(1) shall be
submitted when a small control device becomes a large control device,
as specified in paragraphs (e)(7)(v)(A) through (e)(7)(v)(B) of this
section.
(A) Notification that a small control device has become a large
control device and the site-specific test plan shall be submitted
within 60 days of the date the small control device becomes a large
control device. The site-specific test plan shall include the
information specified in Sec. 63.1417(a)(3)(v). Approval of the site-
specific test plan shall follow paragraph (e)(7)(ii) of this section.
(B) Results of the performance test required by Sec. 63.1417(a)(1)
shall be submitted within 150 days of the date the small control device
becomes a large control device.
(8) Operating permit application. An owner or operator who submits
an operating permit application instead of a Precompliance Report shall
submit the information specified in paragraph (e)(3) of this section,
Precompliance Report, as applicable.
(f) Alternative monitoring parameters. The owner or operator who
has been directed by any section of this subpart or any section of
another subpart referenced by this subpart, that expressly referenced
this paragraph (f) to set unique monitoring parameters, or who requests
approval to monitor a different parameter than those specified in
Sec. 63.1404 for storage vessels, Sec. 63.1405 for continuous process
vents, Sec. 63.1418 for batch process vents, or Sec. 63.1414 for
wastewater shall submit the information specified in paragraphs (f)(1)
through (f)(3) of this section in the Precompliance Report, as required
by paragraph (e)(3) of this section. The owner or operator shall retain
for a period of 5 years each record required by paragraphs (f)(1)
through (f)(3) of this section.
(1) The required information shall include a description of the
parameter(s) to be monitored to ensure the recovery device, control
device, or pollution prevention measure is operated in conformance with
its design and achieves the specified emission limit or percent
reduction, and an explanation of the criteria used to select the
parameter(s).
(2) The required information shall include a description of the
methods and procedures that will be used to demonstrate that the
parameter indicates proper operation, the schedule for this
demonstration, and a statement that the owner or operator will
establish a level for the monitored parameter as part of the
Notification of Compliance Status report required in paragraph (e)(5)
of this section, unless this information has already been included in
the operating permit application.
(3) The required information shall include a description of the
proposed monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting system, to include
the frequency and content of monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting.
Further, the rationale for the proposed monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting system shall be included if either condition in paragraph
(f)(3)(i) or (f)(3)(ii) of this section is met:
(i) If monitoring and recordkeeping is not continuous; or
(ii) If reports of daily average values will not be included in
Periodic Reports when the monitored parameter value is above the
maximum level or below the minimum level as established in the
operating permit or the Notification of Compliance Status.
(g) Alternative continuous monitoring and recordkeeping. An owner
or operator choosing not to implement the provisions specified in
Sec. 63.1405 for continuous process vents, Sec. 63.1418 for batch
process vents, or Sec. 63.1414 for wastewater, may instead request
approval to use alternative continuous monitoring and recordkeeping
provisions according to the procedures specified in paragraphs (g)(1)
through (g)(4) of this section. Requests shall be submitted in the
Precompliance Report as specified in paragraph (e)(3)(iv) of this
section, if not already included in the operating permit application,
and shall contain the information specified in paragraphs (g)(2)(ii)
and (g)(3)(ii) of this section, as applicable.
(1) The provisions in Sec. 63.8(f)(5)(i) shall govern the review
and approval of requests.
(2) An owner or operator of an affected source that does not have
an automated monitoring and recording system capable of measuring
parameter values at least once every 15 minutes and that does not
generate continuous
[[Page 68894]]
records may request approval to use a nonautomated system with less
frequent monitoring, in accordance with paragraphs (g)(2)(i) and
(g)(2)(ii) of this section.
(i) The requested system shall include manual reading and recording
of the value of the relevant operating parameter no less frequently
than once per hour. Daily average (or batch cycle daily average) values
shall be calculated from these hourly values and recorded.
(ii) The request shall contain:
(A) A description of the planned monitoring and recordkeeping
system;
(B) Documentation that the affected source does not have an
automated monitoring and recording system;
(C) Justification for requesting an alternative monitoring and
recordkeeping system; and
(D) Demonstration to the Administrator's satisfaction that the
proposed monitoring frequency is sufficient to represent control or
recovery device operating conditions, considering typical variability
of the specific process and control or recovery device operating
parameter being monitored.
(3) An owner or operator may request approval to use an automated
data compression recording system that does not record monitored
operating parameter values at a set frequency (for example, once every
15 minutes) but records all values that meet set criteria for variation
from previously recorded values, in accordance with paragraphs
(g)(3)(i) and (g)(3)(ii) of this section.
(i) The requested system shall be designed to:
(A) Measure the operating parameter value at least once every 15
minutes;
(B) Except for the monitoring of batch process vents, calculate
hourly average values each hour during periods of operation;
(C) Record the date and time when monitors are turned off or on;
(D) Recognize unchanging data that may indicate the monitor is not
functioning properly, alert the operator, and record the incident;
(E) Calculate daily average, batch cycle daily average, or block
average values of the monitored operating parameter based on all
measured data; and
(F) If the daily average is not an exceedance of the operating
parameter, as defined in Sec. 63.1418(j), the data for that operating
day may be converted to hourly average values and the four or more
individual records for each hour in the operating day may be discarded.
(ii) The request shall contain:
(A) A description of the monitoring system and data compression
recording system, including the criteria used to determine which
monitored values are recorded and retained;
(B) The method for calculating daily averages and batch cycle daily
averages; and
(C) A demonstration that the system meets all criteria in paragraph
(g)(3)(i) of this section.
(4) An owner or operator may request approval to use other
alternative monitoring systems according to the procedures specified in
Sec. 63.8(f)(4).
(h) Reduced recordkeeping program. For any parameter with respect
to any item of equipment, the owner or operator may implement the
recordkeeping requirements specified in paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of
this section as alternatives to the provisions specified in this
subpart for storage vessels, continuous process vents, batch process
vents, or wastewater. The owner or operator shall retain for a period
of 5 years each record required by paragraph (h)(1) or (h)(2) of this
section.
(1) The owner or operator may retain only the daily average, batch
cycle daily average or block average value, and is not required to
retain more frequent monitored operating parameter values, for a
monitored parameter with respect to an item of equipment, if the
requirements of paragraphs (h)(1)(i) through (h)(1)(vi) of this section
are met. An owner or operator electing to comply with the requirements
of paragraph (h)(1) of this section shall notify the Administrator in
the Notification of Compliance Status as specified in paragraph
(e)(5)(vi) of this section or, if the Notification of Compliance Status
has already been submitted, in the Periodic Report immediately
preceding implementation of the requirements of paragraph (h)(1) of
this section as specified in paragraph (e)(6)(x) of this section.
(i) The monitoring system is capable of detecting unrealistic or
impossible data during periods of operation other than start-ups,
shutdowns, or malfunctions (e.g., a temperature reading of -200 deg. C
on a boiler), and will alert the operator by alarm or other means. The
owner or operator shall record the occurrence. All instances of the
alarm or other alert in an operating day or block constitute a single
occurrence.
(ii) The monitoring system generates, updated at least hourly
throughout each operating day, a running average of the monitoring
values that have been obtained during that operating day or block, and
the capability to observe this running average is readily available to
the Administrator on-site during the operating day. The owner or
operator shall record the occurrence of any period meeting the criteria
in paragraphs (h)(1)(ii)(A) through (h)(1)(ii)(C) of this section. All
instances in an operating day or block constitute a single occurrence:
(A) The running average is above the maximum or below the minimum
established limits;
(B) The running average is based on at least six 1-hour average
values; and
(C) The running average reflects a period of operation other than a
start-up, shutdown, or malfunction.
(iii) The monitoring system is capable of detecting unchanging data
during periods of operation other than start-ups, shutdowns, or
malfunctions, except in circumstances where the presence of unchanging
data is the expected operating condition based on past experience
(e.g., pH in some scrubbers), and will alert the operator by alarm or
other means. The owner or operator shall record the occurrence. All
instances of the alarm or other alert in an operating day or block
constitute a single occurrence.
(iv) The monitoring system will alert the owner or operator by an
alarm or other means, if the running average parameter value calculated
under paragraph (h)(1)(ii) of this section reaches a set point that is
appropriately related to the established limit for the parameter that
is being monitored.
(v) The owner or operator shall verify the proper functioning of
the monitoring system, including its ability to comply with the
requirements of paragraph (h)(1) of this section, at the times
specified in paragraphs (h)(1)(v)(A) through (h)(1)(v)(C). The owner or
operator shall document that the required verifications occurred.
(A) Upon initial installation.
(B) Annually after initial installation.
(C) After any change to the programming or equipment constituting
the monitoring system, which might reasonably be expected to alter the
monitoring system's ability to comply with the requirements of this
section.
(vi) The owner or operator shall retain the records identified in
paragraphs (h)(1)(vi)(A) through (h)(1)(vi)(D) of this section.
(A) Identification of each parameter, for each item of equipment,
for which the owner or operator has elected to comply with the
requirements of paragraph (h) of this section.
(B) A description of the applicable monitoring system(s), and of
how compliance will be achieved with each requirement of paragraphs
(h)(1)(i) through (h)(1)(v) of this section. The description shall
identify the location and format (e.g., on-line storage, log
[[Page 68895]]
entries) for each required record. If the description changes, the
owner or operator shall retain both the current and the most recent
superseded description, as provided in paragraph (a) of this section,
except as provided in paragraph (h)(1)(vi)(D) of this section.
(C) A description, and the date, of any change to the monitoring
system that would reasonably be expected to impair its ability to
comply with the requirements of paragraph (h)(1) of this section.
(D) Owners and operators subject to paragraph (h)(1)(vi)(B) of this
section shall retain the current description of the monitoring system
as long as the description is current. The current description shall,
at all times, be retained on-site or be accessible from a central
location by computer or other means that provides access within 2 hours
after a request. The owner or operator shall retain all superseded
descriptions for at least 5 years after the date of their creation.
Superseded descriptions shall be retained on-site (or accessible from a
central location by computer or other means that provides access within
2 hours after a request) for at least 6 months after their creation.
Thereafter, superseded descriptions may be stored off-site.
(2) If an owner or operator has elected to implement the
requirements of paragraph (h)(1) of this section for a monitored
parameter with respect to an item of equipment and a period of 6
consecutive months has passed without an excursion as defined in
paragraph (h)(2)(iv) of this section, the owner or operator is no
longer required to record the daily average, batch cycle daily average,
or block average value for any operating day when the daily average,
batch cycle daily average, or block average value is less than the
maximum or greater than the minimum established limit. With approval by
the Administrator, monitoring data generated prior to the compliance
date of this subpart shall be credited toward the period of 6
consecutive months, if the parameter limit and the monitoring
accomplished during the period prior to the compliance date was
required and/or approved by the Administrator.
(i) If the owner or operator elects not to retain the daily
average, batch cycle daily average, or block average values, the owner
or operator shall notify the Administrator in the next Periodic Report
as specified in paragraph (e)(6)(xi) of this section. The notification
shall identify the parameter and unit of equipment.
(ii) If, on any operating day or during any block after the owner
or operator has ceased recording daily average, batch cycle daily
average, or block average values as provided in paragraph (h)(2) of
this section, there is an excursion as defined in paragraph (h)(2)(iv)
of this section, the owner or operator shall immediately resume
retaining the daily average, batch cycle daily average, or block
average value for each operating day and shall notify the Administrator
in the next Periodic Report. The owner or operator shall continue to
retain each daily average, batch cycle daily average, or block average
value until another period of 6 consecutive months has passed without
an excursion as defined in paragraph (h)(2)(iv) of this section.
(iii) The owner or operator shall retain the records specified in
paragraphs (h)(1)(i) through (h)(1)(iv) of this section, for the
duration specified in paragraph (h) of this section. For any calendar
week, if compliance with paragraphs (h)(1)(i) through (h)(1)(iv) of
this section does not result in retention of a record of at least one
occurrence or measured parameter value, the owner or operator shall
record and retain at least one parameter value during a period of
operation other than a start-up, shutdown, or malfunction.
(iv) For purposes of paragraph (h) of this section, an excursion
means that the daily average, batch cycle daily average, or block
average value of monitoring data for a parameter is greater than the
maximum, or less than the minimum established value, except that the
daily average, batch cycle daily average, or block average value during
any start-up, shutdown, or malfunction shall not be considered an
excursion for purposes of paragraph (h)(2) of this section, if the
owner or operator follows the applicable provisions of the start-up,
shutdown, and malfunction plan required by Sec. 63.6(e)(3).
Table 1 to Subpart OOO of Part 63--Applicability of General Provisions
to Subpart OOO Affected Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applies to
Reference subpart OOO Comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
63.1(a)(1)..................... Yes.............. Sec. 63.1402
specifies
definitions in
addition to or that
supersede
definitions in Sec.
63.2.
63.1(a)(2)..................... Yes..............
63.1(a)(3)..................... Yes.............. 63.1401(g) through
(l) and Sec.
63.160(b) identify
those standards
which overlap with
the requirements of
subparts OOO and H
of this part and
specify how
compliance shall be
achieved.
63.1(a)(4)..................... Yes.............. This subpart OOO
(this table)
specifies the
applicability of
each paragraph in
subpart A of this
part to this
subpart OOO.
63.1(a)(5)..................... No............... [Reserved].
63.1(a)(6)-63.1(a)(8).......... Yes. ....................
63.1(a)(9)..................... No............... [Reserved].
63.1(a)(10).................... Yes. ....................
63.1(a)(11).................... Yes. ....................
63.1(a)(12)-63.1(a)(14)........ Yes. ....................
63.1(b)(1)..................... No............... Sec. 63.1400(a)
contains specific
applicability
criteria.
63.1(b)(2)..................... Yes. ....................
63.1(b)(3)..................... No............... Sec. 63.1400(b)
provides
documentation
requirements for
APPUs not
considered affected
sources.
63.1(c)(1)..................... Yes.............. This subpart OOO
(this table)
specifies the
applicability of
each paragraph in
subpart A of this
part to this
subpart OOO.
63.1(c)(2)..................... No............... Area sources are not
subject to this
subpart OOO.
63.1(c)(3)..................... No............... [Reserved].
63.1(c)(4)..................... Yes. ....................
[[Page 68896]]
63.1(c)(5)..................... Yes.............. Except that affected
sources are not
required to submit
notifications
overridden by this
table.
63.1(d)........................ No............... [Reserved].
63.1(e)........................ Yes. ....................
63.2........................... Yes.............. Sec. 63.1402
specifies those
subpart A
definitions that
apply to this
subpart OOO.
63.3........................... Yes. ....................
63.4(a)(1)-63.4(a)(3).......... Yes. ....................
63.4(a)(4)..................... No............... [Reserved].
63.4(a)(5)..................... Yes. ....................
63.4(b)........................ Yes. ....................
63.4(c)........................ Yes. ....................
63.5(a)(1)..................... Yes.............. Except the terms
``source'' and
``stationary
source'' should be
interpreted as
having the same
meaning as
``affected
source.''
63.5(a)(2)..................... Yes. ....................
63.5(b)(1)..................... Yes.............. Except Sec.
63.1400(i) defines
when construction
or reconstruction
is subject to new
source standards.
63.5(b)(2)..................... No............... [Reserved].
63.5(b)(3)..................... Yes. ....................
63.5(b)(4)..................... Yes.............. Except that the
Initial
Notification and
Sec. 63.9(b)
requirements do not
apply.
63.5(b)(5)..................... Yes. ....................
63.5(b)(6)..................... Yes.............. Except that Sec.
63.1400(i) defines
when construction
or reconstruction
is subject to new
source standards.
63.5(c)........................ No............... Reserved.
63.5(d)(1)(i).................. Yes.............. Except that the
references to the
Initial
Notification and
Sec. 63.9(b)(5) do
not apply.
63.5(d)(1)(ii)................. Yes.............. Except that Sec.
63.5(d)(1)(ii)(H)
does not apply.
63.5(d)(1)(iii)................ No............... Secs. 63.1419(e)(5)
and 63.1415(a)(4)
specify
Notification of
Compliance Status
requirements.
63.5(d)(2)..................... No ....................
63.5(d)(3)..................... Yes.............. Except Sec.
63.5(d)(3)(ii) does
not apply, and
equipment leaks
subject to Sec.
63.1415 are exempt.
63.5(d)(4)..................... Yes. ....................
63.5(e)........................ Yes. ....................
63.5(f)(1)..................... Yes. ....................
63.5(f)(2)..................... Yes.............. Except that where
Sec. 63.9(b)(2) is
referred to, the
owner or operator
need not comply.
63.6(a)........................ Yes. ....................
63.6(b)(1)..................... Yes. ....................
63.6(b)(2)..................... Yes. ....................
63.6(b)(3)..................... Yes. ....................
63.6(b)(4)..................... Yes. ....................
63.6(b)(5)..................... Yes. ....................
63.6(b)(6)..................... No............... Reserved.
63.6(b)(7)..................... No. ....................
63.6(c)(1)..................... Yes.............. Except that Sec.
63.1401 specifies
the compliance
date.
63.6(c)(2)..................... No. ....................
63.6(c)(3)..................... No............... Reserved.
63.6(c)(4)..................... No............... Reserved.
63.6(c)(5)..................... Yes. ....................
63.6(d)........................ No............... Reserved.
63.6(e)........................ Yes.............. Except as otherwise
specified in this
table, Sec.
63.6(e) does not
apply to Group 2
emission points.a
63.6(e)(1)(i).................. No............... This is addressed by
Sec. 63.1400(j)(4)
.
63.6(e)(1)(ii)................. Yes. ....................
63.6(e)(1)(iii)................ Yes. ....................
63.6(e)(2)..................... Yes. ....................
63.6(e)(3)(i).................. Yes.............. For equipment leaks
(subject to Sec.
63.1415), the start-
up, shutdown, and
malfunction plan
requirement of Sec.
63.6(e)(3)(i) is
limited to control
devices and is
optional for other
equipment. The
start-up, shutdown,
malfunction plan
may include written
procedures that
identify conditions
that justify a
delay of repair.
63.6(e)(3)(i)(A)............... No............... This is addressed by
Sec. 63.1400(j)(4)
.
63.6(e)(3)(i)(B)............... Yes. ....................
63.6(e)(3)(i)(C)............... Yes. ....................
63.6(e)(3)(ii)................. Yes. ....................
[[Page 68897]]
63.6(e)(3)(iii)................ No............... Recordkeeping and
reporting are
specified in Sec.
63.1419(b)(1).
63.6(e)(3)(iv)................. No............... Recordkeeping and
reporting are
specified in Sec.
63.1419(b)(1).
63.6(e)(3)(v).................. Yes. ....................
63.6(e)(3)(vi)................. Yes. ....................
63.6(e)(3)(vii)................ Yes. ....................
63.6(e)(3)(vii) (A)............ Yes. ....................
63.6(e)(3)(vii) (B)............ Yes.............. Except the plan
shall provide for
operation in
compliance with
Sec. 63.1400(j)(4)
.
63.6(e)(3)(vii) (C)............ Yes. ....................
63.6(e)(3)(viii)............... Yes. ....................
63.6(f)(1)..................... Yes. ....................
63.6(f)(2)..................... Yes.............. Except Sec.
63.7(c), as
referred to in Sec.
63.6(f)(2)(iii)(D)
, does not apply,
and except that
Sec. 63.6(f)(2)(ii
) does not apply to
equipment leaks
subject to Sec.
63.1415.
63.6(f)(3)..................... Yes. ....................
63.6(g)........................ Yes. ....................
63.6(h)........................ No............... This subpart OOO
does not require
opacity and visible
emission standards.
63.6(i)(1)..................... Yes. ....................
63.6(i)(2)..................... Yes. ....................
63.6(i)(3)..................... Yes. ....................
63.6(i)(4)(i)(A)............... Yes. ....................
63.6(i)(4)(i)(B)............... No............... Dates are specified
in Secs.
63.1401(e) and
63.1419(e)(3)(i)
for all emission
points except
equipment leaks,
which are covered
under Sec.
63.182(a)(6)(i).
63.6(i)(4)(ii)................. No. ....................
63.6(i)(5)--(14)............... Yes. ....................
63.6(i)(15).................... No............... Reserved.
63.6(i)(16).................... Yes. ....................
63.6(j)........................ Yes. ....................
63.7(a)(1)..................... Yes. ....................
63.7(a)(2)..................... No............... Sec. 63.1419(e)(5)
specifies the
submittal dates of
performance test
results for all
emission points
except equipment
leaks; for
equipment leaks,
compliance
demonstration
results are
reported in the
Periodic Reports.
63.7(a)(3)..................... Yes. ....................
63.7(b)........................ No............... Sec. 63.1417
specifies
notification
requirements.
63.7(c)........................ No. ....................
63.7(d)........................ Yes. ....................
63.7(e)(1)..................... Yes.............. Except that all
performance tests
shall be conducted
at maximum
representative
operating
conditions.
63.7(e)(2)..................... Yes. ....................
63.7(e)(3)..................... No............... This subpart OOO
specifies
requirements.
63.7(e)(4)..................... Yes. ....................
63.7(f)........................ Yes.............. Except that Sec.
63.144(b)(5)(iiii)(
A) and (B) shall
apply for process
wastewater. Also,
if a site specific
test plan is not
required, the
notification
deadline in Sec.
63.7(f)(2)(i) shall
be 60 days prior to
the performance
test, and in Sec.
63.7(f)(3),
approval or
disapproval of the
alternative test
method shall not be
tied to the site
specific test plan.
63.7(g)........................ Yes.............. Except that
references to the
Notification of
Compliance Status
report in Sec.
63.9(h) are
replaced with the
requirements in
Sec. 63.1419(e)(5)
. In addition,
equipment leaks
subject to Sec.
63.1415 are not
required to conduct
performance tests.
63.7(h)........................ Yes.............. Except Sec.
63.7(h)(4)(ii) may
not be applicable,
if the site-
specific test plan
in Sec. 63.7(c)(2)
is not required.
63.8(a)(1)..................... Yes. ....................
63.8(a)(2)..................... No. ....................
63.8(a)(3)..................... No............... Reserved.
63.8(a)(4)..................... Yes. ....................
63.8(b)(1)..................... Yes. ....................
63.8(b)(2)..................... No............... This subpart OOO
specifies locations
to conduct
monitoring.
63.8(b)(3)..................... Yes. ....................
63.8(c)(1)..................... Yes. ....................
63.8(c)(1)(i).................. Yes. ....................
[[Page 68898]]
63.8(c)(1)(ii)................. No............... For all emission
points except
equipment leaks,
comply with Sec.
63.1419(b)(1)(i)(B)
; for equipment
leaks, comply with
Sec. 63.181(g)(2)(
iii).
63.8(c)(1)(iii)................ Yes. ....................
63.8(c)(2)..................... Yes. ....................
63.8(c)(3)..................... Yes. ....................
63.8(c)(4)..................... No............... Sec. 63.1418
specifies
monitoring
frequency; not
applicable to
equipment leaks
because Sec.
63.1415 does not
require continuous
monitoring systems.
63.8(c)(5)-63.8(c)(8).......... No. ....................
63.8(d)........................ No. ....................
63.8(e)........................ No. ....................
63.8(f)(1)-63.8(f)(3).......... Yes. ....................
63.8(f)(4)(i).................. No............... Timeframe for
submitting request
is specified in
Sec. 63.1419(f) or
(g); not applicable
to equipment leaks
because Sec.
63.1415 (through
reference to
subpart H of this
part) specifies
acceptable
alternative
methods.
63.8(f)(4)(ii)................. No............... Contents of request
are specified in
Sec. 63.1419(f) or
(g).
63.8(f)(4)(iii)................ No. ....................
63.8(f)(5)(i).................. Yes. ....................
63.8(f)(5)(ii)................. No. ....................
63.8(f)(5)(iii)................ Yes. ....................
63.8(f)(6)..................... No............... This subpart OOO
does not require
continuous emission
monitors.
63.8(g)........................ No............... Data reduction
procedures
specified in Sec.
63.1419(d) and (h);
not applicable to
equipment leaks.
63.9(a)........................ Yes. ....................
63.9(b)........................ No............... This subpart OOO
does not require an
initial
notification.
63.9(c)........................ Yes. ....................
63.9(d)........................ Yes. ....................
63.9(e)........................ No............... Sec. 63.1417
specifies
notification
deadline.
63.9(f)........................ No............... This subpart OOO
does not require
opacity and visible
emission standards.
63.9(g)........................ No. ....................
63.9(h)........................ No............... Sec. 63.1419(e)(5)
specifies
Notification of
Compliance Status
requirements.
63.9(i)........................ Yes. ....................
63.9(j)........................ No. ....................
63.10(a)....................... Yes. ....................
63.10(b)(1).................... No............... Sec. 63.1419(a)
specifies record
retention
requirements.
63.10(b)(2).................... No............... This subpart OOO
specifies
recordkeeping
requirements.
63.10(b)(3).................... No............... Sec. 63.1400(b)
requires
documentation of
sources that are
not affected
sources.
63.10(c)....................... No............... Sec. 63.1419
specifies
recordkeeping
requirements.
63.10(d)(1).................... Yes. ....................
63.10(d)(2).................... No............... Sec. 63.1419(e)
specifies
performance test
reporting
requirements; not
applicable to
equipment leaks.
63.10(d)(3).................... No............... This subpart OOO
does not require
opacity and visible
emission standards.
63.10(d)(4).................... Yes. ....................
63.10(d)(5).................... Yes.............. Except that reports
required by Sec.
63.10(d)(5)(i) may
be submitted at the
same time as
Periodic Reports
specified in Sec.
63.1419(e)(6). The
start-up, shutdown,
and malfunction
plan, and any
records or reports
of start-up,
shutdown, and
malfunction do not
apply to Group 2
emission points.
63.10(e)....................... No............... Sec. 63.1419
specifies reporting
requirements.
63.10(f)....................... Yes. ....................
63.11.......................... Yes. ....................
63.12.......................... Yes. ....................
63.13-63.15.................... Yes. ....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a The plan, and any records or reports of start-up, shutdown, and
malfunction do not apply to Group 2 emission points.
Table 2 to Subpart OOO of Part 63--Group 1 Storage Vessels at Existing
and New Affected Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessel capacity
Stored material (m3) Vapor pressure a (kPa)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aqueous formaldehyde........ capacity 37.85 3.24.
Materials other than aqueous capacity 38.46 16.89.
formaldehyde.
[[Page 68899]]
capacity 3.10.
340.69.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Maximum true vapor pressure of total organic HAP at storage
temperature.
Table 3 to Subpart OOO of Part 63--Known Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP) From the Manufacture of Amino/
Phenolic Resins Organic HAPCAS Number
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4, subpart Table 9, subpart Table 8, subpart
Organic HAP CAS number F HAP (Y/N) G HAP (Y/N) G HAP (Y/N)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acrylamide..................... 79-06-1 No............... No............... No.
Aniline........................ 62-53-3 Yes.............. No............... No.
Biphenyl....................... 92-52-4 Yes.............. Yes.............. No.
Cresol and cresylic acid 1319-77-3 Yes.............. No............... No.
(mixed).
Cresol and cresylic acid (m-).. 108-39-4 Yes.............. No............... No.
Cresol and cresylic acid (o-).. 95-48-7 Yes.............. No............... No.
Cresol and cresylic acid (p-).. 106-44-5 Yes.............. No............... No.
Diethanolamine................. 111-42-2 No............... No............... No.
Dimethylformamide.............. 68-12-2 No............... No............... No.
Ethylbenzene................... 100-41-4 Yes.............. Yes.............. Yes.
Ethylene glycol................ 107-21-1 No............... No............... No.
Formaldehyde................... 50-00-0 Yes.............. No............... No.
Glycol ethers.................. 0 No............... No............... No.
Methanol....................... 67-56-1 Yes.............. Yes.............. No.
Methyl ethyl ketone............ 78-93-3 Yes.............. Yes.............. No.
Methyl isobutyl ketone......... 108-10-1 Yes.............. Yes.............. No.
Naphthalene.................... 91-20-3 Yes.............. Yes.............. No.
Phenol......................... 108-95-2 Yes.............. No............... No.
Styrene........................ 100-42-5 Yes.............. Yes.............. No.
Toluene........................ 108-88-3 No............... Yes.............. Yes.
Xylenes (NOS).................. 1330-20-7 Yes.............. No............... No.
Xylene (m-).................... 108-38-3 Yes.............. Yes.............. Yes.
Xylene (o-).................... 95-47-6 Yes.............. Yes.............. No.
Xylene (p-).................... 106-42-3 Yes.............. Yes.............. Yes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAS No. = Chemical Abstract Registry Number.
Table 4 to Subpart OOO of Part 63--Batch Process Vent Monitoring
Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frequency/
Control device Parameters to be recordkeeping
monitored requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scrubber a...................... pH of scrubber Continuous records
effluent, and. as specified in
Sec. 63.1408(e)(
1).b
Scrubber liquid Continuous records
and gas flow as specified in
rates. Sec. 63.1408(e)(
1).b
Absorber a...................... Exit temperature Continuous records
of the absorbing as specified in
liquid, and. Sec. 63.1408(e)(
1).b
Exit specific Continuous records
gravity for the as specified in
absorbing liquid. Sec. 63.1408(e)(
1).b
Condenser a..................... Exit (product Continuous records
side) temperature. as specified in
Sec. 63.1408(e)(
1).b
Carbon Adsorber a............... Total regeneration Record the total
stream mass flow regeneration
during carbon bed stream mass flow
regeneration for each carbon
cycle(s), and. bed regeneration
cycle.
Temperature of the Record the
carbon bed after temperature of
regeneration and the carbon bed
within 15 minutes after each
of completing any regeneration and
cooling cycle(s). within 15 minutes
of completing any
cooling cycle(s).
Thermal Incinerator............. Firebox Continuous records
temperature c. as specified in
Sec. 63.1408(e)(
1).b
Catalytic Incinerator........... Temperature Continuous records
upstream and as specified in
downstream of the Sec. 63.1408(e)(
catalyst bed. 1).b
Boiler or Process Heater with a Firebox Continuous records
design heat input capacity less temperature c. as specified in
than 44 megawatts and where the Sec. 63.1408(e)(
batch process vents or 1).b
aggregate batch vent streams
are not introduced with or used
as the primary fuel.
[[Page 68900]]
Flare........................... Presence of a Hourly records of
flame at the whether the
pilot light. monitor was
continuously
operating during
batch emission
episodes, or
portions thereof,
selected for
control and
whether the pilot
flame was
continuously
present during
said periods.
All Control Devices............. Presence of flow Hourly records of
diverted to the whether the flow
atmosphere from indicator was
the control operating during
device or. batch emission
episodes, or
portions thereof,
selected for
control and
whether flow was
detected at any
time during said
periods as
specified in Sec.
63.1408(e)(3).
Monthly Records that
inspections of monthly
sealed valves. inspections were
performed as
specified in Sec.
63.1408(e)(4)(i)
.
Scrubber, Absorber, Condenser, Concentration Continuous records
and Carbon Adsorber (as an level or reading as specified in
alternative to the requirements indicated by an Sec. 63.1411(e)(
previously presented in this organic 1).b
table). monitoring device
at the outlet of
the control
device.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Alternatively, these devices may comply with the organic monitoring
device provisions listed at the end of this table.
b ``Continuous records'' is defined in Sec. 63.111.
c Monitor may be installed in the firebox or in the ductwork immediately
downstream of the firebox before any substantial heat exchange is
encountered.
Table 5 to Subpart OOO of Part 63--Operating Parameter Levels
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Established
Device Parameters to be operating
monitored parameter(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scrubber........................ pH of scrubber Minimum pH; and
effluent; and minimum liquid/
scrubber liquid gas ratio
and gas flow
rates.
Absorber........................ Exit temperature Minimum
of the absorbing temperature; and
liquid; and exit minimum specific
specific gravity gravity
of the absorbing
liquid.
Condenser....................... Exit temperature.. Maximum
temperature
Carbon absorber................. Total regeneration Maximum mass flow;
stream mass flow and maximum
during carbon bed temperature
regeneration
cycle; and
temperature of
the carbon bed
after
regeneration (and
within 15 minutes
of completing any
cooling cycle(s)).
Thermal incinerator............. Firebox Minimum
temperature. temperature
Catalytic incinerator........... Temperature Minimum upstream
upstream and temperature; and
downstream of the minimum
catalyst bed. temperature
difference across
the catalyst bed
Boiler or process heater....... Firebox Minimum
temperature. temperature
Other devices (or as an HAP concentration Maximum HAP
alternate to the requirements level or reading concentration or
previously presented in this at outlet of reading
table) a. device.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Concentration is measured instead of an operating parameter.
Table 6 to Subpart OOO of Part 63--Reports Required by This Subpart
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description of
Reference report Due date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 63.1419(b) and Subpart A Refer to Table 1 Refer to Subpart A
of this part. and Subpart A of of this part
this part.
63.1419(e)(3)................... Precompliance Existing affected
Report. sources--12
months prior to
the compliance
date. New
affected sources--
with application
for approval of
construction or
reconstruction.
63.1419(e)(5)................... Notification of Within 150 days
Compliance Status. after the
compliance date.
63.1419(e)(6)................... Periodic Reports.. Semiannually, no
later than 60
days after the
end of each 6-
month period. See
Sec. 63.1419(e)(
6)(i) for the due
date for the
first report.
63.1419(e)(6)(xii).............. Quarterly reports No later than 60
upon request of days after the
the Administrator. end of each
quarter.
63.1419(e)(7)(i)................ Storage Vessels At least 30 days
Notification of prior to the
Inspection. refilling of each
storage vessel or
the inspection of
each storage
vessel.
63.1419(e)(7)(iii).............. Notification of For Notification
Change in the under Sec.
Primary Product. 63.1400(f)(3)(ii)
-notification
submittal date at
the descretion of
the owner or
operator.a
[[Page 68901]]
For Notification
under Sec.
63.1400(f)(4)(ii)
-within 6 months
of making the
determination.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a Note that the APPU remains subject to this subpart until the
notification under Sec. 63.1400(f)(3)(i) is made.
[FR Doc. 98-27385 Filed 12-11-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P