[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 167 (Monday, August 28, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52166-52210]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-21073]



[[Page 52165]]

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

Part II





Environmental Protection Agency





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



40 CFR Part 63



National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Cellulose 
Products Manufacturing; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 167 / Monday, August 28, 2000 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 52166]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[FRL-6853-6]
RIN 2060-AH11


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: 
Cellulose Products Manufacturing

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes national emission standards for hazardous 
air pollutants (NESHAP) for cellulose products manufacturing. Cellulose 
products manufacturing includes both the Viscose Processes source 
category and the Cellulose Ethers source category. The Viscose 
Processes source category comprises the cellulose food casing, rayon, 
cellophane, and cellulosic sponge industries. The Cellulose Ethers 
source category comprises the methyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl methyl 
cellulose, hydroxypropyl cellulose, hydroxyethyl cellulose, and 
carboxymethyl cellulose industries. The EPA has identified the Viscose 
Processes source category and the Cellulose Ethers source category as 
including major sources of hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions, 
such as carbon disulfide (CS2), carbonyl sulfide (COS), 
ethylene oxide, methanol, methyl chloride, propylene oxide, and 
toluene. These proposed standards will implement section 112(d) of the 
Clean Air Act (CAA) by requiring all major sources to meet HAP emission 
standards reflecting the application of the maximum achievable control 
technology (MACT). The proposed standards will reduce HAP emissions by 
approximately 4,060 tons per year (ton/yr). In addition, the proposed 
standards will reduce hydrogen sulfide (H2S) emissions by 
approximately 1,490 ton/yr.

DATES: Comments. Submit comments on or before October 27, 2000.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts us requesting to speak at a 
public hearing by September 18, 2000, a public hearing will be held on 
September 27, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Written comments should be submitted (in duplicate 
if possible) to: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center 
(6102), Attention Docket Number A-99-39, Room M-1500, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Anenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20460. We request a separate copy also be sent to the 
contact person listed below in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section.
    Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held at 
10:00 a.m. on September 27, 2000 in our Office of Administration 
Auditorium, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, or at an alternate 
site nearby.
    Docket. Docket No. A-99-39 contains supporting information used in 
developing the standards. The docket is located at the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 
20460 in room M-1500, Waterside Mall (ground floor), and may be 
inspected from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 
legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about the proposed rule, 
contact Mr. William Schrock; Organic Chemicals Group; Emission 
Standards Division (MD-13); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27711; (919) 541-5032; 
[email protected]. For questions about the public hearing, contact 
Ms. Maria Noell; Organic Chemicals Group; Emission Standards Division 
(MD-13); U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Research Triangle Park, 
North Carolina 27711; (919) 541-5673; [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Comments. Comments and data may be submitted 
by electronic mail (e-mail) to: [email protected]. Electronic 
comments must be submitted as an ASCII file to avoid the use of special 
characters and encryption problems and will also be accepted on disks 
in WordPerfect version 5.1, 6.1 or Corel 8 file format. All 
comments and data submitted in electronic form must note the docket 
number: A-99-39. No confidential business information (CBI) should be 
submitted by e-mail. Electronic comments may be filed online at many 
Federal Depository Libraries.
    Commenters wishing to submit proprietary information for 
consideration must clearly distinguish such information from other 
comments and clearly label it as CBI. Send submissions containing such 
proprietary information directly to the following address, and not to 
the public docket, to ensure that proprietary information is not 
inadvertently placed in the docket: Attention: Mr. William Schrock; c/o 
OAQPS Document Control Officer (Room 740B); U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency; 411 W. Chapel Hill Street; Durham, NC 27701. We will 
disclose information identified as CBI only to the extent allowed by 
the procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. If no claim of 
confidentiality accompanies a submission when we receive it, the 
information may be made available to the public without further notice 
to the commenter.
    Public Hearing. Persons interested in presenting oral testimony or 
inquiring as to whether a hearing is to be held should contact Ms. 
Maria Noell at least 2 days in advance of the public hearing. Persons 
interested in attending such a public hearing must also contact Ms. 
Noell to verify the time, date, and location of the hearing. The 
address, telephone number, and e-mail address for Ms. Noell are listed 
in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. If a public 
hearing is held, it will provide interested parties the opportunity to 
present data, views, or arguments concerning these proposed emission 
standards.
    Docket. The docket is an organized and complete file of all the 
information considered by us in the development of this rulemaking. The 
docket is a dynamic file because material is added throughout the 
rulemaking process. The docketing system is intended to allow members 
of the public and industries involved to readily identify and locate 
documents so that they can effectively participate in the rulemaking 
process. Along with the proposed and promulgated standards and their 
preambles, the contents of the docket will serve as the record in the 
case of judicial review. (See section 307(d)(7)(A) of the CAA.) The 
regulatory text and other materials related to this rulemaking are 
available for review in the docket or copies may be mailed on request 
from the Air Docket by calling (202) 260-7548. A reasonable fee may be 
charged for copying docket materials.
    Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket, 
an electronic copy of today's proposed rule will also be available on 
the WWW through the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following the 
Administrator's signature, a copy of the rule will be posted on the 
TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed or promulgated rules 
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information and 
technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control. If more 
information regarding the TTN is needed, call the TTN HELP line at 
(919) 541-5384.
    Regulated Entities. Categories and entities potentially regulated 
by this action include those listed in the following table.

[[Page 52167]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Examples of
              Category                SIC    NAICS   regulated entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Industry.........................   3089   326199  cellulose food
                                                     casing
                                                    operations.
                                                    cellophane
                                                    operations.
                                                    cellulosic sponge
                                                    operations.
                                     2821   325211   cellulosic sponge
                                                    operations.
                                     2823   325221   rayon
                                     2819   325188  operations.
                                     2869   325199   cellulose ether
                                                    operations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by this 
action. To determine whether your process operation is regulated by 
this action, you should examine the applicability criteria in 
Sec. 63.5481 of the proposed rule. If you have any questions regarding 
the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the 
person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
    Outline. The information presented in this preamble is organized as 
follows:

I. Background

A. What is the source of authority for development of NESHAP?
B. What criteria are used in the development of NESHAP?
C. What is the history of the source categories?
D. What are the health effects associated with the pollutants 
emitted from cellulose products manufacturing operations?

II. Summary of the Proposed Rule

A. What source categories and subcategories are affected by this 
proposed rule?
B. What are the primary sources of HAP emissions and what are the 
emissions?
C. What is the affected source?
D. What are the emission limits, operating limits and other 
standards?
E. What are the testing and initial compliance requirements?
F. What are the continuous compliance provisions?
G. What are the notification, recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements?

III. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Standards

A. How did we select the source categories?
B. How did we select any subcategories?
C. How did we select the affected source?
D. How did we determine the basis and level of the proposed 
standards for the Viscose Processes source category?
E. How did we determine the basis and level of the proposed 
standards for the Cellulose Ethers source category?
F. How did we select the form of the standards?
G. How did we select the alternative standards?
H. How did we select the standards for the Viscose Processes source 
category?
I. How did we select the standards for the Cellulose Ethers source 
category?
J. How did we select the testing and initial compliance 
requirements?
K. How did we select the continuous compliance requirements?
L. How did we select the notification, reporting, and recordkeeping 
requirements?
M. What is the relationship of this rule to other rules?

IV. Summary of Environmental, Energy and Economic Impacts

A. What are the air quality impacts?
B. What are the cost impacts?
C. What are the economic impacts?
D. What are the non-air health, environmental and energy impacts?

V. Solicitation of Comments and Public Participation

VI. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review
B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
C. Executive Order 13084, Consultation and Coordination with Indian 
Tribal Governments
D. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
F. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1966 (SBREFA), 5 
U.S.C. 601 et. Seq.
G. Paperwork Reduction Act
H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995

I. Background

A. What is the source of authority for development of NESHAP?

    The CAA was enacted, 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 CAA). Section 112 of the CAA requires us to list 
categories and subcategories of major sources and area sources of HAP 
and to establish NESHAP for the listed source categories and 
subcategories. The categories of major sources covered by today's 
proposed NESHAP were listed on the following dates: Cellulose Food 
Casings, Rayon, Cellophane, Methyl Cellulose, Carboxymethyl Cellulose, 
and Cellulose Ethers--July 16, 1992 (57 FR 31576); and Cellulosic 
Sponges--November 18, 1999 (64 FR 63026). Major sources of HAP are 
those that have the potential to emit greater than 10 ton/yr of any one 
HAP or 25 ton/yr of any combination of HAP.

B. What criteria are used in the development of NESHAP?

    Section 112 of the CAA requires that we establish NESHAP for the 
control of HAP from both new and existing major sources. The CAA 
requires the NESHAP to reflect the maximum degree of reduction in 
emissions of HAP that is achievable. This level of control is commonly 
referred to as the MACT.
    The MACT floor is the minimum control level allowed for NESHAP and 
is defined under section 112(d)(3) of the CAA. In essence, the MACT 
floor ensures that the standard is set at a level that assures that all 
major sources achieve the level of control at least as stringent as 
that already achieved by the better-controlled and lower-emitting 
sources in each source category or subcategory. For new sources, the 
MACT floor cannot be less stringent than the emission control that is 
achieved in practice by the best-controlled similar source. The MACT 
standards for existing sources can be less stringent than standards for 
new sources, but they cannot be less stringent than the average 
emission limitation achieved by the best-performing 12 percent of 
existing sources in the category or subcategory (or the best-performing 
5 sources for categories or subcategories with fewer than 30 sources).
    In developing MACT, we also consider control options that are more 
stringent than the floor. We may establish standards more stringent 
than the floor based on the consideration of cost of achieving the 
emissions reductions, any non-air quality health and environmental 
impacts, and energy requirements.

C. What is the history of the source categories?

1. Listing the Initial Source Categories
    Section 112 of the CAA requires us to establish emission standards 
for categories of stationary sources that emit HAP. On July 16, 1992, 
we published an initial list of source categories to be regulated (57 
FR 31576). Today's proposed rule groups the various cellulose products 
manufacturing industries included in the initial list with another 
industry recently added to the list and combines them to create two new 
source categories.
    The initial source category list included separate source 
categories for various cellulose products manufacturing industries. 
These source categories are Cellulose Food Casings, Rayon, Cellophane, 
Methyl Cellulose, Carboxymethyl Cellulose, and Cellulose Ethers. The 
Cellulose Ethers source

[[Page 52168]]

category on the initial list included the hydroxyethyl cellulose, 
hydroxypropyl cellulose, and hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose industries.
2. Adding Another Source Category
    In developing this proposed rule, we identified another cellulose 
products manufacturing industry, cellulosic sponge manufacturing, that 
was not on the initial source category list. Based on information we 
obtained while gathering data for this proposed rule, we determined 
that the production of cellulosic sponges is similar to the production 
of some of the other cellulose products (cellulose food casings, rayon, 
and cellophane). We found similarities in raw materials, process 
operations, emission characteristics, and control device applicability. 
We added Cellulosic Sponges to the source category list under section 
112(c) of the CAA on November 18, 1999 (64 FR 63026).
3. Reducing to Two Source Categories
    In developing the proposed rule, we decided to combine the various 
cellulose products manufacturing source categories on the initial 
source category list with the Cellulosic Sponge source category that 
was listed November 18, 1999. Then we split out the Cellulose Food 
Casing, Rayon, Cellophane, and Cellulosic Sponge manufacturing 
industries and combined them to create a new source category named 
``Viscose Processes.'' We split out the various cellulose ether 
industries (Methyl Cellulose, Carboxymethyl Cellulose, and Cellulose 
Ethers) and combined them to create a new source category named 
``Cellulose Ethers.''
    Within each new source category (Viscose Processes and Cellulose 
Ethers), we found similarities in raw materials, process operations, 
emission characteristics, and control device applicability. Based on 
these factors, we concluded that separate MACT standards were not 
warranted for each of the individual cellulose products source 
categories on the source category list.
    Instead, we believe that it is technically feasible to regulate 
emissions from a variety of viscose process operations (or a variety of 
cellulose ether operations) by a single set of standards. Similar to 
the Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON) for the Synthetic Organic Chemical 
Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI), we are proposing separate requirements 
for process vents, storage vessels, equipment leaks, and wastewater HAP 
emission points.
    One set of standards for each of the two new source categories 
would ensure that process equipment with comparable HAP emissions and 
control technologies are subject to consistent emission control 
requirements. In addition, some of the cellulose ether operations are 
collocated within individual plants. Plants with collocated cellulose 
ether manufacturing operations could more easily comply with one set of 
standards than with individual standards for each of the collocated 
process operations.

D. What are the health effects associated with the pollutants emitted 
from cellulose products manufacturing operations?

    Today's 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 CAA. Available emission data, collected as we 
developed this proposed rule, show that CS2, COS, and 
toluene are the HAP emitted in the greatest quantities from viscose 
process operations. Ethylene oxide, methanol, methyl chloride, and 
propylene oxide are the HAP emitted in the greatest quantities from 
cellulose ether operations. Exposure to these HAP has been demonstrated 
to cause adverse health effects.
    This section describes the adverse health effects associated with 
the exposure to these specific HAP. The adverse health effects 
resulting from exposure to HAP can range from mild to severe. The 
severity of health effects resulting from HAP exposure depends on: (1) 
Concentrations of HAP in the area; (2) the amount of time a person is 
exposed; and (3) characteristics of exposed individuals (such as 
genetics, age, pre-existing health conditions, and lifestyle) which 
vary significantly among the population. Exposure is also influenced by 
source-specific characteristics (such as emission rates and local 
meteorological conditions), as well as pollutant-specific 
characteristics.
    The HAP that this proposed rule would control are associated with a 
variety of adverse health effects. These adverse health effects include 
chronic health disorders (such as effects on the central nervous and 
reproductive systems) and acute health disorders (such as irritation of 
eyes, throat, and mucous membranes and narcotic effects). Three of the 
HAP have been classified as probable or possible human carcinogens. In 
general, these findings have only been shown with concentrations higher 
than those typically found in the ambient air.
    We do not have the kind of current, detailed data on the operations 
covered by today's proposed rule (and the people living around the 
operations) that are necessary to determine the actual population 
exposures to the HAP emitted from these operations and the potential 
for resultant health effects. Therefore, we do not know the extent to 
which the adverse health effects described above occur in the 
populations surrounding these operations. However, to the extent the 
adverse effects do occur, this proposed rule will reduce emissions and 
subsequent exposures.
1. Health Effects Associated with HAP Emitted from Viscose Process 
Operations
    Acute (short-term) inhalation exposure of humans to CS2 
has caused changes in breathing and chest pains. Nausea, vomiting, 
dizziness, fatigue, headache, mood changes, lethargy, blurred vision, 
delirium, and convulsions have also been reported in humans acutely 
exposed by inhalation. Neurologic effects, including behavioral and 
neurophysiological changes, have been observed in chronic (long-term) 
human and animal inhalation studies. Reproductive effects, such as 
decreased sperm count and menstrual disturbances, have been observed in 
humans exposed to CS2 by inhalation. Developmental effects, 
including birth defects, toxicity to the embryo, and functional and 
behavioral disturbances, have been observed in animal studies. We have 
not classified CS2 with respect to potential human 
carcinogenicity.
    Acute (short-term) inhalation of high concentrations of COS may 
cause narcotic effects in humans. Carbonyl sulfide may also irritate 
the eyes and skin in humans. No information is available on the chronic 
(long-term), reproductive, developmental, or carcinogenic effects of 
COS in humans. We have not classified COS with respect to potential 
human carcinogenicity.
    Acute (short-term) inhalation of toluene by humans may cause 
effects to the central nervous system (CNS), such as fatigue, 
sleepiness, headache, and nausea, as well as irregular heartbeat. 
Adverse CNS effects have been reported in chronic abusers exposed to 
high levels of toluene. Symptoms include tremors, decreased brain size, 
involuntary eye movements, and impaired speech, hearing, and vision. 
Chronic (long-term) inhalation exposure of humans to lower levels of 
toluene also causes irritation of the upper respiratory tract, eye 
irritation, sore throat, nausea, dizziness, headaches, and difficulty 
with sleep. Studies of

[[Page 52169]]

children of pregnant women exposed by inhalation to toluene or to mixed 
solvents have reported CNS problems, facial and limb abnormalities, and 
delayed development. However, these effects may not be attributable to 
toluene alone.
2. Health Effects Associated with HAP Emitted from Cellulose Ether 
Operations
    The acute (short-term) effects of ethylene oxide in humans consist 
mainly of CNS depression and irritation of the eyes and mucous 
membranes. High concentrations of ethylene oxide produce weakness, 
nausea, bronchitis, pulmonary edema, emphysema, and death. Chronic 
(long-term) exposure to ethylene oxide in humans can cause irritation 
of the eyes, skin, and mucous membranes, and adversely affect the 
functioning of the brain and nerves. Limited evidence from animal and 
human studies indicates that inhalation exposure to ethylene oxide may 
result in adverse reproductive effects, such as an increased rate of 
miscarriages. Some limited human cancer data suggest an increase in the 
incidence of leukemia, stomach cancer, cancer of the pancreas, and 
Hodgkin's disease in workers exposed to ethylene oxide. Ethylene oxide 
has been shown to cause lung, gland, and uterine tumors in laboratory 
animals. We have classified ethylene oxide as a Group B1 (probable) 
human carcinogen.
    Acute (short-term) or chronic (long-term) exposure of humans to 
methanol by inhalation or ingestion may result in blurred vision, 
headache, dizziness, and nausea. No information is available on the 
reproductive, developmental, or carcinogenic effects of methanol in 
humans. Birth defects have been observed in the offspring of rats and 
mice exposed to methanol by inhalation. A methanol inhalation study 
using rhesus monkeys reported a decrease in the length of pregnancy and 
limited evidence of impaired learning ability in offspring. We have not 
classified methanol with respect to potential human carcinogenicity.
    Acute (short-term) exposure to high concentrations of methyl 
chloride in humans causes severe neurological effects, including 
convulsions, coma, and death. Methyl chloride also affects the heart 
rate, blood pressure, liver, and kidney function in humans. No 
information is available regarding chronic (long-term) systemic effects 
of methyl chloride in humans, but animal studies have reported effects 
to the liver, kidney, spleen, and CNS. No information is available 
concerning developmental or reproductive effects of methyl chloride in 
humans. Inhalation studies have demonstrated that methyl chloride 
causes reproductive effects in male rats, with effects such as 
testicular lesions and decreased sperm production. We have classified 
methyl chloride as a Group C (possible) human carcinogen on the basis 
of limited human data and animal studies that have reported kidney 
tumors in male mice.
    Acute (short-term) exposure of workers to propylene oxide may cause 
CNS effects, such as headache, weakness, loss of coordination, and 
coma. Propylene oxide also irritates the eyes and respiratory tract, 
causing coughing and difficulty in breathing, possibly leading to 
pulmonary edema and pneumonia. Health effects from chronic propylene 
oxide exposure in humans have not been reported. Chronic (long-term) 
animal studies have reported neurological disorders and inflammatory 
lesions of the nasal cavity, trachea, and lungs. We have classified 
propylene oxide as a Group B2 (probable) human carcinogen on the basis 
of nasal tumors observed in rodents exposed by inhalation.

II. Summary of the Proposed Rule

A. What source categories and subcategories are affected by this 
proposed rule?

    Today's proposed rule applies to the Viscose Processes source 
category and the Cellulose Ethers source category. There are no 
subcategories.

B. What are the primary sources of HAP emissions and what are the 
emissions?

    The primary sources of HAP emissions at cellulose products 
manufacturing operations are process vents, storage vessels, equipment 
leaks, and wastewater systems. Total baseline HAP emissions for all 
cellulose products manufacturing operations at the current level of 
control are 20,700 ton/yr. Baseline emissions from process vents 
account for most of the emissions, or approximately 92 percent of the 
total. Baseline emissions from wastewater, equipment leaks, and storage 
vessels account for approximately 4 percent, 3 percent, and 1 percent 
of the total, respectively.

C. What is the affected source?

    The affected source for the Viscose Processes source category is 
the sum of all operations engaged in the production of cellulose food 
casing, rayon, cellophane, or cellulosic sponge. The affected source 
for the Cellulose Ethers source category is the sum of all operations 
engaged in the production of cellulose ethers.

D. What are the emission limits, operating limits and work practice 
standards?

    As provided under the authority of CAA section 112(h), we are 
proposing the requirements of this rule in the form of emission limits 
(such as mass rate, percent reduction, and concentration emission 
limits), operating limits, and work practice standards. Work practice 
standards include design, equipment, work practices, and operational 
standards.
    In establishing HAP emission limits for viscose process affected 
sources, we selected total sulfide emissions as a surrogate for HAP 
emissions of CS2 and COS. We are defining total sulfide 
emissions as the sum of all CS2, COS, and H2S 
emissions (reported as CS2). (Emissions of H2S 
are included because they are generated from by-products of the 
CS2 reactions in the viscose process operation.) We are 
requiring owners and operators of cellulose food casing, rayon, 
cellophane, and cellulosic sponge operations at both new and existing 
viscose process affected sources to reduce the total sulfide emissions 
from their process vents by a specified percentage, which is unique to 
the type of viscose process operation.
    We are requiring owners and operators of any of the three types of 
cellulose ether operations at both new and existing cellulose ether 
affected sources to reduce the total HAP emissions from their process 
vents by 99 percent. The HAP included in total HAP vary for each 
cellulose ether operation, depending on the cellulose ether product 
being manufactured.
    We are requiring owners and operators of cellulose food casing, 
rayon, cellophane, and cellulosic sponge operations at both new and 
existing viscose process affected sources to control the CS2 
emissions from their CS2 unloading and storage operations by 
complying with one of the following options: (1) Reducing 
CS2 emissions by at least 83 percent using any compliance 
method, or (2) installing a nitrogen system for CS2 
unloading and storage, or (3) obtaining an equivalent emission 
reduction from elsewhere in the viscose process (such as process 
vents).
    We are requiring owners and operators of cellulose ether operations 
at both new and existing cellulose ether affected sources to reduce the 
HAP emissions from their wastewater by complying with the applicable 
process wastewater provisions in subpart G of 40 CFR part 63.
    We are requiring owners and operators of cellulose ether operations 
at both new and existing cellulose ether

[[Page 52170]]

affected sources to reduce the HAP emissions from equipment leaks by 
complying with the equipment leak provisions in subpart H of 40 CFR 
part 63. We are considering allowing owners or operators that can 
demonstrate that they are below a certain number of leaks an 
alternative to complying with the equipment leak provisions in subpart 
H; that is, they may comply with the equipment leak provisions in the 
proposed subpart F of 40 CFR part 65 (65 FR 57837, October 28, 1998) 
after it becomes final and we evaluate its requirements.
    It is generally not cost effective for owners and operators of 
these affected sources to continuously test the emission control 
devices to ensure continuous compliance with the emission standards. 
Therefore, for the most likely control devices to be used, this 
proposed rule specifies operating parameters that can be monitored to 
demonstrate continuous compliance. This proposed rule also specifies 
operating limits for these parameters. We have established operating 
limits for carbon adsorbers, thermal oxidizers, condensers, biofilters, 
oil absorbers, wet scrubbers, and flares.
    Owners and operators of affected sources that use a control device 
other than those listed in this proposed rule may establish operating 
limits for the appropriate operating parameters subject to prior 
written approval from the Administrator. The owners and operators must 
submit for approval a proposed site-specific monitoring plan that 
includes a description of the alternative control device, test results 
verifying the performance of the control device, the appropriate 
operating parameters that will be monitored, and the frequency of 
measuring and recording to establish continuous compliance with the 
operating limits. The owners and operators of the affected sources must 
install, operate, and maintain the parameter monitoring system for the 
alternative control device in accordance with the monitoring plan 
approved by the Administrator. The owners and operators will also 
establish operating limits during the initial performance test based on 
the operating parameters for the alternative control device included in 
the approved monitoring plan.
    Owners and operators of affected sources that use a control device 
listed in this proposed rule may establish operating limits for 
alternative operating parameters subject to prior written approval by 
the Administrator. The owner and operators must submit the application 
for approval of alternative operating parameters no later than the 
notification of the performance test. The application must include 
information justifying the request for alternative operating parameters 
(such as the infeasibility or impracticality of using the operating 
parameters in this proposed rule), a description of the proposed 
alternative control device operating parameters, the monitoring 
approach, the frequency of measuring and recording the alternative 
parameters, the averaging period for the operating limits, how the 
operating limits are to be calculated, and information documenting that 
the alternative operating parameters would provide equivalent or better 
assurance of compliance with the relevant emission limit. The owners 
and operators of the affected sources must install, operate, and 
maintain the alternative parameter monitoring systems in accordance 
with the application approved by the Administrator. The owners and 
operators will establish operating limits during the initial 
performance test based on the alternative operating parameters included 
in the approved application.

E. What are the testing and initial compliance requirements?

    We are requiring owners and operators of all affected sources to 
conduct an initial performance test using specified EPA test methods to 
demonstrate initial compliance with the emission limits for process 
vents. The owner or operator would test at the inlet and outlet to the 
control device and at the stack(s) for the process operation and, using 
these results, calculate a percent reduction of emissions.
    We are also requiring owners and operators of all viscose process 
affected sources to prepare a material balance that documents HAP usage 
and HAP emissions at the affected source. The material balance would be 
based on HAP emissions information from the initial performance test 
and HAP usage information from records at the affected source.
    Prior to the initial performance test, owners and operators of 
affected sources are required to install the parameter monitoring 
equipment to be used to demonstrate compliance with the operating 
limits. During the initial test, the owners or operators would use the 
parameter monitoring equipment to establish operating parameter limits.
    We are requiring owners and operators of cellulose food casing, 
rayon, cellophane, and cellulosic sponge operations at new and existing 
viscose process affected sources to demonstrate initial compliance with 
the emission limits and work practice standards for CS2 
unloading and storage operations by: (1) Documenting an 85 percent 
reduction in emissions from CS2 unloading and storage 
operations; or (2) certifying that a nitrogen system is being used in 
CS2 unloading and storage operations to prevent emissions; 
or (3) complying with the initial compliance requirements for process 
vents at viscose process affected sources, such that the total emission 
reductions from process vents equals the required emission reductions 
from both process vents and CS2 unloading and storage 
operations.
    We are requiring owners and operators of cellulose ether operations 
at new and existing cellulose ether affected sources to comply with the 
initial compliance provisions for process wastewater in subpart G of 40 
CFR part 63.
    We are requiring owners and operators of cellulose ether operations 
at new and existing cellulose ether affected sources to comply with the 
initial compliance provisions for equipment leaks in subpart H of 40 
CFR part 63.

F. What are the continuous compliance provisions?

    We are requiring owners and operators of all affected sources to 
monitor and record the operating parameters established during the 
initial performance test and calculate average operating parameter 
values averaged over the period of time specified in this proposed rule 
to demonstrate continuous compliance with the operating limits.
    We are also requiring owners and operators of all viscose process 
affected sources to maintain the material balance documenting HAP usage 
and HAP emissions that they established as part of their initial 
compliance requirements. The owners and operators would use the HAP 
usage and HAP emissions information from the material balance to 
calculate the percent reduction in emissions and demonstrate continuous 
compliance with the emission limits.
    We are requiring owners and operators of cellulose food casing, 
rayon, cellophane, and cellulosic sponge operations at new and existing 
viscose process affected sources to demonstrate continuous compliance 
with the emission limits and work practice standards for CS2 
unloading and storage operations by: (1) Keeping a record documenting 
the 85 percent reduction in emissions; or (2) keeping a record 
certifying that a nitrogen system is being used; or (3) complying with 
the continuous compliance requirements for process vents at viscose 
process affected

[[Page 52171]]

sources, such that the total emission reductions from process vents 
equals the required emission reductions from both process vents and 
CS2 unloading and storage operations.
    We are requiring owners and operators of cellulose ether operations 
at new and existing cellulose ether affected sources to comply with the 
continuous compliance provisions for process wastewater in subpart G of 
40 CFR part 63.
    We are requiring the owners and operators of cellulose ether 
operations at new and existing cellulose ether affected sources to 
comply with the continuous compliance provisions for equipment leaks in 
subpart H of 40 CFR part 63.

G. What are the notification, reporting, and recordkeeping 
requirements?

    We are requiring owners and operators of all affected sources to 
submit initial notifications, notifications of performance tests, and 
notifications of compliance status by the specified dates in the 
proposed rule, which may vary depending on whether the affected source 
is new or existing.
    We are also requiring owners and operators of all affected sources 
to submit semiannual compliance reports. In addition, if an owner or 
operator undertakes action that is inconsistent with their approved 
startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) plan, then we are requiring 
that they submit SSM reports within 2 days of starting such action and 
within 7 days of ending such action.
    We are requiring owners and operators of all affected sources to 
keep a copy of each notification and report, along with supporting 
documentation. Owners and operators of all affected sources also must 
keep records related to SSM, records of performance tests, and records 
for each continuous parameter monitoring system. Owners and operators 
of those viscose process affected sources that comply with the work 
practice standard for CS2 unloading and storage operations 
requiring installation of a nitrogen system must keep records 
certifying that a nitrogen system is being used. Owners and operators 
of all viscose process affected sources must keep records of all 
material balances and calculations documenting the percent reduction in 
HAP emissions.

III. Rationale for Selecting the Proposed Standards

A. How did we select the source categories?

    Today's proposed rule applies to the Viscose Processes source 
category and the Cellulose Ethers source category. We are creating 
these two source categories by combining seven existing source 
categories based on the differences between the categories and the 
similarities within each category with regard to raw materials, process 
operations, emission characteristics, and control device applicability.
1. Raw Materials
    Both viscose process operations and cellulose ether operations use 
cellulose and sodium hydroxide (NaOH) as raw materials to produce 
alkali cellulose. However, after the production of alkali cellulose, 
the viscose process operations and cellulose ether operations add 
different chemicals to the process. All of the viscose process 
operations use primarily CS2, while the cellulose ether 
operations use a variety of chemicals (such as propylene oxide, 
ethylene oxide, chloroacetic acid, and methyl chloride), depending upon 
the type of cellulose ether being produced. Some of the cellulose ether 
operations use the same chemicals. For example, both the methyl 
cellulose and hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose operations use methyl 
chloride, and both the hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose and hydroxypropyl 
cellulose operations use propylene oxide.
2. Process Operations
    Although both operations produce alkali cellulose, the viscose 
process operations and cellulose ether operations are completely 
different in terms of the process steps and equipment used. For 
example, all of the viscose process operations include the following 
process steps: (1) production of alkali cellulose from cellulose and 
NaOH, (2) production of sodium cellulose xanthate from alkali cellulose 
and CS2 (xanthation), (3) production of viscose from sodium 
cellulose xanthate and NaOH solution, (4) regeneration of liquid 
viscose into solid cellulose, and (5) washing of the solid cellulose 
product.
    The cellulose ether operations include mostly different process 
steps, as follows: (1) production of alkali cellulose from cellulose 
and NaOH, (2) reaction of the alkali cellulose with organic chemical(s) 
to produce a cellulose ether product, (3) washing and purification of 
the cellulose ether product, and (4) drying of the cellulose ether 
product.
3. Emission Characteristics
    Viscose process operations emit primarily CS2, whereas 
cellulose ether operations do not use or emit CS2. Emissions 
from cellulose ether operations include ethylene oxide, methanol, 
methyl chloride, and propylene oxide. The type of emissions depends 
upon the type of cellulose ether produced. Some of the cellulose ether 
operations have the same type of emissions; for example, the methyl 
cellulose, hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose, and carboxymethyl cellulose 
operations all emit methanol as a by-product of the reaction.
4. Control Device Applicability
    All of the viscose process operations are subject to a permissible 
exposure limit (PEL) for CS2 from the U.S. Occupational 
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) that requires owners or 
operators to reduce worker exposure to CS2 inside the 
buildings. The viscose process operations have been able to reduce 
worker exposure to CS2 by increasing gas flow rates (thereby 
reducing CS2 concentrations) and enclosing some processes. 
As a result, viscose process operations have lower HAP concentrations 
and higher gas flow rates compared to cellulose ether operations.
    Because the viscose process operations and cellulose ether 
operations are different in terms of the type and concentration of HAP 
emitted as well as the gas flow rate, the types of control devices that 
are applicable to the viscose process operations and cellulose ether 
operations are also different. Cellulose ether operations are better 
able to apply certain types of control devices, such as condensers, 
that require high-concentration, low-flow gas streams to operate 
effectively. Control devices that are effective on low-concentration, 
high-flow gas streams, such as biofilters and carbon adsorbers, are the 
most viable options for reducing CS2 emissions from the 
viscose process operations.
    Some control devices that cellulose ether operations have 
effectively employed on their organic HAP emissions cannot be as easily 
employed by viscose process operations on their CS2 
emissions. For example, while wet scrubbers are effective control 
devices for cellulose ether operations, available data show them to 
have little effect on CS2 emissions at viscose process 
operations. Also, viscose process operations have special concerns 
regarding the flammability of CS2 that cellulose ether 
operations do not have to consider in selecting a control device.

B. How did we select any subcategories?

1. Viscose Process Industry
    We reviewed the available information on the viscose process

[[Page 52172]]

industry and determined that the various viscose process operations 
should not be subcategorized. We found that viscose process operations 
are generally similar with respect to types of raw materials, 
emissions, initial process steps, and control device applicability.
    We are establishing a single set of standards across the Viscose 
Processes source category in those areas (such as CS2 
unloading and storage, wastewater emissions, and equipment leaks) where 
we have found important similarities between the various viscose 
process operations. For example, most viscose process operations use 
nitrogen or water displacement to unload the liquid CS2 from 
the railcar in order to control CS2 emissions during 
unloading, and they use nitrogen or water padding in the head space of 
the CS2 storage vessels in order to control CS2 
emissions from the vessels.
    Other similarities between the various viscose process operations 
include how they address wastewater emissions and equipment leaks. None 
of the viscose process operations take any measures to control the 
CS2 emissions from their wastewater, and none of the viscose 
process operations are subject to Federal or State leak detection and 
repair (LDAR) requirements to control the CS2 emissions from 
their equipment leaks.
    However, we are establishing separate limits for the various 
viscose process operations (cellulose food casing, rayon, cellophane, 
and cellulosic sponge) in those areas (such as process vents) where we 
have found important differences between the various viscose 
operations. We found some differences between the various viscose 
process operations with respect to final process steps and final 
products. For example, some viscose process operations use different 
methods and equipment to complete the regeneration step. Cellulose food 
casing operations extrude viscose through a die, forming a tube, while 
rayon operations extrude viscose through spinnerets, forming thin 
strands. Cellophane operations extrude viscose through a long slit, 
forming a flat sheet, while cellulosic sponge operations feed a mixture 
of viscose and Glauber's salt into a sponge mold. Also, cellulose food 
casing, rayon, and cellophane operations use a hot acid solution in 
their regeneration step, while cellulosic sponge operations use either 
a hot salt solution or electricity.
    The various viscose process operations produce a variety of 
products, such as cellulose food casings, rayon, cellophane, and 
cellulosic sponges, all of which compete in different economic markets. 
None of the viscose process operations produces more than one of these 
products. For example, a cellulose food casing operation does not also 
produce rayon or cellophane.
2. Cellulose Ether Industry
    We reviewed the available information on the cellulose ether 
industry and determined that the Cellulose Ethers source category 
should not be subcategorized. We found that the various cellulose ether 
operations are sufficiently similar with respect to their process steps 
and control device applicability to justify keeping the various 
operations in one category. Therefore, we are establishing a single set 
of standards across the Cellulose Ethers source category.

C. How did we select the affected source?

    In selecting the affected source for the Viscose Processes source 
category and the Cellulose Ethers source category, we included all 
equipment that emits HAP, such as process vents, storage vessels, 
wastewater treatment processes, and other components (such as pumps, 
valves, flanges, sampling connections, compressors, and pressure relief 
devices). In addition, because ``reconstruction,'' as defined in 
Sec. 63.2 of subpart A of 40 CFR part 63, is calculated based on the 
affected source, we also included other auxiliary equipment that is 
necessary to make the operation run but which may not emit HAP.
    We are defining the affected source broadly to include the sum of 
all operations engaged in the production of the cellulose product (that 
is, cellulose food casing, rayon, cellophane, cellulosic sponge, or 
cellulose ethers). We defined the affected source broadly because 
emissions from the sum of all operations are better documented than 
emissions from individual process lines or emission points. In 
addition, by defining the affected source broadly, it is less likely 
that a change will trigger new source MACT. New source MACT would be 
triggered when the fixed capital cost of new components exceeds 50 
percent of the fixed capital cost for all components that would be 
required to construct a comparable new affected source. Because 
emissions averaging takes place within the affected source, a broadly 
defined affected source would provide owners and operators with more 
flexibility in conducting any emissions averaging.

D. How did we determine the basis and level of the proposed standards 
for the Viscose Processes source category?

    The following sections present the basis for determining the 
components of the MACT floor for equipment leaks, wastewater emissions, 
CS2 unloading and storage operations, and process vents for 
the Viscose Processes source category. The MACT floor for the category 
is the sum of the MACT floor components for each type of emission point 
present at a given affected source. The Viscose Processes source 
category has fewer than 30 process operations from which to establish 
existing source MACT floors for these emission points. If there are 
fewer than 30 sources in a category, the CAA states that the MACT floor 
for existing affected sources must be determined based on the average 
emission limitation achieved by the best-performing five sources.
    We have previously interpreted the ``average'' emission limitation 
as either the mean or median emission limitation. Where we had at least 
five process operations in a group of similar operations to establish a 
MACT floor (that is, equipment leaks, wastewater emissions, and 
CS2 unloading and storage operations), we used the median 
emission limitation to establish the MACT floor because it corresponds 
to the control level for an actual control technology. Where we had 
fewer than five operations in a group of similar operations to 
establish a MACT floor (that is, process vents), we used another 
approach, which is discussed below.
    For new affected sources, the CAA states that the MACT floor must 
be determined based on the emission limitation achieved by the best-
performing similar source. In each case, we used this approach to 
determine the new source MACT floor.
1. MACT Floor for Equipment Leaks and Wastewater Emissions
    Because none of the ten viscose process operations control 
CS2 emissions from equipment leaks or wastewater, the MACT 
floor for those emission points is no control.
2. MACT Floor for CS2 Unloading and Storage Operations
    Most of the ten viscose process operations have taken steps to 
control CS2 emissions from unloading and storage operations 
by using nitrogen or water displacement to unload the liquid 
CS2 from the railcar and using nitrogen or water padding in 
the head space of the storage vessels. All of these CS2 
control techniques reduce liquid CS2 contact with air. 
However, the water

[[Page 52173]]

unloading and padding systems result in CS2-contaminated 
water being sent to wastewater treatment, thereby generating gaseous 
CS2 emissions from wastewater. We have determined that using 
nitrogen unloading and storage systems reduces CS2 emissions 
by at least 85 percent relative to the water unloading and storage 
systems.
    The MACT floor for CS2 unloading and storage operations 
at existing affected sources is the median CS2 emission 
reduction achieved by the top five viscose process operations. The 
median viscose process operation has a nitrogen system for both 
unloading and storage. Therefore, we established the MACT floor for 
CS2 unloading and storage operations at 85 percent 
CS2 control, which is the calculated control efficiency for 
nitrogen systems relative to water systems. Because the best-controlled 
viscose process operation also has a nitrogen system for CS2 
unloading and storage operations, the MACT floor is the same for both 
new and existing affected sources.
3. MACT Floors for Process Vents
    a. Methodology. We determined separate components of the viscose 
process operation MACT floor for each type of process vent used in a 
viscose process operation (that is, one MACT floor for cellulose food 
casing, one for rayon, one for cellophane, and one for cellulosic 
sponge). There are only three viscose process operations that include 
cellulose food casing process operations, two that include rayon 
process operations, one that includes cellophane process operation, and 
four that include cellulosic sponge process operations from which to 
establish the various process vent components of the MACT floor for 
viscose process operations. The CAA does not clearly address how to 
establish the MACT floor for existing affected sources when there are 
fewer than five process operations to determine the average emission 
limitation.
    For the various viscose process operations (cellulose food casing, 
rayon, cellophane, and cellulosic sponge), we decided to use the MACT 
floor approach outlined in the preamble to the proposal for the Generic 
MACT NESHAP (63 FR 55178, October 14, 1998). According to the preamble 
to the Generic MACT NESHAP, the smaller the group of similar process 
operations, the less likely it is that the best control strategies have 
been implemented for the process operations in that group. Averaging 
the emission limitations from uncontrolled and well-controlled process 
operations in a small group would result in a low average emission 
limitation that is clearly below the emission limitation already 
demonstrated by at least one process operation in that group. Selecting 
the average emission limitation also could result in a control level 
with no corresponding control technology. Selecting the median process 
operation of the group, which would be uncontrolled, would also have 
little relevance to the determination of MACT.
    As an alternative, the proposal preamble to the Generic MACT NESHAP 
outlined two basic scenarios where EPA can reasonably infer that the 
MACT floor requirements for small groups of similar process operations 
have been satisfied:

    First, when the EPA intends to select a MACT standard that 
coincides with the level of control achieved by the best-controlled 
[process operation(s)] in a [group of similar process operations], 
it is self-evident that the MACT floor has been met, and it is 
clearly a waste of EPA resources to undertake a separate 
quantitative MACT floor analysis based, in part, on control levels 
at the less well-controlled [process operations] * * *. Second, in 
those instances where the EPA will base its MACT standard for a 
small [group of similar process operations] (five or fewer [process 
operations]) on MACT standards previously established for a larger 
group of demonstrably similar [process operations] in other 
categories, it is also reasonable to infer MACT floor compliance 
without the need for a detailed new analysis.

    The second scenario under which we would determine MACT floors 
based on MACT standards previously established for a larger group of 
similar process operations in other categories is not useful here. We 
found the cellulose food casing, rayon, cellophane, and cellulosic 
sponge process operations to be completely different from other 
industrial process operations in terms of the type and concentration of 
HAP emitted, gas flow rates, control device applicability, types of 
emission points, and special concerns regarding the flammability of 
CS2 that other industries do not have to consider.
    Instead, we selected the first scenario under which we would 
determine process vent MACT floors based on the emission limitation of 
the best-performing process operation for each type of viscose process 
operation (cellulose food casing, rayon, cellophane, and cellulosic 
sponge). The substantial emissions from viscose process vents (18,900 
ton/yr nationwide for ten process operations) demonstrate the need for 
effective emission control for this emission point. In this case, the 
emission point is represented by the collection of process vents at 
each viscose process operation. For example, when we determined the 
best-performing process operation for rayon process vents, we compared 
the overall reductions in process vent HAP emissions at the two rayon 
process operations, and the process operation with the higher overall 
reduction in process vent HAP emissions was considered to be the best-
performing rayon process operation.
    We also determined the process vent MACT floors for new affected 
sources based on the best-performing source for each type of viscose 
process operation. Consequently, the process vent MACT floors for 
viscose process operations at existing affected sources are the same as 
the process vent MACT floors for viscose process operations at new 
affected sources.
    b. MACT Floor for Cellophane Process Vents. Because there is only 
one cellophane process operation, we established the MACT floor for the 
cellophane production process vents based on the current emission 
reductions achieved by that process operation. The process operation 
currently achieves between 85 and 90 percent control of total 
uncontrolled sulfide emissions (reported as CS2). The 
process operation accomplishes these reductions by using a 
CS2 recovery system. To take into account any variability, 
we established the MACT floor for cellophane production process vents 
at 85 percent control.
    We also established the MACT floors for solvent coating process 
vents and toluene storage vessels at cellophane process operations 
based on the current emission reductions achieved by the cellophane 
process operation. The process operation currently achieves between 95 
and 100 percent control of uncontrolled toluene emissions from these 
emission points. The process operation accomplishes these reductions by 
venting emissions from solvent coating process vents and toluene 
storage vessels to a solvent recovery system. To take into account any 
variability, we established the MACT floor for solvent coating process 
vents and toluene storage vessels at 95 percent control.
    c. MACT Floor for Cellulose Food Casing Process Vents. Of the three 
cellulose food casing process operations, we have determined that the 
best-performing process operation achieves between 25 and 30 percent 
control of total sulfide emissions (reported as CS2) from 
process vents at the MACT floor. The process operation accomplishes 
part of these sulfide emission reductions by using viscose process 
changes to reduce the amount of CS2 added to the process. 
The process

[[Page 52174]]

operation accomplishes the remaining sulfide emission reductions by 
using caustic scrubbers to capture H2S emissions, which are 
generated from by-products of the CS2 reactions in the 
viscose process operation. To take into account any variability, we 
established the MACT floor for cellulose food casing process vents at 
25 percent control.
    d. MACT Floor for Rayon Process Vents. Of the two rayon process 
operations, we have determined that the best-performing process 
operation achieves between 55 and 60 percent control of total sulfide 
emissions reported as CS2. The process operation 
accomplishes these reductions by using a new rayon spinning technology, 
CS2 recovery operations (using condensers and oil 
absorbers), and caustic scrubbers (to capture the H2S 
generated from CS2). To take into account any variability, 
we established the MACT floor for rayon process vents at 55 percent 
control.
    e. MACT Floor for Cellulosic Sponge Process Vents. Of the four 
cellulosic sponge process operations, we have determined that the two 
best-performing process operations achieve similar CS2 
reductions from process vents, between 75 and 85 percent overall. One 
of these two process operations reduces CS2 emissions by 
using a biofilter to remove the CS2 emissions from its 
sponge-making operations. The second process operation reduces 
CS2 emissions by using a carbon adsorber to recover the 
CS2 from the viscose production and regeneration operations 
and by using a thermal oxidizer to destroy the CS2 and 
H2S from the salt recovery operation. To take into account 
any variability, we established the MACT floor for cellulosic sponge 
process vents at the lower end of the range, that is, 75 percent 
control.
4. Beyond-the-Floor Technology
    The CAA states that MACT must be no less stringent than the MACT 
floor. Therefore, we also evaluate options more stringent than the MACT 
floor. When evaluating the more stringent options, we consider the 
costs, non-air quality health and environmental impacts, and energy 
requirements that accompany the expected emission reductions.
    a. Beyond-the-floor Technology for CS2 Unloading and 
Storage Operations. We did not consider any beyond-the-floor 
requirements for CS2 unloading and storage operations at new 
or existing affected sources because no beyond-the-floor technologies 
are available for that emission point.
    b. Beyond-the-Floor Technology for Equipment Leaks and Wastewater 
Emissions. We do not project any emission control beyond the MACT floor 
for equipment leaks and wastewater emissions at new or existing 
affected sources to be cost effective.
    In order to control HAP emissions from equipment leaks, viscose 
process operations would be required to implement an LDAR program 
similar to the LDAR provisions in subpart H of 40 CFR part 63. However, 
the baseline HAP emissions from equipment leaks at viscose process 
operations account for less than 2 percent of total HAP emissions. 
Therefore, we do not project that any reduction in HAP emissions from 
equipment leaks would be worth the cost to implement the LDAR program.
    In order to control HAP emissions from wastewater, viscose process 
operations would be required to implement requirements similar to the 
process wastewater provisions in subpart G of 40 CFR part 63. However, 
the baseline HAP emissions from wastewater at viscose process 
operations account for less than 5 percent of total HAP emissions. 
Therefore, we do not project that any reduction in HAP emissions from 
wastewater would be worth the cost to implement requirements similar to 
those in subpart G.
    c. Beyond-the-Floor Technology for Cellophane and Cellulosic Sponge 
Process Vents. We did not consider any beyond-the-floor requirements 
for cellophane process vents and cellulosic sponge process vents at new 
or existing affected sources because no beyond-the-floor technologies 
are available for those emission points.
    d. Beyond-the-Floor Technology for Cellulose Food Casing Process 
Vents. We are including beyond-the-floor requirements for process vents 
in today's proposed rule for cellulose food casing operations at new 
viscose process affected sources. The arguments supporting the beyond-
the-floor requirements are presented below.
    None of the existing cellulose food casing operations has achieved 
CS2 emission reductions from process vents significantly 
greater than the MACT floor level, which is 25 percent control of total 
sulfide emissions (reported as CS2). However, other viscose 
process operations (such as, rayon and cellulosic sponge) have achieved 
higher CS2 emission reductions using various CS2 
control technologies (such as condensers, biofilters, and carbon 
adsorbers). Because of similarities in process vents among the various 
viscose process operations, we believe that cellulose food casing 
operations are also capable of reducing the CS2 emissions 
from their process vents.
    We have reviewed information obtained from cellulose food casing 
operations on CS2 concentrations and gas flow rates for 
individual process machines. Based on this information, we found that 
the emission streams from the stack at cellulose food casing operations 
have relatively low CS2 concentrations and high air flows. 
The stack CS2 concentrations are typically around 100 parts 
per million (ppm), and the stack gas flow rates typically exceed 80,000 
cubic feet per minute (cfm). We have determined that the cost to 
control these streams at stack conditions would be excessive. However, 
we also have determined that, if more concentrated emission streams 
from further back in the cellulose food casing process are segregated 
from the less concentrated emission streams and sent to a control 
device, then CS2 control technologies could be applied to 
the cellulose food casing operations more cost effectively.
    Two of the four cellulosic sponge operations have achieved total 
sulfide emission reductions of at least 75 percent for the sum of their 
process vents by using either a carbon adsorber or a biofilter. We have 
determined that applying one of these CS2 control 
technologies (such as a carbon adsorber) to cellulose food casing 
process vents at new viscose process affected sources to achieve 75 
percent control would be cost effective, with minimal non-air quality 
environmental and energy impacts. Therefore, we are including a beyond-
the-floor control requirement of 75 percent total sulfide control for 
cellulose food casing process vents at new viscose process affected 
sources in today's proposed rule.
    The cost effectiveness of applying carbon adsorbers to the three 
existing cellulose food casing process operations to achieve 75 percent 
control ranges from $500 to $1,600 per ton of total sulfide (reported 
as CS2). The incremental cost effectiveness between the MACT 
floor requirement of 25 percent control and the beyond-the-floor 
requirement of 75 percent control ranges from $500 to $700 per ton of 
total sulfide (reported as CS2). The low incremental cost 
effectiveness is based primarily on the larger emission reductions 
achieved beyond the floor. The high capital costs for this control 
technology ($3.9 to $5.8 million) and the economic status of the 
industry are the primary factors in our rejecting beyond-the-floor 
requirements for cellulose food casing operations at existing viscose 
process affected sources. However, we project that capital costs and 
cost effectiveness for this control technology will be lower for 
cellulose food casing operations at new

[[Page 52175]]

viscose process affected sources. The costs for the existing affected 
sources include retrofit costs which increased the capital costs by 50 
percent. Retrofit costs will not be a factor for cellulose food casing 
operations at new viscose process affected sources.
    The non-air quality impacts and energy requirements for cellulose 
food casing operations at new viscose process affected sources are 
expected to be comparable to those determined for operations at 
existing viscose process affected sources which are minimal. The energy 
requirements for applying carbon adsorbers to the three existing 
cellulose food casing operations range from 2,800 to 4,600 megawatt-
hours per year (MWh/yr), and the wastewater impacts range from 15 to 35 
million gallons per year (gal/yr).
     e. Beyond-the-Floor Technology for Rayon Process Vents. We are 
including beyond-the-floor requirements for process vents in today's 
proposed rule for rayon operations at new viscose process affected 
sources. The arguments supporting the beyond-the-floor requirements are 
presented below.
    One of the rayon operations has indicated that an emission control 
technology (fluidized-bed carbon adsorber) is available to increase 
their CS2 emission reductions from 60 to 80 percent. This 
emission control technology is similar to technology currently being 
used at one of the cellulosic sponge process operations, which is 
achieving CS2 emission reductions of 75 percent for the sum 
of its process vents using a carbon adsorber. We have determined that 
applying this CS2 control technology to rayon operations at 
new viscose process affected sources will be cost effective, with 
minimal non-air quality environmental and energy impacts. Therefore, we 
are including a beyond-the-floor control requirement of 75 percent 
total sulfide control for rayon process vents at new viscose process 
affected sources in today's proposed rule.
    The cost effectiveness of applying carbon adsorbers to the two 
existing rayon process operations ranges from $600 to $1,300 per ton of 
total sulfide (reported as CS2). The incremental cost 
effectiveness between the MACT floor requirement of 55 percent control 
and the beyond-the-floor requirement of 75 percent control ranges from 
$500 to $1,300 per ton of total sulfide (reported as CS2). 
The low incremental cost effectiveness is based primarily on the larger 
emission reductions achieved beyond the floor. The high capital cost 
for this control technology ($15.2 to $21.8 million) and the economic 
status of the industry are the primary factors in our rejecting beyond-
the-floor requirements for rayon operations at existing viscose process 
affected sources. However, we project that capital costs and cost 
effectiveness for these control technologies will be lower for rayon 
operations at new viscose process affected sources. The costs for the 
existing affected sources include retrofit costs which increased the 
capital costs by 50 percent. Retrofit costs will not be a factor for 
rayon operations at new viscose process affected sources.
    The non-air quality impacts and energy requirements for a rayon 
operation at a new viscose process affected source are expected to be 
comparable to those determined for operations at existing viscose 
process affected sources which are minimal. The energy requirements for 
applying carbon adsorbers to the two existing rayon operations range 
from 7,600 to 20,000 MWh/yr, and the wastewater impacts range from 57 
to 165 million gal/yr.

E. How did we determine the basis and level of the proposed standards 
for the Cellulose Ethers source category?

    There are four cellulose ether plants that are major sources 
subject to today's proposed rule. These four cellulose ether plants are 
comprised of seven individual process operations. One cellulose ether 
plant has three cellulose ether operations (hydroxyethyl cellulose, 
hydroxypropyl cellulose, and carboxymethyl cellulose operations). 
Another cellulose ether plant has two cellulose ether operations 
(methyl cellulose and hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose operations). A 
third cellulose ether plant has a hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose 
operation, and a fourth cellulose ether plant has a hydroxyethyl 
cellulose operation.
    We established the MACT floor for storage vessels, equipment leaks, 
wastewater emissions, and process vents based on these seven cellulose 
ether operations. Therefore, we used the MACT floor approach presented 
in section I.B and determined the MACT floor for existing affected 
sources based on the average emission limitation achieved by the best-
performing five cellulose ether operations. We established the MACT 
floor using the median as the ``average'' emission limitation because 
the median corresponds to the control level for an actual control 
technology.
1. MACT Floor for Storage Vessels
    Because none of the seven cellulose ether operations have 
controlled storage vessels in the size range of those controlled under 
other rules, the MACT floor for storage vessels at both new and 
existing affected sources is no control.
2. MACT Floor for Equipment Leaks
    Only two of the seven cellulose ether operations are currently 
subject to any LDAR requirements. Therefore, the median control level 
(that is, MACT floor) for equipment leaks for existing affected sources 
is no control. The equipment leak provisions for one of the cellulose 
ether operations are essentially the same as the equipment leak 
provisions in subpart H of 40 CFR part 63, with some minor differences. 
Therefore, for new affected sources, we established subpart H 
provisions as the MACT floor for equipment leaks.
3. MACT Floor for Wastewater Emissions
    Information is available on wastewater HAP emissions and wastewater 
treatment for five of the seven cellulose ether operations. Methanol is 
the only HAP in the wastewater for four of the five cellulose ether 
operations, and isophorone is the only HAP for the fifth cellulose 
ether operation. Five of those cellulose ether operations treat the 
wastewater in either onsite or offsite biological treatment units.
    The industry has reported that these biological treatment units 
achieve methanol reductions ranging from 95 to 99 percent, but no data 
are currently available to confirm these reductions. There are also no 
data on any isophorone reductions; however, isophorone also may be 
easily biodegraded. The process wastewater provisions in subpart G of 
40 CFR part 63 require only a 31 percent reduction in methanol and a 60 
percent reduction in isophorone from Group 1 wastewater streams. Even 
in an open biological system (perhaps with an open collection system), 
it should be possible to easily achieve these biodegradation levels. 
Also, according to the analysis for the Hazardous Organic NESHAP (HON), 
these two compounds would not readily volatilize from the wastewater 
before they had a chance to be biodegraded.
    Because the top five cellulose ether operations all treat 
wastewater in a manner at least as stringent as the process wastewater 
provisions in subpart G of 40 CFR part 63, we established those 
provisions as the MACT floor for existing affected sources. We 
established the MACT floor for new affected sources to be the same as 
for existing affected sources because insufficient information is 
available to confirm a specific control level better than the HON.

[[Page 52176]]

4. MACT Floor for Process Vents
    Of the seven cellulose ether operations, five operations have 
process vents. The remaining two cellulose ether operations have 
closed-loop systems with no process vent HAP emissions. In our MACT 
floor determination for process vents at cellulose ether operations, we 
considered the five operations with process vents.
    We established the MACT floor for process vents based on the median 
emission limitation achieved by the five cellulose ether operations 
with process vent HAP emissions. For those five cellulose ether 
operations, the median control level (that is, MACT floor) is 99 
percent for existing affected sources. This control level is 
characteristic of incinerators, condensers, and scrubbers currently 
used by these process operations to recover and control their HAP 
emissions. The best-performing cellulose ether operation process vent 
is also controlled to 99 percent; therefore, we established a MACT 
floor of 99 percent for new affected sources. For cellulose ether 
operations with closed-loop systems, the MACT floor is the emission 
control achieved by use of a closed-loop system.
5. Beyond-the-Floor Technology
    We evaluate options more stringent than the MACT floor by 
considering the costs, non-air quality health and environmental 
impacts, and energy requirements that accompany the expected emission 
reductions.
    a. Beyond-the-Floor Technology for Storage Vessels. We did not 
consider any beyond-the-floor requirements for storage vessels at new 
or existing affected sources because we do not project any emission 
control beyond the MACT floor to be cost effective. In order to control 
HAP emissions from storage vessels, cellulose ether operations would be 
required to implement requirements similar to the storage vessel 
provisions in subpart G of 40 CFR part 63. However, the baseline HAP 
emissions from storage vessels at cellulose ether operations account 
for less than 0.2 percent of total HAP emissions. Therefore, we do not 
project that any reductions in HAP emissions from storage vessels would 
be worth the cost to implement requirements similar to those in subpart 
G.
    b. Beyond-the-Floor Technology for Wastewater Emissions and Process 
Vents. We did not consider any beyond-the-floor requirements for 
wastewater emissions and process vents at new or existing affected 
sources because no beyond-the-floor technologies are available for 
those emission points.
    c. Beyond-the-Floor Technology for Equipment Leaks. Two of the 
seven cellulose ether operations are currently subject to LDAR 
requirements for their equipment leaks. The equipment leak provisions 
for one of the cellulose ether processes are essentially the same as 
the equipment leak provisions in subpart H of 40 CFR part 63, with some 
minor differences. Therefore, we considered subpart H provisions as 
beyond-the-floor requirements for equipment leaks at existing cellulose 
ether affected sources. We are including this beyond-the-floor 
requirement for existing cellulose ether affected sources in today's 
proposed rule based on the conclusion that the benefits of additional 
control beyond the MACT floor justify the additional cost.
    The cost effectiveness of implementing the equipment leak 
provisions in subpart H of 40 CFR part 63 ranges from $400 to $600 per 
ton of HAP for the five cellulose ether operations that do not 
currently have LDAR programs. The capital and annual costs are also 
low, with the capital costs ranging from $10,800 to $21,600, and the 
annual costs ranging from $17,200 to $95,900. there are no non-air 
quality impacts and energy requirements associated with these beyond-
the-floor requirements.

F. How did we select the form of the standards?

    We evaluated the feasibility of the following forms of the 
standards for the Viscose Processes source category and the Cellulose 
Ethers source category: (1) emission limits (such as mass rate, percent 
reduction, and concentration emission limits); and (2) work practice 
standards (such as design, equipment, work practices, and operational 
standards).
1. Standard Forms Selected
    Based on the evaluations presented in the following section, we are 
specifying a percent reduction emission limit for MACT standards for 
viscose process vents, cellulose ether process vents, and toluene 
storage vessels in today's proposed rule.
    We are providing some flexibility for complying with the emission 
limits and work practice standards for CS2 unloading and 
storage operations. We are providing the owners and operators of 
viscose process affected sources with three options for compliance. The 
first compliance option (a percent reduction emission limit) specifies 
that owners and operators may achieve an 83 percent reduction in 
CS2 emissions from their CS2 unloading and 
storage operations using any compliance method. The second compliance 
option (an alternative equivalent equipment standard) specifies that 
owners and operators may install a nitrogen system for their 
CS2 unloading and storage operations. The third compliance 
option (an alternative equivalent percent reduction emission limit) 
specifies that owners and operators may achieve an equivalent emission 
reduction from elsewhere in the viscose process.
    The third compliance option provides flexibility to owners and 
operators to control other emission points instead of the 
CS2 unloading and storage operations, as long as they can 
demonstrate that they have achieved an equivalent CS2 
emission reduction. The equivalent of the 85 percent reduction in 
CS2 emissions from the CS2 unloading and storage 
operation is a 0.14 percent reduction in total sulfide emissions from 
process vents. The 0.14 percent reduction in process vent emissions is 
based on the percent reduction in storage vessel throughput to the 
process when a water system is replaced with a nitrogen system for 
CS2 unloading and storage.
    We are specifying work practice standards for equipment leaks and 
wastewater emissions at cellulose either affected sources. For 
equipment leaks, owners and operators of new and existing cellulose 
ether affected sources must comply with the LDAR work practice 
standards in subpart H of 40 CFR part 63. Section 112(h) of the CAA 
recognizes the need for alternative forms of the standard such as a 
work practice standard. As described in the preamble to the HON (57 FR 
62608), the use of a work practice standard for equipment leaks is 
justified. We are also evaluating the LDAR work practice standards in 
the proposed Consolidated Air Rule (if owners and operators can 
demonstrate that they are below a certain number of leaks) and may 
allow owners and operators the option of complying with those 
provisions. For wastewater emissions, we are specifying emission limits 
and work practice standards based on the process wastewater provisions 
in subpart G of 40 CFR part 63.
2. Standard Forms Evaluated
    The following sections present the evaluations used to determine 
the form of the MACT standards for today's proposed rule.
    a. Mass Rate Emission Limit. A mass rate emission limit would be 
based on information that owners and operators of cellulose ether 
operations and viscose process operations consider CBI (such

[[Page 52177]]

as, amount of final product produced, amount of HAP used, and amount of 
cellulose used). Considering the small size of the groups used to 
determine the MACT floors for viscose process vents and cellulose ether 
process vents, we determined that specifying this type of emission 
limit could reveal confidential information. Therefore, we rejected 
this type of emission limit for today's proposed rule.
    b. Percent Reduction Emission Limit. A percent reduction emission 
limit is the most common type of emission limit for emission points 
such as process vents, storage vessels, and wastewater emissions. The 
percent reduction is calculated as a reduction in uncontrolled HAP 
emissions.
    For process vents at viscose process affected sources, we selected 
an emission limit based on percent reduction of total sulfide emissions 
from initial CS2 usage. This type of emission limit provides 
owners and operators of viscose process affected sources with the 
flexibility of take credit for controlling emissions of non-HAP 
sulfides, implementing process changes that reduce CS2 usage 
and recovering and reusing CS2. Total sulfide emissions 
(CS2, H2S, and COS) would be reported as 
CS2. Owners and operators of viscose process affected 
sources would use the information from the material balance required in 
today's proposed rule to take into account any sulfides that are 
uncontrolled, lost to wastewater, etc., and then determine the percent 
reduction for viscose process vents.
    For process vents at cellulose ether affected sources, we also 
selected an emission limit based on percent reduction of total HAP 
emissions from initial HAP usage. This type of emission limit provides 
owners and operators of cellulose ether affected sources with the 
flexibility to take credit for implementing process changes that reduce 
HAP usage and recovering and reusing HAP. Similar to viscose process 
affected sources, owners and operators of cellulose ether affected 
sources would use the information from the material balance required in 
today's proposed rule to take into account any HAP that are 
uncontrolled, lost to wastewater, etc., and then determine the percent 
reduction for cellulose ether process vents.
    c. Concentration Emission Limit. We considered a concentration 
emission limit (such as ppm) as an alternative to a percent reduction 
emission limit for process vents. For example, if concentrations prior 
to a control device are already low, then a 90 percent reduction may 
not be feasible. In such instances, an alternative concentration 
emission limit at the control device outlet (such as, 20 ppm) could be 
effective.
    However, at viscose process operations, stack concentrations of 
CS2 are fairly low because the vent stream is diluted. In 
order to comply with OSHA limits for worker exposure to CS2, 
the ventilation systems associated with viscose process operations are 
designed to produce large volumes of process and building exhaust air, 
which reduce the concentration of CS2 emission limit, then 
viscose process operations may be able to reduce their CS2 
concentrations by simply increasing the air flow (for example, by 
installing more powerful fans), which would not achieve any actual 
reduction in CS2 emissions. Therefore, we rejected 
specifying an alternative CS2 concentration emission limit 
for viscose process affected sources.
    For cellulose ether affected sources, we also rejected specifying 
an alternative HAP concentration emission limit. Based on available HAP 
emissions data for cellulose ether operations, concentrations prior to 
the control device are fairly high, so an alternative HAP concentration 
emission limit is not necessary.
    d. Equipment Standard. We are providing owners and operators of 
viscose process affected sources with the option to comply with an 
equipment standard as an alternative to the 83 percent reduction 
emission limit for CS2 unloading and storage operations. 
Under this equipment standard, owners and operators may install a 
nitrogen system for unloading and storing their CS2. This 
equipment standard is equivalent to the 83 percent reduction emission 
limit because the nitrogen system has been demonstrated to achieve an 
85 percent reduction in CS2 emissions relative to water 
systems.
    For process vents at viscose process affected sources, an equipment 
standard would be restrictive, given the range of CS2 
control technologies available (such as, biofilters, carbon adsorbers, 
oil absorbers, and condensers). An emission limit (such as, percent 
reduction) would provide owners and operators with the flexibility to 
try different approaches to meeting the MACT standard.
    e. Work Practice Standard. For equipment leaks (such as, from 
valves, flanges, and connectors), an LDAR work practice standard is the 
most common type of standard. In today's proposed rule, we are 
requiring owners and operators of new and existing cellulose ether 
affected sources to determine the frequency of monitoring for their 
equipment components and a schedule of repair. We are requiring owners 
and operators to comply with the LDAR standards of subpart H of 40 CFR 
part 63. We are evaluating the LDAR standards of the proposed 
Consolidated Air Rule and may allow that as an alternative in the final 
rule. The proposed Consolidated Air Rule allows less frequent 
monitoring and repair (compared to the HON) if owners and operators can 
demonstrate that they are below a certain number of leaks.
    For wastewater emissions, we are specifying emission limits and 
work practice standards based on the process wastewater provisions in 
subpart G of 40 CFR part 63.

G. How did we select the alternative standards?

    We evaluated pollution prevention standards as an alternative to 
the emission limits and work practice standards. Based on the 
evaluations presented below, we decided to reject the pollution 
prevention alternative standards for today's proposed rule.
    One cellulose ether operation reduces HAP emissions by extending 
the reaction time beyond the point of profitability in a technique 
called ``extended cookout'' or ECO. By using up most of the HAP raw 
material in the reaction, this pollution prevention technique leaves 
less unreacted HAP to be emitted downstream. However, insufficient 
information is available to determine if this technique can achieve the 
emission reductions necessary to meet MACT floor requirements.
    One cellulose food casing operation has developed a non-viscose 
process that emits no HAP (that is, no CS2) and expects to 
reduce total air emissions by about 99 percent. However, the non-
viscose process will not be available prior to proposal and 
promulgation and has not yet been proven to be an effective alternative 
process. Also, none of the other viscose process operations (rayon, 
cellophane, cellulosic sponge) have a non-HAP alternative process for 
their operations. Therefore, this type of standard may not be feasible 
for those process operations.
    Each of the cellulose food casing operations has implemented 
process changes to reduce the amount of CS2 added to the 
viscose process. However, the owners and operators of these cellulose 
food casing operations have declared the details of these process 
changes to be confidential, making a pollution prevention standard 
based on reduction of CS2 usage infeasible.

[[Page 52178]]

H. How did we select the standards for the Viscose Processes source 
category?

    We selected the proposed standards for the Viscose Processes source 
category based on our assessment of the cost of achieving the MACT 
floor and beyond-the-floor control options developed for the source 
category and any non-air quality health and environmental impacts and 
energy requirements.
1. Standards for Existing Viscose Process Affected Sources
    For existing viscose process affected sources, we selected the MACT 
floor control options for process vents, CS2 unloading and 
storage operations, and toluene storage vessels as the standards for 
those emission points. We chose not to select any beyond-the-floor 
options as standards for existing viscose process affected sources. The 
additional cost of control beyond the floor was not reasonable.
    The only beyond-the-floor options we considered were 75 percent 
control of total sulfide emissions of cellulose food casing process 
vents and 75 percent control of total sulfide emissions for rayon 
process vents. For process vents at existing cellulose food casing 
operations, we determined that the incremental cost effectiveness of 
going beyond the floor would range from $500 to $700 per tone of total 
sulfide (reported as CS2). The low incremental cost 
effectiveness is based primarily on the larger emission reductions 
achieved beyond the floor. The high capital costs ($3.9 to $5.8 
million) to install control technology capable of achieving 75 percent 
control beyond the floor and the economic status of the cellulose food 
casing industry are the primary factors in our rejecting beyond-the-
floor requirements for cellulose food casing operations at existing 
viscose process affected sources.
    For process vents at existing rayon operations, we determined that 
the incremental cost effectiveness of going beyond the floor would 
range from $500 to $1,300 per ton of total sulfide (reported as 
CS2). The low incremental cost effectiveness is based 
primarily on the larger emission reductions achieved beyond the floor. 
The high capital costs ($15.3 to $21.8 million) to install control 
technology capable of achieving 75 percent control beyond the floor and 
the economic status of the rayon industry are the primary factors in 
our rejecting beyond-the-floor requirements for rayon operations at 
existing rayon process affected sources.
2. Standards for New Viscose Process Affected Sources
    For new viscose process affected sources, we selected the MACT 
floor control options for CS2 unloading and storage 
operations, toluene storage vessels, cellophane process vents, and 
cellulosic sponge process vents as the standards for those emission 
points. We also selected the beyond-the-floor control options for 
cellulose food casing process vents and rayon process vents (that is, 
75 percent control of total sulfide emissions) as the standards for 
those emission points. We believe that the cost of additional controls 
beyond the MACT floor for new viscose process affected sources is 
reasonable.
    As noted in the previous section, we rejected beyond-the-floor 
control options for cellulose food casing process vents and rayon 
process vents for existing viscose process affected sources because of 
the high capital costs and economic status of the respective 
industries. However, we project that capital costs will be lower for 
cellulose food casing operations at new viscose process affected 
sources. The control technology costs for the existing operations 
include retrofit costs which increased the capital costs by 50 percent. 
Retrofit costs will not be a factor for cellulose food casing 
operations and rayon operations at new viscose process affected 
sources.
    Also, the non-air quality impacts and energy requirements for 
cellulose food casing operations and rayon operations at new viscose 
process affected sources are expected to be minimal. We project that 
the non-air quality impacts and energy requirements for new viscose 
process affected sources will be comparable to those determined for 
existing viscose process affected sources. The energy requirements 
necessary to achieve control of total sulfide emissions beyond the MACT 
floor range for 2,800 to 4,600 MWh/yr for the three existing cellulose 
food casing operations and from 7,600 to 20,000 MWh/yr for the two 
existing rayon operations. The wastewater impacts range from 15 to 35 
million gal/yr for the three existing cellulose food casing operations 
and from 57 to 165 million gal/yr for the two existing rayon 
operations.

I. How did we select the standards for the Cellulose Ethers source 
category?

    We selected the proposed standards for the Cellulose Ethers source 
category based on our assessment of the cost of achieving the MACT 
floor and beyond-the-floor control options developed for the source 
category and any non-air quality and environmental impacts and energy 
requirements.
1. Standards for Existing Cellulose Ethers Affected Sources
    For existing cellulose ether affected sources, we selected the MACT 
floor control options for process vents and wastewater emissions as the 
standards for those emission points. We also selected the beyond-the-
floor control option for equipment leaks as the standard for that 
emission point. We believe that the cost of additional controls beyond 
the MACT floor for existing cellulose ether affected sources is 
reasonable.
    The cost effectiveness of implementing the equipment leak 
provisions in subpart H of the HON ranges from $400 to $600 per tone of 
HAP for the five cellulose ether operations that do not currently have 
LDAR program. The capital and annual costs are also low, with the 
capital costs ranging from $10,800 to $21,600, and the annual costs 
ranging from $17,200 to $95,900. There are no non-air quality impacts 
and energy requirements associated with this beyond-the-floor 
requirement.
2. Standards for New Cellulose Ether Affected Sources
    For new cellulose ether affected sources, we selected the MACT 
floor control options for process vents, wastewater emissions, and 
equipment leaks as the standards for those emission points. There are 
no beyond-the-floor control options for new cellulose ether affected 
sources.

J. How did we select the testing and initial compliance requirements?

    We selected the testing and initial compliance requirements based 
on a combination of the generic testing requirements in the NESHAP 
General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A) and specific testing 
requirements for the Viscose Process and Cellulose Ethers source 
categories.
1. Initial Performance Test Requirements
    We are requiring owners and operators of all affected sources to 
conduct an initial performance test to demonstrate initial compliance 
with the applicable emission limits. As specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(3) of 
subpart A, the owners and operators would conduct three separate test 
runs for each performance test and use the arithmetic mean of the 
results of the three runs to determine compliance. As specified in 
Sec. 63.7(e)(1) of subpart A, each test run must last at least 1 hour. 
The owners and operators

[[Page 52179]]

would establish 3-hour averages for each performance test based on the 
arithmetic means of the three, 1-hour test runs.
    We structured the performance test requirements for continuous 
operations to account for representative conditions. The owners and 
operators would conduct testing of emissions from continuous process 
vents at representative conditions, as defined in Sec. 63.1257(b)(7) of 
the Pharmaceutical Products NESHAP (subpart GGG of 40 CFR part 63).
    We structured the performance test requirements for batch 
operations to account for the worst-case conditions. We adopted this 
approach for batch operations because they are cyclical and, therefore, 
tend to have variable emissions. The owners and operators would conduct 
testing of emissions from batch process vents at either absolute or 
hypothetical worst-case conditions, as defined in Sec. 63.1257(b)(8) of 
the Pharmaceutical Products NESHAP (subpart GGG of 40 CFR part 63).
    In order for owners and operators of affected sources to 
demonstrate initial compliance with the applicable emissions limit for 
their process vents, we are requiring them to test their process vent 
emissions at the inlet and outlet to the control device and at the 
stack. The owners and operators would use the applicable equations in 
today's proposed rule to determine the percent reduction in emissions. 
The average emissions measured during the 3-hour performance test must 
be reduced by the applicable amount in the emission limit.
2. EPA Test Methods
    As specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(2) of subpart A, we are requiring that 
the performance tests be conducted using specified EPA test methods. 
Owners and operators of cellulose food casing, rayon, cellophane, and 
cellulosic sponge operations at new and existing viscose process 
affected sources would use EPA Method 15, ``Determination of Hydrogen 
Sulfide, Carbonyl Sulfide, and Carbon Disulfide Emissions from 
Stationary Sources'' (40 CFR part 60, appendix A), to measure the 
sulfide emissions from their process vents. The EPA Method 15 is the 
predominant test method used for measuring emissions of the sulfides 
CS2, H2S, and COS from stationary sources. The 
EPA Method 15 has been used in previous emission tests to measure 
sulfide emissions at a cellulose food casing process operation and a 
cellulosic sponge process operation.
    Except as specified below, owners and operators of cellulose ether 
operations at new and existing cellulose ether affected sources would 
use EPA Method 18, ``Measurement of Gaseous Organic Compound Emissions 
by Gas Chromatography'' (40 CFR part 60, appendix A), to measure the 
emissions of organic HAP such as ethylene oxide, methanol, methyl 
chloride, and propylene oxide from their process vents. Owners and 
operators would use Method 25, ``Determination of Total Gaseous 
Nonmethane Organic Emissions as Carbon'' (40 CFR part 60, appendix A), 
to determine the destruction efficiency of thermal oxidizers for 
organic compounds. Owners and operators may use Method 25A, 
``Determination of Total Gaseous Organic Concentration using a Flame 
Ionization Analyzer'' (40 CFR part 60, appendix A), under the following 
conditions: (1) an exhaust gas volatile organic matter concentration of 
50 ppmv or less is required in order to comply with the emission limit, 
or (2) the volatile organic matter concentration at the inlet to the 
control device and the required level of control are such as to result 
in exhaust volatile organic matter concentrations of 50 ppmv or less; 
or (3) because of the high efficiency of the control device, the 
anticipated volatile organic matter concentration at the control device 
exhaust is 50 ppmv or less, regardless of the inlet concentration.
    Owners and operators of cellophane operations at new and existing 
viscose process affected sources would use EPA Method 18 to measure 
emissions of toluence from their solvent coating process vents and 
toluene storage vessels. The EPA Method 18 is the predominant test 
method used for measuring emissions of speciated gaseous organics.
3. Material Balance
    In order for owners and operators of viscose process affected 
sources to demonstrate continuous compliance with the applicable 
percent reduction standard, they must be able to calculate the percent 
reduction of emissions on an ongoing basis after the initial 
performance test. Therefore, as an additional initial compliance 
requirement, the owners and operators must also prepare a material 
balance that includes information on HAP usage and HAP emissions. The 
material balance would be based on information from the initial 
performance test and from records at the affected source. If the owners 
and operators use pollution prevention process changes to comply with 
the emission limits, then the material balance must include information 
on the amount of HAP that would have been used in the absence of the 
process change and the amount of HAP that was used after the process 
change was implemented. By recording this information, the owners and 
operators would be able to determine the percent reduction from 
implementing the process change. The owners and operators would use the 
applicable equation in today's proposed rule to determine the percent 
reduction from process changes and any other emission controls.
4. Determination of Operating Limits
    In order to establish the operating limits used to demonstrate 
continuous compliance, the owners and operators of affected sources 
must install the monitoring equipment used to establish these limits. 
Because the operating limits will be established during the initial 
performance test, the owners and operators must install the monitoring 
equipment prior to the initial performance test. We selected operating 
parameters for each control device that are reliable indicators of 
control device performance. See section III.K.1 for further information 
on the selection of the operating parameters.
    To establish site-specific operating limits for condensers, thermal 
oxidizers, water scrubbers, caustic scrubbers, biofilters, and oil 
absorbers, the owners and operators must record the applicable 
operating parameters averaged over the same period as the performance 
test while the vent stream is routed and constituted normally. For 
flares, the owners and operators must comply with the requirements in 
Sec. 63.11 of subpart A to establish site-specific operating limits. 
For carbon absorbers, the owners and operators must record the 
applicable operating parameters for each carbon bed regeneration cycle 
during the period of the performance test. In each case, the owners and 
operators must locate the monitoring sensors in positions that provide 
representative parameter values.
5. Initial Compliance Requirements for CS2 Unloading and 
Storage Operations
    Owners and operators of new and existing cellulose food casing, 
rayon, cellophane, and cellulosic sponge affected sources would have 
three options for demonstrating initial compliance with the emission 
limits and work practice standards for CS2 unloading and 
storage operations. If the owners and operators choose to reduce the 
CS2 emissions from their CS2 unloading and 
storage operations by 83 percent by any compliance method, they must 
have a record documenting how they met the 83 percent emission limit. 
If they met the 83 percent

[[Page 52180]]

emission limit by installing a nitrogen system, they would calculate 
the actual percent reduction achieved using the applicable equation in 
today's proposed rule. If they met the 83 percent emission limit by 
venting emissions to a control device, then they must conduct an 
initial performance test to demonstrate the actual percent reduction 
achieved, prepare a material balance based on information from the test 
and from records at the affected source, and establish the appropriate 
control device operating parameters during the test. Owners and 
operators would calculate the percent reduction of emissions measured 
during the performance test using the applicable equation in today's 
proposed rule.
    If the owners and operators decide to reduce their CS2 
emissions by installing a nitrogen system for CS2 unloading 
and storage, then they must have a record certifying that a nitrogen 
system is being used for CS2 unloading and storage 
operations. Using a nitrogen system for CS2 unloading and 
storage ensures the reduction of CS2 emissions by at least 
83 percent relative to water systems, based on MACT floor calculations.
    If the owners and operators decide to obtain an equivalent emission 
reduction from elsewhere in the viscose process, such as a 0.14 percent 
reduction from process vents, then they must comply with the initial 
compliance requirements for process vents, that is, conduct an initial 
performance test of sulfide emissions, prepare a material balance, and 
establish the appropriate control device operating parameters during 
the test. The average total sulfide emissions from the process vents, 
measured during the 3-hour performance test, must be reduced by the 
applicable amount (such as 75 percent for cellulosic sponge operations) 
plus 0.14 percent.
6. Initial Compliance Requirements for Cellulose Ether Operations for 
Wastewater Emissions
    Because cellulose ether operations at new and existing cellulose 
ether affected sources are subject to the applicable process wastewater 
provisions of subpart G of 40 CFR part 63, they are also subject to the 
applicable initial compliance provisions of subpart G for process 
wastewater. These initial compliance provisions include using EPA 
Method 305, ``Measurement of Emission Potential of Individual Volatile 
Organic Compounds in Waste'' (40 CFR part 63, appendix A), which is one 
test method mentioned under subpart G for concentration measurements of 
process wastewater.
7. Initial Compliance Requirements for Cellulose Ether Operations for 
Equipment Leaks
    Because cellulose ether operations at new and existing cellulose 
ether affected cellulose ether affected sources are subject to the 
applicable equipment leak standards of subpart H of 40 CFR part 63, 
they are also subject to the applicable initial compliance provisions 
of subpart H for equipment leaks. These initial compliance provisions 
include using EPA Method 21, ``Determination of Volatile Organic 
Compounds Leaks'' (40 CFR part 60, appendix A), which is the 
predominant test method for determining equipment leaks from process 
equipment, such as valves, flanges and other connections, pumps and 
compressors, and pressure relief devices.

K. How did we select the continuous compliance requirements?

    We selected the continuous compliance requirements based on a 
combination of general monitoring requirements in the NESHAP General 
Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A) and specific monitoring 
requirements for the Viscose Processes and Cellulose Ethers source 
categories.
1. Control Device Parameter Monitoring Requirements
    As specified in Sec. 63.8(c) of subpart A, the owners and operators 
of affected sources must record the data from their monitoring systems 
at least once every 15 minutes. They must have a minimum of three of 
the four required data points to constitute a valid hour of data. They 
must also have valid hourly data for at least 66 percent of every 
averaging period (such as, two valid hourly values for a 3-hour 
averaging period).
    In most cases, owners and operators are required to calculate 3-
hour averages of their operating parameter values for the purpose of 
demonstrating continuous compliance with the emission limit. (for 
carbon adsorbers, owners and operators are required to monitor 
operating parameters for each regeneration cycle.) We selected the 3-
hour averaging time because the initial performance test provisions in 
today's proposed rule require owners and operators to perform a minimum 
of three, 1-hour test runs, and the limits of the established parameter 
values would be based on the average values obtained using all test 
data obtained during the performance test. Each 3-hour average 
parameter value must be within the level established during the initial 
performance test in order for the owners and operators to demonstrate 
continuous compliance with the operating limit.
    Based on information from operations in the Viscose Processes 
source category, the Cellulose Ethers source category, and other source 
categories, we selected operating parameters for each control device 
that are reliable indicators of control device performance. Owners and 
operators of affected sources would monitor these operating parameters 
to demonstrate continuous compliance with the operating limits.
    a. Carbon Adsorbers. We selected the operating parameters for 
carbon adsorbers based on monitoring provisions in subpart G of 40 CFR 
part 63 and in the Pharmaceutical Products NESHAP (subpart GGG of 40 
CFR part 63). We are requiring owners and operators of affected sources 
equipped with carbon adsorbers to monitor and record the following 
parameters to demonstrate continuous compliance: (1) Total regeneration 
stream flow during the carbon bed regeneration cycle, (2) the 
temperature of the carbon bed after regeneration, (3) the temperature 
of the carbon bed after completing the cooling cycle, and (4) 
regeneration frequency (operating time since the end of the last 
regeneration). Inlet temperature and flow can affect the adsorption 
unit efficiency.
    b. Thermal Oxidizers. Based on information from subpart G of 40 CFR 
part 63 and from cellulose ether and cellulosic sponge operations, we 
are requiring owners and operators of affected sources equipped with 
thermal oxidizers to monitor the temperature in the firebox or in the 
ductwork immediately downstream of the firebox. A sufficiently high 
temperature in the firebox helps to ensure complete combustion.
    c. Biofilters. We selected the operating parameters for biofilters 
based on information from a cellulosic sponge operation and a biofilter 
vendor. We are requiring owners and operators of affected sources 
equipped with a biofilter to monitor the following parameters to 
demonstrate continuous compliance: (1) Inlet air flow temperature, (2) 
inlet air flow rate, (3) amount of water and nutrients added, (4) 
nutrient levels in the biofilter discharge, (5) pH of the effluent, (6) 
conductivity of the effluent, and (7) pressure drop on the media. These 
monitoring parameters have also been recommended by a biofilter vendor.
    Monitoring the temperature and gas flow rate at the biofilter inlet 
can assist the owners and operators in maintaining an optimal inlet 
temperature and flow. Monitoring the nutrient levels added to

[[Page 52181]]

the system and in the biofilter discharge determines whether the 
microbes in the biofilter bed are receiving enough nutrients; the 
presence of some excess nutrients is an indication that they are. By 
measuring the pH and conductivity of the effluent, owners and operators 
can monitor the buildup of sulfuric acid. The pH decreases and the 
conductivity of the effluent increases as levels of sulfur and sulfuric 
acid increase. Monitoring the pressure drop across the system can alert 
owners and operators to problems in the system that increase the 
pressure drop (such as fungal growth sealing off the bottom of the 
biofilter bed).
    d. Condensers. Based on information from the subpart G of 40 CFR 
part 63 and from cellulose ether operations, we are requiring owners 
and operators of affected sources equipped with condensers to monitor 
the condenser outlet gas temperature. Monitoring the outlet gas 
temperature helps to ensure proper operation of the condenser.
    e. Oil Absorbers. No information is readily available on operating 
parameters for owners and operators of affected sources with oil 
absorbers. However, several parameters are suggested based on the 
method of operation of this control device. After the CS2 
vapors from the process are absorbed in an absorption vessel, the 
absorption liquid is passed to heat exchangers, which increase the 
temperature of the liquid and enhance the release of the CS2 
from the absorption liquid in a steam stripper. The absorption liquid 
from the stripper is sent through a heat exchanger to cool and is 
returned to the absorber. The flow of absorption liquid through the 
absorber, the stripping and condensation temperatures before and after 
the steam stripper, and the steam flow are good parameters for ensuring 
the proper operation of this control device. Consequently, we are 
requiring owners and operators of affected sources equipped with oil 
absorbers to monitor these parameters to demonstrate continuous 
compliance.
    f. Scrubbers. We selected the operating parameters for packed tower 
scrubbers based on information from subpart G of 40 CFR part 63, and 
the Pharmaceutical Products NESHAP (subpart GGG of part 63), cellulose 
food casing operations, and cellulose ether operations. Owners and 
operators of affected sources equipped with packet tower scrubbers that 
use water as the scrubber liquid would monitor scrubber pressure drop 
and scrubber liquid flow rate to demonstrate continuous compliance. 
Owners and operators of affected sources equipped with packed tower 
scrubbers that use caustic scrubber liquid would monitor these two 
parameters and also scrubber liquid pH. The pressure drop across the 
packed tower scrubber is an indicator of whether the packing in the 
scrubber is becoming clogged. Continued flow of scrubber liquid ensures 
that the scrubber is operating properly. Monitoring the pH of the 
scrubber liquid ensures that the scrubber liquid is at the optimal pH 
level for absorbing the target pollutant.
    g. Flares. The simplest and most effective means of determining 
whether a flare is operating properly is whether the pilot flame is 
still burning. Therefore, we are requiring owners and operators of 
affected sources using flares to monitor the presence of the pilot 
flame in addition to the other flare operating requirements (such as 
design specifications, heat content specifications, exit velocity 
limitation, etc.) specified in Sec. 63.11 of subpart A.
2. Material Balance
    In order for owners and operators of viscose process affected 
sources to demonstrate continuous compliance with the applicable 
percent reduction standard, they must be able to calculate the percent 
reduction of emissions on an ongoing basis. They would calculate the 
percent reduction using the emissions data from the material balance 
that they established as part of their initial compliance requirements. 
The material balance would include information on HAP usage and HAP 
emissions based on information from the initial performance test and 
from records at the affected source. If the owners and operators use 
pollution prevention process changes to comply with the emission 
limits, then the material balance would include information on the 
amount of HAP that would have been used in the absence of the process 
change, and the amount of HAP that was used after the process change 
was implemented. By recording this information, the owners and 
operators would be able to determine the percent reduction from 
implementing the process change. The owners and operators would use the 
applicable equation in today's proposed rule to determine the percent 
reduction from process changes and any other emission controls.
3. Continuous Compliance Requirements for CS2 Unloading and 
Storage Operations
    Owners and operators of cellulose food casing, rayon, cellophane, 
and cellulosic sponge at new and existing viscose process affected 
sources would have three options for demonstrating continuous 
compliance with the emission limits and work practice standards for 
CS2 unloading and storage operations.
    If owners and operators choose to reduce the CS2 
emissions from their CS2 unloading and storage operations by 
83 percent by any compliance method, they must keep a record 
documenting how they are meeting the 83 percent emission limit. If they 
met the 83 percent emission limit by installing a nitrogen system, they 
would calculate the actual percent reduction achieved using the 
applicable equation in today's proposed rule. If they met the 85 
percent emission limit by venting emissions to a control device, then 
they must monitor the appropriate control device operating parameters 
and meet the appropriate operating limits. They would also calculate 
the percent reduction of emissions from the material balance using the 
applicable equation in today's proposed rule.
    If owners and operators decide to reduce their CS2 
emissions by installing a nitrogen system for CS2 unloading 
and storage, then they must keep the record established as part of 
their initial compliance requirements certifying that a nitrogen system 
is being used for CS2 unloading and storage operations. 
Using a nitrogen system for CS2 unloading and storage 
ensures the reduction of CS2 emissions by at least 83 
percent relative to water systems, based on MACT floor calculations.
    If owners and operators of affected sources decide to obtain an 
equivalent emission reduction from elsewhere in the viscose process, 
such as a 0.14 percent reduction from process vents, then they must 
comply with the continuous compliance requirements for process vents. 
They must monitor and record operating parameters at least once every 
15 minutes and calculate 3-hour averages of operating parameter values. 
Each 3-hour average parameter value must be within the value 
established during the initial performance test to demonstrate 
continuous compliance with the operating limit. They must also maintain 
the material balance that they established as part of their initial 
compliance requirements and document the percent reduction of total 
sulfide (reported as CS2) using the emissions data from the 
material balance. The average total sulfide emissions from the process 
vents, based on information from the material balance, must be reduced 
by the applicable amount (such as 75 percent for cellulosic sponge 
operations) plus 0.14 percent.

[[Page 52182]]

4. Continuous Compliance Requirements for Cellulose Ether Operations 
for Wastewater Emissions
    Because owners and operators of new and existing cellulose ether 
affected sources are subject to the applicable process wastewater 
provisions of subpart G of 40 CFR part 63, they are also subject to the 
applicable continuous compliance provisions of subpart G for process 
wastewater.
5. Continuous Compliance Requirements for Cellulose Ether Operations 
for Equipment Leaks
    Because owners and operators of new and existing cellulose ether 
affected sources are subject to the applicable equipment leak standards 
of subpart H of 40 CFR part 63, they are also subject to the applicable 
continuous compliance provisions of subpart H for equipment leaks.

L. How did we select the notification, reporting, and recordkeeping 
requirements?

    We selected the notification, recordkeeping, and reporting 
requirements based on generic requirements in the NESHAP General 
Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A) and specific requirements for 
the Viscose Processes and Cellulose Ethers source categories.
1. Notification Requirements
    The notification requirements that we selected include initial 
notifications, notification of performance test, notification of 
compliance status, and notification dates. These notification 
requirements are based on requirements in Secs. 63.7(b) and (c), 
63.8(f), 63.9(b) and (h), and 63.10(d)(2) of subpart A.
2. Reporting Requirements
    The reporting requirements that we selected include semiannual 
compliance reports, required in Sec. 63.10(e)(3) of subpart A, and 
immediate SSM reports, required in Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(ii) of subpart A. 
If there were no deviations from the emission limits, operating limits, 
or work practice standards during the reporting period, then the 
semiannual compliance report must include a statement that there were 
no deviations. If there were deviations from the emission limits, 
operating limits, or work practice standards during the reporting 
period, then the semiannual compliance report must include the 
information required in today's proposed rule. If there was a startup, 
shutdown or malfunction during the reporting period, and the source 
took actions consistent with the SSM plan, then the compliance report 
must include the information in Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(i) of subpart A. The 
submittal date for the compliance report is based on information in 
Sec. 63.10(e)(3)(v) of subpart A.
    If there was a startup, shutdown, or malfunction during the 
reporting period, and the owner or operator took actions inconsistent 
with the SSM plan, then the owner or operator must submit an immediate 
SSM report. The report must include the actions taken for the event and 
the information provided in Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(ii) of subpart A. The 
submittal date for the immediate SSM report is based on 
Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(ii) of subpart A.
3. Recordkeeping Requirements
    The recordkeeping requirements that we selected include a copy of 
each notification and report, as well as documentation supporting any 
initial notification or notification of compliance status, according to 
the requirements in Sec. 63.10(b)(1)(xiv) of subpart A. Owners and 
operators of affected sources must also keep the records in 
Sec. 63.6(e)(3) of subpart A related to SSM, records of performance 
tests as required in Sec. 63.7(g)(1) of subpart A, and records for each 
continuous parameter monitoring system.
    The records for the continuous parameter monitoring system would 
include records of operating limits and parameter monitoring data 
required in today's proposed rule. Owners and operators of affected 
sources that installed a nitrogen system to comply with the work 
practice standard for CS2 unloading and storage operations 
must keep records certifying that a nitrogen system is being used. 
Owners and operators must keep records of all material balances and 
calculations documenting the percent reduction in HAP emissions used to 
demonstrate compliance with the emission limits.

M. What is the relationship of this rule to other rules?

    This section discusses the relationship between today's proposed 
rule and other Federal rules covering cellulose products manufacturing 
operations. We evaluated pertinent rules in an effort to minimize the 
burden on the industry and enforcement authorities. We are interested 
in hearing from you on specific suggestions for reducing the overall 
burden of the rule without jeopardizing its enforceability of our 
overall emission reduction goals.
1. Carbon Disulfide OSHA PEL
    Occupational exposure to CS2 is regulated by the U.S. 
Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration 
(OSHA). The current permissible exposure limit (PEL) for 
CS2, established by OSHA in 1992, is 20 ppm as an 8-hour 
time-weighted average (TWA) (29 CFR 1910.1000, subpart Z). The PEL 
requires operations to reduce average worker exposure to CS2 
at or below 20 ppm during an 8-hour shift of a 40-hour week.
    Viscose process operations have reduced worker exposure to 
CS2 by designing their ventilation systems to produce large 
volumes of process and building exhaust air. As a result, viscose 
process operations have relatively low CS2 concentrations 
and high gas flow rates.
    Currently, OSHA is evaluating setting a lower PEL for 
CS2. Many viscose process operations have indicated that 
they are currently achieving CS2 levels at or below 4 ppm, 
which was the PEL for CS2 for a short period of time, prior 
to its being increased to 20 ppm. Therefore, we do not anticipate any 
OSHA limit at or above 4 ppm will have much impact on industry's 
compliance with the CS2 emission reduction requirements in 
today's proposed rule.
    However, an OSHA limit lower than 4 ppm could require some viscose 
process operations to take additional measures and increase their gas 
flow rates in order to further reduce the CS2 concentrations 
inside the operation. The more dilute flows, the more difficult it 
becomes for MACT floor viscose process operations, that are currently 
controlled, to maintain the level of CS2 control that they 
currently achieve. Control devices would not be as efficient at 
removing CS2 at reduced concentrations. Consequently, the 
MACT floor would have to be revised downward. Otherwise, the MACT 
standard would be based on obsolete, incorrect information.
    The more dilute flow makes it more difficult for viscose process 
operations to achieve the level of CS2 control necessary to 
meet the MACT floor and increases emission control costs to meet the 
MACT floor. The resulting higher cost effectiveness beyond the MACT 
floor would make it more difficult for us to establish beyond-the-floor 
requirements.
    Conversely, a tighter OSHA limit could force some viscose process 
operations to enclose more of their process in order to reduce the 
CS2 concentrations inside the operation. The more 
concentrated flows resulting from the lower OSHA limit would dovetail 
with the need for more concentrated flows for the CS2 
control devices used to comply with the MACT standard, whether the 
standard is set at the MACT

[[Page 52183]]

floor or beyond-the-floor. To avoid any conflict in implementing our 
respective standards, we are working with OSHA to coordinate our 
efforts in reducing worker exposure to CS2 and air emissions 
of CS2.
2. Polyether Polyols NESHAP
    The proposed NESHAP for Polyether Polyols Production (subpart PPP 
of 40 CFR part 63) (62 FR 46818, September 4, 1997) defined a 
``polyether polyol'' as

    . . . a compound formed through the polymerization of ethylene 
oxide or propylene oxide or other cyclic ethers with compounds 
having one or more reactive hydrogens (i.e., a hydrogen bonded to 
nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus, sulfur, etc.) to form polyethers. This 
definition, excludes materials regulated under the HON, such as 
glycols and glycol ethers.

    One commenter on the proposed rule noted that the cellulose ether, 
hydroxyethyl cellulose, is formed through the reaction of ethylene 
oxide on cellulose polymer molecules. The commenter requested that EPA 
clarify whether hydroxyethyl cellulose is included or excluded from the 
definition of ``polyether polyol.'' In response to this comment, the 
final Polyether Polyol NESHAP (64 FR 29439, June 1, 1999) revised the 
definition of ``polyether polyol'' to specifically exclude hydroxyethyl 
cellulose. Therefore, hydroxethyl cellulose operations are not subject 
to the requirements of subpart PPP of 40 CFR part 63 and are subject to 
today's proposed subpart.
    However, the final Polyether Polyol NESHAP did not specifically 
exclude any of the other cellulose ether operations (for example, 
hydroxypropyl cellulose operations and hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose 
operations) subject to today's proposed rule and which also fall under 
the definition of a polyether polyol. A revision to the Polyether 
Polyol NESHAP that specifically excludes all cellulose ether operations 
was published on May 8, 2000 (65 FR 26491). Once this change becomes 
effective, cellulose ether operations will only be subject to this 
subpart.
3. Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Vessels New Source Performance 
Standards (NSPS)
    The NSPS for Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Vessels (40 CFR part 
60, subpart Kb) includes requirements for storage vessels constructed, 
reconstructed, or modified after July 23, 1984 that are used to store 
volatile organic liquids. The NSPS exempts the following storage 
vessels: (1) vessels with a design capacity less than 75 cubic meters 
(m\3\), (2) vessels with a capacity greater than or equal to 151 m\3\ 
with a maximum true vapor pressure less than 3.5 kilopascals (kPa), and 
(3) vessels with a capacity greater than or equal to 75 m\3\ but less 
than 151 m\3\ with a maximum true vapor pressure less than 15 kPa.
    Today's proposed rule also contains requirements for storage 
vessels containing volatile organic liquids, specifically HAP storage 
vessels containing CS2 or toluene at viscose process 
affected sources. However, the CS2 storage vessel standards 
in today's proposed rule primarily address the gaseous CS2 
emissions being generated from the CS2-contaminated water 
from water unloading and padding systems, not the gaseous 
CS2 emissions from the storage vessel. Also, only the 
cellophane operation has toluene storage vessels that would be subject 
to the storage vessel provisions in subpart Kb and today's proposed 
rule. Therefore, we project no overlap in requirements between subpart 
Kb and today's proposed rule for CS2 storage vessels. The 
owner or operator will identify in the notification of compliance 
status which storage vessels are in compliance with subpart Kb.

IV. Summary of Environmental, Energy and Economic Impacts

A. What are the air quality impacts?

    We have determined nationwide baseline HAP emissions from 
operations in the Viscose Processes source category and Cellulose 
Ethers source category to be 20,700 ton/yr at the current level of 
control. We have determined that the proposed standards will reduce 
total HAP emissions from these operations by about 4,060 ton/yr.
    In addition to reducing emissions of HAP, the proposed standards 
will also reduce emissions of non-HAP, such as H2S. We have 
determined that the proposed standards will reduce H2S 
emissions by about 1,490 ton/yr from a baseline level of 4,440 ton/yr.
    We have determined that the proposed standards will increase 
secondary emissions of particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen 
oxides, and carbon monoxide from industrial and utility boilers by 
about 23 ton/yr. Secondary emissions were assumed to be generated from 
the utility boilers that generate the electricity for the control 
devices as well as from the industrial boilers that generate the steam 
used in operating the control devices (e.g., carbon adsorbers).

B. What are the cost impacts?

    We have determined that the capital costs for emission control 
equipment for the proposed standards will be $33.0 million, and the 
capital costs for monitoring equipment will be $251,000. The capitol 
costs include the costs to purchase and install the equipment.
    We have determined that the incremental annual costs for emission 
control for the proposed standards will be $7.7 million/yr, and the 
annual costs for monitoring will be $362,000. The annual costs include 
the direct annual costs (comprised of labor, materials, and utilities) 
plus the indirect annual costs (comprised of overhead, taxes, 
insurance, administrative charges, and capital recovery).
    We expect that the total average costs for annual recordkeeping and 
reporting required by the proposed standards will be $2,041 over the 
first 3 years after implementation of the standards.

C. What are the economic impacts?

    With our economic impact analysis, we sought to evaluate the 
impacts this proposed rule would have on the cellulose manufacturing 
market, consumers, and society. Because of the variability in end 
products in cellulose products manufacturing, we assessed impacts on 
five separate market segments. We treated the Cellulose Ethers source 
category as one segment and divided the Viscose Processes source 
category into four segments: cellophane, rayon, food casings, and 
sponges. The total annualized social cost (in 1998 dollars) of the 
proposed rule on the industry is $7.7 million, with costs to the firms 
affected by this proposed rule ranging from 0.2 to 4.5 percent of 
sales. The cost-to-sales ratios for ethers and cellophane were below 1 
percent, suggesting the proposed rule had minimal impact on these 
segments. Since the cost-to-sales ratios were higher overall for the 
rayon, food casings, and sponge segments of the cellulose market, we 
performed a market analysis using 1998 as the baseline. The results 
indicated less than 1 percent change in market prices and in the 
quantity of cellulose products produced for these three segments.
    We do not predict that cellulose manufacturing facilities will 
close as a result of this proposed rule. However, available economic 
data suggest that some facilities in this source category would very 
likely close if current trends continue--even if they did not incur 
compliance costs from this proposed rule. The impact of these proposed 
standards may be that decisions to close facilities may occur sooner 
than they would otherwise.

[[Page 52184]]

D. What are the non-air health, environmental and energy impacts?

    We have determined that the overall energy demand (electricity plus 
steam) for operations in the Viscose Processes source category and 
Cellulose Ethers source category will increase by about 16,000 MWh/yr 
under the proposed standards. We determined this net increase based on 
the additional energy demand for control devices installed to meet the 
proposed standards. No information for comparison is currently 
available on the baseline energy consumption for the Viscoe Processes 
source category and Cellulose Ethers source category.
    We have determined that wastewater generation will increase by 
about 115 million gal/yr from a baseline level of 9,204 million gal/yr 
with the installation of the control devices. We project that some of 
the control strategies examined for the proposed standards will 
generate additional solid waste, primarily from the use of scrubbers. 
We have no information on the amount of additional solid waste that 
will be generated, but we anticipate that the amount will be small.

V. Solicitation of Comments and Public Participation

    We would like to have full public participation in arriving at our 
final decisions, and we encourage comment on all aspects of this 
proposal from all interested parties. Interested parties should submit 
supporting data and detailed analyses with their comments so we can 
make maximum use of them. Information on where and when to submit 
comments is listed in ``Comments'' under the ADDRESSES and DATES 
sections. Information on procedures for submitting proprietary 
information in the comments is listed in ``Comments'' under the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

VI. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), EPA 
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and 
therefore subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order 
defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to 
result in 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 obligation 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.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been 
determined that this rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' 
because none of the listed criteria apply to this action. Consequently, 
this action was not submitted to OMB for review under Executive Order 
12866.

B. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999) requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' Under 
Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that has 
federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance 
costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal 
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance 
costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA consults with 
State and local officials early in the process of developing the 
proposed regulation. The EPA also may not issue a regulation that has 
federalism implications and that preempts State law unless EPA consults 
with State and local officials early in the process of developing the 
proposed regulation.
    If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13132 requires EPA 
to provide to OMB, in a separately identified section of the preamble 
to the rule, a federalism summary impact statement (FSIS). The FSIS 
must include a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation 
with State and local officials, a summary of the nature of their 
concerns and EPA's position supporting the need to issue the 
regulation, and a statement of the extent to which the concerns of 
State and local officials have been met. Also, when EPA transmits a 
draft final rule with federalism implications to OMB for review 
pursuant to Executive Order 12866, it must include a certification from 
EPA's Federalism Official stating that EPA has met the requirements of 
Executive Order 13132 in a meaningful and timely manner.
    This proposal rule will not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. 
Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply 
to this rule.

C. Executive Order 13084, Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    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, or EPA consults with those 
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084 
requires EPA to provide to OMB, 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 
officials 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 proposed rule does not significantly or uniquely 
affect the communities of Indian tribal governments. No tribal 
governments own or operate cellulose food casing operations, rayon 
operations, cellophane operations, cellulosic sponge operations, or 
cellulose ether operations. Accordingly, the requirements of section 
3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this action.

[[Page 52185]]

D. Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental 
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, EPA 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 that EPA considered.
    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those 
regulatory actions that are based on health or safety risks, such that 
the analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has 
the potential to influence the regulation. This rule is not subject to 
Executive Order 13045 because it is based solely on technology 
performance. No children's risk analysis was performed because no 
alternative technologies exist that would provide greater stringency at 
a reasonable cost. Furthermore, this rule has been determined not to be 
``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub. 
L. 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that 
may result in expenditures by State, local, and tribal governments, in 
aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 1 
year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is 
needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and 
consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the 
least-costly, most cost-effective, or least-burdensome alternative that 
achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do 
not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least-
costly, most cost-effective, or least-burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that 
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, including tribal governments, it must have developed under 
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must 
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling 
officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely 
input in the development of EPA's regulatory proposals with significant 
Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and 
advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory 
requirements.
    The EPA has determined that this proposed rule does not contain a 
Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more 
for State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the 
private sector in any 1 year. The maximum total annual cost of this 
proposed rule for any year has been determined to be less than $9 
million. Thus, today's proposed rule is not subject to the requirements 
of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. In addition, EPA has determined 
that this proposed rule contains no regulatory requirements that might 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments because it contains 
no requirements that apply to such governments or impose obligations 
upon them. Therefore, today's proposed rule is not subject to the 
requirements of section 203 of the UMRA.

F. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1966 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.

    The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a regulatory 
flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment 
rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act or any 
other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small 
governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's proposed rule on 
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business that 
has fewer than 1,000 employees for SIC codes 2823, 2819, and 2869; 
fewer than 750 employees for SIC code 2821; or fewer than 500 employees 
for SIC code 3089; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a 
government of a city, county, town, school district or special district 
with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization 
that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and 
operated and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impact of today's proposed rule on 
small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. We have 
determined that only one company meets one of the definitions of small 
entity--a small business that has fewer than 500 employees for SIC code 
3089. This company owns only 1 of the 14 operations subject to today's 
proposed rule. There are several firms subject to today's proposed rule 
whose costs will be a greater percentage of sales than this small 
business. Furthermore, the market impacts on this company are minimal, 
and are in line with impacts experience by other firms subject to 
today's proposed rule.
    Although this proposed rule will not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has 
tried to reduce the impact of this proposed rule on small entities. We 
held a number of meetings with industry in which the lone small 
business participated, and we visited the only small business impacted 
by this proposed rule. The EPA continues to be interested in the 
potential impacts of the proposed rule on small entities and welcomes 
comments on issues related to such impacts.

G. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this proposed rule will 
be submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget under 
the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The EPA has 
prepared an Information Collection Request (ICR) document 1974.01, and 
you may obtain a copy from Sandy Farmer by mail at Office of 
Environmental Information, Collection Strategies Division (2822), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., 
Washington, DC 20460, by email at [email protected], or by calling 
(202) 260-2740. You may also download a copy off the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr. The information requirements are not effective until 
OMB approves them.
    The information requirements are based on notification, 
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the NESHAP General 
Provisions (40 CFR part 63, subpart A), which are mandatory for all 
operators subject to national emission standards. These

[[Page 52186]]

recordkeeping and reporting requirements are specifically authorized by 
section 114 of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7414). All information submitted to 
EPA pursuant to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements for which 
a claim of confidentiality is made is safeguarded according to EPA's 
policies set forth in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B.
    The proposed rule would require maintenance inspections of the 
control devices but would not require any notifications or reports 
beyond those required by the NESHAP General Provisions (40 CFR part 63, 
subpart A). The recordkeeping requirements require only the specific 
information needed to determine compliance.
    The annual recordkeeping and reporting burden for this collection 
(averaged over the first 3 years after the effective date of the rule) 
has been determined to be 42 labor hours per year, at a total annual 
cost of $2,041. This burden number includes one-time notifications and 
recordkeeping. Total capital/startup costs over the 3-year period of 
the ICR have been determined to be $0. Total annualized operation and 
maintenance costs associated with the notification requirements have 
been determined to be $129.
    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: (1) Review instructions; (2) 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; (3) adjust the 
existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and 
requirements; (4) train personnel to be able to respond to a collection 
of information; (5) search data sources; (6) complete and review the 
collection of information; and (7) 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, Collection Strategies Division; U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency (2822); 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, 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. Since OMB is required to make a decision concerning the 
ICR between 30 and 60 days after August 28, 2000, a comment to OMB is 
best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it by September 
27, 2000. The final rule will respond to any OMB or public comments on 
the information collection requirements contained in this proposal.

H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Pub. L. No. 104-113, section 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 
note), directs all Federal agencies to use voluntary consensus 
standards instead of government-unique standards in their regulatory 
and procurement activities, unless to do so would be inconsistent with 
applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards 
are technical standards (such as materials specifications, test 
methods, sampling procedures, business practices) developed or adopted 
by one or more voluntary consensus standards bodies. Examples of 
organizations generally regarded as voluntary consensus standards 
bodies include the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 
the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), and the Society of 
Automotive engineers (SAE). The NTTAA requires Federal agencies to 
provide Congress, through annual reports to OMB, with explanations when 
an agency does not use available and applicable voluntary consensus 
standards.
    Consistent with the NTTAA, EPA conducted searches to identify 
voluntary consensus standards for use in emissions testing. The search 
for emissions testing procedures identified 20 voluntary consensus 
standards that appeared to have possible use in lieu of EPA standard 
reference methods. However, after reviewing the available standards, 
EPA determined that nine of the candidate consensus standards 
identified for measuring emissions of the HAP or surrogates subject to 
emission limits in the proposed rule would not be practical due to lack 
of equivalency, documentation, and validation data. Eleven of the 
remaining candidate consensus standards are under development or under 
EPA review. The EPA plans to follow, review, and consider adopting 
these standards after their development and after further review by EPA 
is completed.
    The ASTM D6420-99 is currently under EPA review as an approved 
alternative to EPA Method 18. The EPA will also compare this final ASTM 
standard to methods previously approved as alternatives to EPA Method 
18 with specific applicability limitations. These methods, designated 
as ALT-017 and CTM-028, are available through EPA's Emission 
Measurement Center Internet site at www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/tmethods.html. 
The final ASTM D6420-99 standard is very similar to these approved 
alternative methods, which may be equally suitable for specific 
applications. The EPA plans to continue its review of the final ASTM 
standard and will consider adopting the ASTM standard at a later date.
    The EPA takes comment on compliance demonstration requirements 
proposed in this rulemaking and specifically invites the public to 
identify potentially applicable voluntary consensus standards. 
Commenters should also explain why this proposed rule should adopt 
these voluntary consensus standards in lieu of EPA's standards. 
Emission test 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 EPA Method 301 (40 CFR part 63, appendix A) was used).
    Table 4 to the proposed rule lists the EPA test methods included in 
the proposed rule. Most of the methods have been used by States and 
industry for more than 10 years. Nevertheless, as specified in 
Sec. 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f) of subpart A, the proposed rule also allows 
any State or affected source to apply to EPA for permission to use an 
alternative method in place of any of the EPA test methods listed in 
Table 4 to the proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

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

    Dated: August 11, 2000.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 63, title 40, chapter 
I of the Code of the Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as 
follows:

[[Page 52187]]

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

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

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

    2. It is proposed that part 63 be amended by adding subpart UUUU to 
read as follows:

Subpart UUUU--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants for Cellulose Products Manufacturing

Sec.

What This Subpart Covers

63.5480   What is the purpose of this subpart?
63.5485   Am I subject to this subpart?
63.5490   What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?
63.5495   When do I have to comply with this subpart?

Emission Limits, Operating Limits, and Work Practice Standards

63.5505   What emission limits, operating limits, and work practice 
standards must I meet?

General Compliance Requirements

63.5515   What are my general requirements for complying with this 
subpart?

Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements

63.5530   How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission 
limits and work practice standards?
63.5535   What performance tests and other procedures must I use?
63.5540   By what date must I conduct a performance test or other 
initial compliance demonstration?
63.5545   What are my monitoring installation, operation, and 
maintenance requirements?

Continuous Compliance Requirements

63.5555   How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the 
emission limits, operating limits, and work practice standards?
63.5560   How do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate 
continuous compliance?

Notifications, Reports, and Records

63.5575   What notifications must I submit and when?
63.5580   What reports must I submit and when?
63.5585   What records must I keep?
63.5590   In what form and how long must I keep my records?

Other Requirements and Information

63.5600   What other requirements apply to me?
63.5605   Who implements and enforces this subpart?
63.5610   What definitions apply to this subpart?

Tables

Table 1 to Subpart UUUU--Emission Limits and Work Practice Standards
Table 2 to Subpart UUUU--Operating Limits
Table 3 to Subpart UUUU--Initial Compliance With Emission Limits and 
Work Practice Standards
Table 4 to Subpart UUUU--Requirements for Performance Tests
Table 5 to Subpart UUUU--Continuous Compliance with Emission Limits 
and Work Practice Standards
Table 6 to Subpart UUUU--Continuous Compliance with Operating Limits
Table 7 to Subpart UUUU--Requirements for Notifications
Table 8 to Subpart UUUU--Requirements for Reports
Table 9 to Subpart UUUU--Requirements for Recordkeeping
Table 10 to Subpart UUUU--Applicability of General Provisions to 
Subpart UUUU

What This Subpart Covers


Sec. 63.5480  What is the purpose of this subpart?

    This subpart establishes emission limits, operating limits, and 
work practice standards for hazardous air pollutants (HAP) emitted from 
cellulose products manufacturing operations. Carbon disulfide, carbonyl 
sulfide, ethylene oxide, methanol, methyl chloride, propylene oxide, 
and toluene are the HAP emitted in the greatest quantities from 
cellulose products manufacturing operations. This subpart also 
establishes requirements to demonstrate initial and continuous 
compliance with the emission limits, operating limits, and work 
practice standards.


Sec. 63.5485  Am I subject to this subpart?

    You are subject to this subpart if you own or operate a cellulose 
products manufacturing operation that is located at a major source of 
HAP emissions.
    (a) Cellulose products manufacturing includes both the Viscose 
Processes source category and the Cellulose Ethers source category. The 
Viscose Processes source category includes the collection of 
manufacturing processes that use the viscose process. These 
manufacturing processes include the cellulose food casing, rayon, 
cellophane, and cellulosic sponge manufacturing processes. The 
Cellulose Ethers source category includes the collection of cellulose 
ether operations that manufacture any of the following products: 
carboxymethyl cellulose, hydroxyethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl 
cellulose, methyl cellulose, and hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose.
    (b) A major source of HAP is 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 any single HAP at a 
rate of 9.07 megagrams (10 tons) or more per year or any combination of 
HAP at a rate of 22.68 megagrams (25 tons) or more per year.


Sec. 63.5490  What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?

    (a) This subpart applies to each new, reconstructed, or existing 
affected source at a cellulose products manufacturing operation.
    (b) The affected source for the Viscose Processes source category 
is the sum of all operations engaged in the production of cellulose 
food casing, rayon, cellophane, or cellulosic sponge. The affected 
source for the Cellulose Ethers source category is the sum of all 
operations engaged in the production of cellulose ethers.
    (c) An affected source is a new affected source if you began 
construction of the affected source after August 28, 2000 and you meet 
the applicability criteria at the time you began construction.
    (d) An affected source is reconstructed if you meet the criteria as 
defined in Sec. 63.2.
    (e) An affected source is existing if it is not new or 
reconstructed.


Sec. 63.5495  When do I have to comply with this subpart?

    (a) If you have a new or reconstructed affected source, you must 
comply with this subpart according to the requirements in paragraphs 
(a)(1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) If you start up your affected source before [the effective date 
of the final rule], then you must comply with this subpart no later 
than [the effective date of the final rule].
    (2) If you start up your affected source after [the effective date 
of the final rule], then you must comply with this subpart upon startup 
of your affected source.
    (b) If you have an existing affected source, then you must comply 
with the emission limits, operating limits, and work practice standards 
for existing sources no later than 3 years after [the effective date of 
the final rule].
    (c) If you have an area source that increases its emissions or its 
potential to emit so that it becomes a major source of HAP, then the 
requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section apply.
    (1) Any portion of the existing facility that is a new affected 
source or a new reconstructed source must be in compliance with this 
subpart upon startup.
    (2) All other parts of the source must be in compliance with this 
subpart by [3 years after the effective date of the final rule].

[[Page 52188]]

    (d) You must meet the notification requirements in Sec. 63.5575 
according to the schedule in Sec. 63.5575 and in 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart A. Some of the notifications must be submitted earlier than the 
compliance date of the standards in this subpart.

Emission Limits, Operating Limits, and Work Practice Standards


Sec. 63.5505  What emission limits, operating limits, and work practice 
standards must I meet?

    (a) You must meet each emission limit and work practice standard in 
Table 1 to subpart UUUU that applies to you.
    (b) You must meet each operating limit in Table 2 to subpart UUUU 
that applies to you.
    (c) As provided in Sec. 63.6(g), you may apply to EPA for 
permission to use an alternative to the work practice standards in this 
section.

General Compliance Requirements


Sec. 63.5515  What are my general requirements for complying with this 
subpart?

    (a) You must be in compliance with the emission limits, operating 
limits, and work practice standards in this subpart at all times, 
except during periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
    (b) You must always operate and maintain your affected source, 
including air pollution control and monitoring equipment, according to 
the provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(1)(i).
    (c) You must develop and implement a written startup, shutdown, and 
malfunction (SSM) plan according to the provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(3).
    (d) You must be in compliance with the provisions of subpart A of 
this part, except as noted in Table 10 to subpart UUUU.

Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements


Sec. 63.5530  How do I demonstrate initial compliance with the emission 
limits and work practice standards?

    (a) You must demonstrate initial compliance with each emission 
limit and work practice standard that applies to you according to Table 
3 to subpart UUUU. You must also install and operate the monitoring 
equipment according to the requirements in Sec. 63.5545 that apply to 
you.
    (b) You must establish each site-specific operating limit in Table 
2 to subpart UUUU that applies to you according to the requirements in 
Sec. 63.5535 and Table 4 to subpart UUUU.
    (c) You must submit the Notification of Compliance Status report 
containing the results of the initial compliance demonstration 
according to the requirements of Sec. 63.5580(e).


Sec. 63.5535  What performance tests and other procedures must I use?

    (a) You must conduct each performance test in Table 4 to this 
subpart that applies to you.
    (b) You must conduct each performance test for continuous process 
vents according to the requirements in Sec. 63.7(e)(1) and under the 
specific conditions in Table 4 to this subpart. You must conduct each 
performance test for batch process vents under the specific conditions 
in Table 4 to this subpart and not under normal operating conditions as 
specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(1).
    (c) You may not conduct performance tests during periods of 
startup, shutdown, or malfunction, as specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(1).
    (d) You must conduct three separate test runs for each performance 
test required in this section, as specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(3). Each 
test run must last at least 1 hour.
    (e) You must use the equations in paragraphs (e)(1) through (8) of 
this section to determine compliance with the emission limits.
    (1) Except as specified in paragraphs (e) (5) and (6) of this 
section, you must calculate the percent reduction for each test run 
using Equation 1 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU00.000


Where:
    PR = percent reduction, percent
    ERi = total emission rate of organic HAP or sulfide in 
the inlet vent stream of the control device, pounds per hour
    ERo = total emission rate of organic HAP or sulfide in 
the outlet vent stream of the control device, pounds per hour
    ERs = total emission rate of organic HAP or sulfide in 
the stack, pounds per hour
    (2) The total organic HAP emission rate is the sum of the emission 
rates of the individual HAP components. You must calculate total 
organic HAP emission rate for each run using Equation 2 of this 
section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU00.001


Where:
    ERHAPt = total emission rate of organic HAP in vent 
stream, pounds per hour
    ERHAPj = emission rate of individual organic HAP in vent 
stream, pounds per hour
    j = individual HAP
    m = number of individual HAP sampled in each test run
    i = test run
    n = number of test runs
    (3) The total sulfide emission rate is the sum of the emission 
rates of the individual sulfide components, expressed as carbon 
disulfide. You must calculate total sulfide emission rate for each test 
run using Equation 3 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU00.002


Where:
    ERsulft = total emission rate of sulfide in vent stream, 
pounds per year, as carbon disulfide
    ERCS2 = emission rate of carbon disulfide in vent 
stream, pounds per hour
    ERH2S = emission rate of hydrogen sulfide in vent 
stream, pounds per hour
    MCS2 = mass of carbon disulfide per pound-mole of carbon 
disulfide, 76 pounds per pound-mole
    MH2S = mass of hydrogen sulfide per pound-mole of carbon 
disulfide, 68

[[Page 52189]]

pounds per pound-mole
    ERCOS = emission rate of carbonyl sulfide in vent 
stream, pounds per hour
    MCOS = mass of carbonyl sulfide per pound-mole of carbon 
disulfide, 120 pounds per pound-mole
    i = test run
    n = number of test runs
    (4) You must calculate the percent reduction with process changes 
and any other emissions reductions using Equation 4 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU00.003


Where:
    PR = percent reduction, percent
    ERu = total uncontrolled emission rate of organic HAP or 
sulfide prior to process changes and other emission controls, pounds 
per hour
    ERs = total emission rate of organic HAP or sulfide in 
the stack, pounds per hour
    (5) You must calculate the total uncontrolled emission rate of 
organic HAP or sulfide prior to process changes and other emission 
controls using Equation 5 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU00.004


Where:
    ERu = total uncontrolled emission rate of organic HAP or 
sulfide prior to process changes and other emission controls, pounds 
per hour
    ERs = total emission rate of organic HAP or sulfide in 
the stack, pounds per hour
    ERo = total emission rate of organic HAP or sulfide in 
the outlet vent stream of the control device, pounds per hour
    ERi = total emission rate of organic HAP or sulfide in 
the inlet vent stream of the control device, pounds per hour
    CEpc = calculated control efficiency of process change, 
percent
    (6) You must calculate the percent reduction for carbon disulfide 
unloading and storage operations using Equation 6 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU00.005


Where:
    PR = percent reduction, percent
    ERw = emission rate of carbon disulfide from water 
unloading and storage system, pounds per year
ERn = emission rate of carbon disulfide from nitrogen 
unloading and storage system, pounds per year
    (7) You must calculate the emission rate of carbon disulfide from a 
water unloading and storage system using Equation 7 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU00.006


Where:
    ERw = emission rate of carbon disulfide from water 
unloading and storage system, pounds per year
    Vww = volume of wastewater, gallons per year
    CCS2 = concentration of carbon disulfide in water, parts 
per million volume
    Fe = fraction of carbon disulfide emitted from 
wastewater, 0.92 (based on Table 34 of the HON)
    dCS2 = density of carbon disulfide, pounds per gallon
    (8) You must calculate the emission rate of carbon disulfide from a 
nitrogen unloading and storage system using Equation 8 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28AU00.007


Where:
    ERn = emission rate of carbon disulfide from nitrogen 
unloading and storage system, pounds per year
    TT = tank throughput, gallons per year
    P1 = initial head space pressure, pounds per square inch 
ambient
    V1 = available head space volume (assume 50 percent of 
capacity), gallons
    VPa = ambient vapor pressure for carbon disulfide, 
pounds per square inch ambient
    MW = molecular weight of carbon disulfide, 76 pounds per pound-mole
    TC = tank capacity, gallons
    P2 = maximum vent setting of vapor pressure for carbon 
disulfide, pounds per square inch ambient
    F = conversion factor, 7.48 gallons per cubic foot
    R = Ideal gas law constant, 10.73 pounds per square inch-cubic feet 
per pound-mole-degrees Rankine
    Ta = ambient temperature, degrees Rankine
    (f) You must establish each site-specific operating limit in Table 
2 to this subpart that applies to you according to the requirements in 
paragraphs (f)(1) through (8) of this section.
    (1) For condensers, record the outlet (product side) gas 
temperature averaged over the same period as the performance test while 
the vent stream is routed and constituted normally. Locate the 
temperature sensor in a position that provides a representative 
temperature.
    (2) For thermal oxidizers, record the firebox temperature averaged 
over the same period as the performance test. Locate the temperature 
sensor in a position that provides a representative temperature.
    (3) For water scrubbers, record the pressure drop and flow rate of 
the scrubber liquid averaged over the same time period as the 
performance test (both measured while the vent stream is routed and 
constituted normally). Locate the pressure and flow sensors in 
positions that provide representative measurements of the pressure and 
flow.
    (4) For caustic scrubbers, record the pressure drop, flow rate of 
the scrubber liquid, and pH of the scrubber liquid averaged over the 
same time period as the performance test (measured while the vent 
stream is routed and constituted normally). Locate the pressure, flow, 
and pH sensors in positions that provide representative measurements of 
the pressure, flow and pH. Ensure the sample is properly mixed and 
representative of the fluid to be measured.
    (5) For flares, comply with the requirements in Sec. 63.11 to 
establish site-specific operating limits.
    (6) For biofilters, record the pressure drop across the biofilter 
beds, inlet gas temperature, inlet gas flow rate, inlet nutrient and 
water levels, effluent pH,

[[Page 52190]]

effluent conductivity, and effluent nutrient levels averaged over the 
same time period as the performance test (measured while the vent 
stream is routed and constituted normally). Locate the pressure, 
temperature, flow, pH, and conductivity sensors in positions that 
provide representative measurement of the pressure, temperature, flow, 
pH, and conductivity. Ensure the sample is properly mixed and 
representative of the fluid to be measured.
    (7) For carbon adsorbers, record the total regeneration stream mass 
flow during each carbon bed regeneration cycle during the period of the 
performance test, the temperature of the carbon bed after each 
regeneration during the period of the performance test (and within 15 
minutes of completion of any cooling cycle or cycles), and the 
operating time since the end of the last regeneration cycle during the 
period of the performance test. Locate the temperature and flow sensors 
in positions that provide representative measurement of the temperature 
and flow.
    (8) For oil absorbers, record the flow of absorption liquid through 
the absorber, the temperatures of the absorption liquid before and 
after the steam stripper, and the steam flow through the steam stripper 
averaged during the same period of the performance test. Locate the 
temperature and flow sensors in positions that provide representative 
measurement of the temperature and flow.


Sec. 63.5540  By what date must I conduct a performance test or other 
initial compliance demonstration?

    (a) You must conduct performance tests at least 180 calendar days 
before the compliance date that is specified for your source in 
Sec. 63.5495 and according to the provisions in Sec. 63.7(a)(2).
    (b) For each emission limit or work practice standard that applies 
to you in Table 3 of this subpart where initial compliance is not 
demonstrated using a performance test, you must conduct the initial 
compliance demonstration within 30 calendar days after the compliance 
date that is specified for your source in Sec. 63.5495.


Sec. 63.5545  What are my monitoring installation, operation, and 
maintenance requirements?

    (a) You must install, operate, and maintain each continuous 
parameter monitoring system (CPMS) according to the requirements in 
paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this section.
    (1) The CPMS must complete a minimum of one cycle of operation for 
each successive 15-minute period. You must have a minimum of three of 
the four required data points to constitute a valid hour of data.
    (2) Have valid hourly data for at least 66 percent of every 
averaging period (such as, two valid hourly values for a 3-hour 
averaging period).
    (3) Determine the hourly average of all recorded readings.
    (4) Determine the 3-hour average of all recorded readings for each 
3-hour period during the semiannual reporting period described in Table 
8 to this subpart.
    (5) Record the results of each inspection, calibration, and 
validation check.
    (b) For each temperature monitoring device, you must meet the 
requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b)(1) through (7) of this section.
    (1) Locate the temperature sensor in a position that provides a 
representative temperature.
    (2) Use a temperature sensor with a minimum tolerance of 2.2  deg.C 
or 0.75 percent of the temperature value, whichever is larger.
    (3) Shield the temperature sensor system from electromagnetic 
interference and chemical contaminants.
    (4) If a chart recorder is used, it must have a sensitivity in the 
minor division of at least 20  deg.F.
    (5) At least semiannually, perform an electronic calibration, 
according to the procedures in the manufacturer's owners manual. 
Following the electronic calibration, you must conduct a temperature 
sensor validation check, in which a second or redundant temperature 
sensor placed near the process temperature sensor must yield a reading 
within 16.7  deg.C of the process temperature sensor's reading.
    (6) Conduct calibration and validation checks any time the sensor 
exceeds the manufacturer's specified maximum operating temperature 
range, or install a new temperature sensor.
    (7) At least monthly, inspect all components for integrity and all 
electrical connections for continuity, oxidation, and galvanic 
corrosion.
    (c) For each flow measurement device, you must meet the 
requirements in paragraphs (a) and (c)(1) through (5) of this section.
    (1) Locate the flow sensor and other necessary equipment, such as 
straightening vanes, in a position that provides a representative flow.
    (2) Use a flow sensor with a minimum tolerance of 2 percent of the 
flow rate.
    (3) Reduce swirling flow or abnormal velocity distributions due to 
upstream and downstream disturbances.
    (4) At least semiannually, conduct a flow sensor calibration check.
    (5) At least monthly, inspect all components for integrity, all 
electrical connections for continuity, and all mechanical connections 
for leakage.
    (d) For each pressure measurement device, you must meet the 
requirements in paragraphs (a) and (d)(1) through (7) of this section.
    (1) Locate the pressure sensor(s) in a position that provides a 
representative measurement of the pressure.
    (2) Minimize or eliminate pulsating pressure, vibration, and 
internal and external corrosion.
    (3) Use a gauge with a minimum tolerance of 0.5 inch of water or a 
transducer with a minimum tolerance of 1 percent of the pressure range.
    (4) Check pressure tap pluggage daily.
    (5) Using a manometer, check gauge calibration quarterly and 
transducer calibration monthly.
    (6) Conduct calibration checks any time the sensor exceeds the 
manufacturer's specified maximum operating pressure range, or install a 
new pressure sensor.
    (7) At least monthly, inspect all components for integrity, all 
electrical connections for continuity, and all mechanical connections 
for leakage.
    (e) For each pH measurement device, you must meet the requirements 
in paragraphs (a) and (e)(1) through (4) of this section.
    (1) Locate the pH sensor in a position that provides a 
representative measurement of pH.
    (2) Ensure the sample is properly mixed and representative of the 
fluid to be measured.
    (3) Check the pH meter's calibration on at least two points every 8 
hours of process operation.
    (4) At least monthly, inspect all components for integrity and all 
electrical connections for continuity.

Continuous Compliance Requirements


Sec. 63.5555  How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the 
emission limits, operating limits, and work practice standards?

    (a) You must demonstrate continuous compliance with each emission 
limit, operating limit, and work practice standard in Tables 1 and 2 to 
this subpart that applies to you according to methods specified in 
Tables 5 and 6 to this subpart.
    (b) You must report each instance in which you did not meet each 
emission limit, each operating limit, and each work practice standard 
in Tables 5 and 6 to this subpart that apply to you. This includes 
periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction. These instances are

[[Page 52191]]

deviations from the emission limits, operating limits, and work 
practice standards in this subpart. These deviations must be reported 
according to the requirements in Sec. 63.5580.
    (c) During periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction, you must 
operate according to the SSM plan.
    (d) Consistent with Secs. 63.6(e) and 63.7(e)(1), deviations that 
occur during a period of startup, shutdown, or malfunction are not 
violations if you demonstrate to the Administrator's satisfaction that 
you were operating according to the SSM plan. The Administrator will 
determine whether deviations that occur during a period of startup, 
shutdown, and malfunction are violations, according to the provisions 
in Sec. 63.6(e).


Sec. 63.5560  How do I monitor and collect data to demonstrate 
continuous compliance?

    (a) You must monitor and collect data according to this section.
    (b) Except for monitor malfunctions, associated repairs, and 
required quality assurance or control activities (including, as 
applicable, calibration checks and required zero and span adjustments), 
you must monitor continuously (or collect data at all required 
intervals) at all times that the affected source is operating, 
including periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
    (c) You may not use data recorded during monitoring malfunctions, 
associated repairs, and required quality assurance or control 
activities in data averages and calculations used to report emission or 
operating levels, nor may such data be used in fulfilling a minimum 
data availability requirement, if applicable. You must use all the data 
collected during all other periods in assessing the operation of the 
control device and associated control system.

Notifications, Reports, and Records


Sec. 63.5575  What notifications must I submit and when?

    (a) You must submit each notification in Table 7 to this subpart 
that applies to you.


Sec. 63.5580  What reports must I submit and when?

    (a) You must submit each report in Table 8 to this subpart that 
applies to you.
    (b) Unless the Administrator has approved a different schedule for 
submitting reports under Sec. 63.10, you must submit each report by the 
date in Table 8 to this subpart and according to the requirements in 
paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this section.
    (1) The first compliance report must cover the period beginning on 
the compliance date that is specified for your affected source in 
Sec. 63.5495 and ending on June 30 or December 31, whichever date is 
the first date following the end of the first calendar half after the 
compliance date that is specified for your source in Sec. 63.5495.
    (2) The first compliance report must be postmarked or delivered no 
later than July 31 or January 31, whichever date follows the end of the 
first calendar half after the compliance date that is specified for 
your affected source in Sec. 63.5495.
    (3) Each subsequent compliance report must cover the semiannual 
reporting period from January 1 through June 30 or the semiannual 
reporting period from July 1 through December 31.
    (4) Each subsequent compliance report must be postmarked or 
delivered no later than July 31 or January 31, whichever date is the 
first date following the end of the semiannual reporting period.
    (5) For each affected source that is subject to permitting 
regulations pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, and if the 
permitting authority has established dates for submitting semiannual 
reports pursuant to 40 CFR 70.6(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR 71.6(3)(iii)(A), 
you may submit the first and subsequent compliance reports according to 
the dates the permitting authority has established instead of according 
to the dates in paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section.
    (c) The compliance report must contain the information in 
paragraphs (c)(1) through (6) of this section.
    (1) Company name and address.
    (2) Statement by a responsible official, with that official's name, 
title, and signature, certifying the truth, accuracy, and completeness 
of the content of the report. This certification must state that, based 
on information and belief formed after reasonable inquiry, the 
statements and information in the report are true, accurate, and 
complete.
    (3) Date of report and beginning and ending dates of the reporting 
period.
    (4) If you had a startup, shutdown or malfunction during the 
reporting period and you took actions consistent with your startup, 
shutdown, and malfunction plan, the compliance report must include the 
information in Sec. 63.10(d)(5)(i).
    (5) If there are no deviations from any emission limits, operating 
limits, or work practice standards that apply to you (see Tables 5 and 
6 to this subpart), the compliance report must contain a statement that 
there were no deviations from the emission limits, operating limits, or 
work practice standards during the reporting period.
    (6) If there were no periods during which the CPMS was out-of-
control, the compliance report must contain a statement that there were 
no periods during which the CPMS was out-of-control during the 
reporting period. You must include specifications for out-of-control 
operation in the CPMS quality control plan required under 
Sec. 63.8(d)(2).
    (d) For each deviation from an emission limit or work practice 
standard that occurs at an affected source where you are not using a 
CPMS to demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission limits or 
work practice standards in this subpart (see Table 5 to this subpart), 
the compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (c)(1) 
through (4) and (d)(1) through (2) of this section. This includes 
periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
    (1) The total operating time of each affected source during the 
reporting period.
    (2) Information on the number, duration, and cause of deviations 
(including unknown cause, if applicable), as applicable, and the 
corrective action taken.
    (e) For each deviation from an emission limit or operating limit 
occurring at an affected source where you are using a CPMS to 
demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission limit or operating 
limit in this subpart (see Tables 5 and 6 to this subpart), you must 
include the information in paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) and (e)(1) 
through (12) of this section. This includes periods of startup, 
shutdown, and malfunction.
    (1) The date and time that each malfunction started and stopped.
    (2) The date and time that each CPMS was inoperative, except for 
zero (low-level) and high-level checks.
    (3) The date, time, and duration that each CPMS was out-of-control.
    (4) The date and time that each deviation started and stopped, and 
whether each deviation occurred during a period of startup, shutdown, 
or malfunction or during another period.
    (5) A summary of the total duration of the deviation during the 
reporting period and the total duration as a percent of the total 
source operating time during that reporting period.
    (6) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations during the 
reporting period into those that are due to startup, shutdown, control 
equipment problems, process problems, other known causes, and other 
unknown causes.

[[Page 52192]]

    (7) A summary of the total duration of CPMS downtime during the 
reporting period and the total duration of CPMS downtime as a percent 
of the total source operating time during that reporting period.
    (8) An identification of each hazardous air pollutant that was 
monitored at the affected source.
    (9) A brief description of the process units.
    (10) A brief description of the CPMS.
    (11) The date of the latest CPMS certification or audit.
    (12) A description of any changes in CPMS, processes, or controls 
since the last reporting period.
    (f) If you have obtained a title V operating permit pursuant to 40 
CFR part 70 or 40 CFR part 71, you must report all deviations as 
defined in this subpart in the semiannual monitoring report required by 
40 CFR 70.6(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR 71.6(3)(iii)(A). If you submit a 
compliance report according to Table 8 of this subpart along with, or 
as part of, the semiannual monitoring report required by 40 CFR 
70.6(3)(iii)(A) or 40 CFR 71.6(3)(iii)(A), and the compliance report 
includes all required information concerning deviations from any 
emission limit, operating limit, or work practice standard in this 
subpart, then submitting the compliance report will satisfy any 
obligation to report the same deviations in the semiannual monitoring 
report. However, submitting a compliance report will not otherwise 
affect any obligation you may have to report deviations from permit 
requirements to the permit authority.


Sec. 63.5585  What records must I keep?

    You must keep the records in Table 9 to this subpart that apply to 
you.


Sec. 63.5590  In what form and how long must I keep my records?

    (a) Your records must be in a form suitable and readily available 
for expeditious review, according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1).
    (b) As specified in Sec. 63.10(b)(1), you must keep each record for 
5 years following the date of each occurrence, measurement, 
maintenance, corrective action, report, or record.
    (c) You must keep each record on site for at least 2 years after 
the date of each occurrence, measurement, maintenance, corrective 
action, report, or record, according to Sec. 63.10(b)(1). You can keep 
the records offsite for the remaining 3 years.

Other Requirements and Information


Sec. 63.5600  What other requirements apply to me?

    Table 10 to this subpart shows which provisions of the General 
Provisions in Secs. 63.1 through 63.13 apply to you.


Sec. 63.5605  Who implements and enforces this subpart?

    (a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by us, the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, or a delegated authority, such as your 
State, local, or tribal agency. If the Administrator has delegated 
authority to your State, local, or tribal agency, then that agency has 
the authority to implement and enforce this subpart. You should contact 
your EPA Regional Office to find out if this subpart is delegated to 
your State, local, or tribal agency.
    (b) In delegating implementation and enforcement authority of this 
subpart to a State, local, or tribal agency under 40 CFR part 63, 
subpart E, the Administrator keeps the authorities contained in 
paragraphs (b)(1) through (4) of this section and does not delegate 
such authorities to the State, local, or tribal agency.
    (1) Approval of alternatives to the non-opacity emission limits, 
operating limits, and work practice standards in Sec. 63.5505(a) 
through (c) and under Sec. 63.6(g).
    (2) Approval of major alternatives to test methods under 
Sec. 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f) and as defined in Sec. 63.90.
    (3) Approval of major alternatives to monitoring under Sec. 63.8(f) 
and as defined in Sec. 63.90.
    (4) Approval of major alternatives to recordkeeping and reporting 
under Sec. 63.10(f) and as defined in Sec. 63.90.


Sec. 63.5610  What definitions apply to this subpart?

    Terms used in this subpart are defined in the Clean Air Act, in 40 
CFR 63.2, and in this section as follows:
    Cellophane operation means an operation that manufactures a thin, 
transparent cellulose material used in food packaging (for example, 
candy, cheese, baked goods), adhesive tapes, and membranes for 
industrial uses, such as batteries.
    Cellulose ether operation means an operation that manufactures 
cellulose derivatives used as thickeners and binders in consumer and 
other products.
    Cellulose ether process means a manufacturing process that includes 
the following process steps:
    (1) Reaction of cellulose (for example, wood pulp or cotton 
linters) with sodium hydroxide to produce alkali cellulose;
    (2) Reaction of the alkali cellulose with a chemical compound(s) to 
produce a cellulose ether product;
    (3) Washing and purification of the cellulose ether product; and
    (4) Drying of the cellulose ether product.
    Cellulose ethers source category means the collection of cellulose 
ether operations that manufacture any of the following products: 
carboxymethyl cellulose, hydroxyethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl 
cellulose, methyl cellulose, and hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose.
    Cellulose food casing operation means an operation that 
manufactures cellulose casings used in manufacturing meat products (for 
example, hot dogs, sausages). The food casings are used to form the 
meat products and, in most cases, are removed from the meat products 
before sale.
    Cellulosic sponge operation means an operation that manufactures a 
porous cellulose product for consumer use (for example, for cleaning).
    Control technique means any equipment or process control used for 
capturing, recovering, or oxidizing HAP vapors. The equipment includes, 
but is not limited to, biofilters, carbon adsorbers, condensers, 
flares, oil absorbers, thermal oxidizers, and scrubbers, or any 
combination of these. The process control includes extended cookout and 
viscose process modification (as defined in this section).
    Deviation means any instance in which an affected source subject to 
this subpart, or an owner or operator of such a source:
    (1) Fails to meet any requirement or obligation established by this 
subpart, including, but not limited to, any emission limit, operating 
limit, or work practice standard;
    (2) Fails to meet any term or condition that is adopted to 
implement an applicable requirement in this subpart and that is 
included in the operating permit for any affected source required to 
obtain such a permit; or
    (3) Fails to meet any emission limit, operating limit, or work 
practice standard in this subpart during startup, shutdown, or 
malfunction, regardless of whether or not such failure is permitted by 
this subpart.
    Emission point means an individual process vent, storage vessel, 
wastewater stream, or equipment leak.
    Equipment leak means emissions of HAP from a pump, valve, flange, 
sampling connection, or other components (for example, compressor, 
pressure relief device) in HAP service.

[[Page 52193]]

    Extended cookout (ECO) means a control technique that reduces the 
amount of unreacted ethylene oxide (EO) or propylene oxide (PO) leaving 
the reactor. This is accomplished by allowing the product to react for 
a longer time, thereby leaving less unreacted EO or PO and reducing 
emissions of EO or PO that might have occurred otherwise.
    Nitrogen system means the combination of a nitrogen unloading 
system for unloading carbon disulfide and a nitrogen padding system for 
storing carbon disulfide. The nitrogen unloading system is a system of 
unloading carbon disulfide from railcars to storage vessels using 
nitrogen displacement to prevent gaseous carbon disulfide emissions to 
the atmosphere and to preclude contact with oxygen. The nitrogen 
padding system is a system of padding the carbon disulfide storage 
vessels with nitrogen to prevent contact with oxygen.
    Oil absorber means a packed-bed absorber that absorbs pollutant 
vapors using a type of oil (for example, kerosene) as the absorption 
liquid.
    Process vent means a vent from a process operation through which a 
HAP-containing gas stream is, or has the potential to be, released to 
the atmosphere. Process vents do not include vents on storage tanks, 
vents on wastewater emission sources, or pieces of equipment regulated 
under the equipment leak standards.
    Rayon operation means an operation that manufactures cellulose 
fibers used in the production of either textiles (for example, apparel, 
drapery, upholstery) or non-woven products (for example, feminine 
hygiene products, wipes, computer disk liners, surgical swabs).
    Reconstruction means replacing components of an affected source so 
that:
    (1) The fixed capital cost of the new components exceeds 50 percent 
of the fixed capital cost that would be required to construct a 
comparable new affected source; and
    (2) It is technologically and economically feasible for the 
reconstructed source to meet the relevant standard(s) established in 
this subpart. Reconstruction excludes any routine part replacement or 
maintenance. Upon reconstruction, an affected source is subject to 
relevant standards for new sources, including compliance dates, 
irrespective of any change in emissions of HAP from that source.
    Responsible official means responsible official as defined in 40 
CFR 70.2.
    Solvent coating process means a manufacturing process in which 
cellophane film is coated (for example, with Saran or nitrocellulose) 
to impart moisture impermeability to the film and to make it printable. 
Both Saran and nitrocellulose use the same solvents--tetrahydrofuran 
and toluene.
    Storage vessel means a tank or other vessel used to store liquids 
that contain one or more HAP. Storage vessels do not include the 
following:
    (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 (30 pounds per square inch) and without emissions to the 
atmosphere;
    (3) Vessels with capacities smaller than 38 cubic meters (10,000 
gallons);
    (4) Vessels and equipment storing and/or handling material that 
contains no HAP or contains HAP as impurities only;
    (5) Surge control vessels;
    (6) Wastewater storage vessels; and
    (7) Storage vessels assigned to another process unit regulated 
under another subpart of part 63.
    Subpart means 40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUU.
    Total HAP means the sum of organic HAP emissions measured using EPA 
Method 18.
    Total sulfide means the sum of emissions for carbon disulfide, 
hydrogen sulfide, and carbonyl sulfide reported as carbon disulfide 
using EPA Method 15.
    Viscose process. (1) Viscose process means a manufacturing process 
that includes the following process steps:
    (i) Reaction of cellulose (for example, wood pulp) with sodium 
hydroxide to produce alkali cellulose;
    (ii) Reaction of alkali cellulose with carbon disulfide to produce 
sodium cellulose xanthate;
    (iii) Combination of sodium cellulose xanthate with additional 
sodium hydroxide to produce viscose solution;
    (iv) Extrusion of the viscose into various shapes (for example, 
hollow casings, thin fibers, thin sheets, molds);
    (v) Regeneration of the cellulose product;
    (vi) Washing of the cellulose product; and
    (vii) Possibly acid or salt recovery.
    (2) The cellulose products manufactured using the viscose process 
include cellulose food casings, rayon, cellophane, and cellulosic 
sponges.
    Viscose process modification means a change to the viscose process 
that occurred after January 1992 that allows either the recovery of 
carbon disulfide or a reduction in carbon disulfide usage in the 
process.
    Viscose processes source category means the collection of 
manufacturing processes that use the viscose process. These 
manufacturing processes include the cellulose food casing, rayon, 
cellophane, and cellulosic sponge manufacturing processes.
    Wastewater means water which, during manufacturing or processing, 
comes into direct contact with, or results from, the production or use 
of any raw material, intermediate product, by-product, or waste 
product.
    Water system means the combination of a water unloading system for 
unloading carbon disulfide and a water padding system for storing 
carbon disulfide. The water unloading system is a system of unloading 
carbon disulfide from railcars to storage vessels using water 
displacement to prevent gaseous carbon disulfide emissions to the 
atmosphere and to preclude contact with oxygen. The water padding 
system is a system of padding the carbon disulfide storage vessels with 
water to prevent contact with oxygen. The water, which is saturated 
with carbon disulfide, is later sent to wastewater treatment.
    Work practice standard means any design, equipment, work practice, 
or operational standard, or combination thereof, that is promulgated 
pursuant to section 112(h) of the Clean Air Act.

                      Table 1 to Subpart UUUU.--Emission Limits and Work Practice Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          For . . .                  At . . .           You must . . .       Or you must . . .   Or you must . .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.-------
1  The sum of all process      Existing cellulose    Reduce total
 vents.                         food casing           uncontrolled
                                operations.           sulfide emissions
                                                      (reported as carbon
                                                      disulfide) by at
                                                      least 25% based on
                                                      a 6-month rolling
                                                      average.

[[Page 52194]]

 
2  The sum of all process      New cellulose food    Reduce total
 vents.                         casing operations.    uncontrolled
                                                      sulfide emissions
                                                      (reported as carbon
                                                      disulfide) by at
                                                      least 75% based on
                                                      a 6-month rolling
                                                      average.
3  The sum of all process      Existing rayon        Reduce total
 vents.                         operations.           uncontrolled
                                                      sulfide emissions
                                                      (reported as carbon
                                                      disulfide) by at
                                                      least 55% based on
                                                      a 6-month rolling
                                                      average.
4  The sum of all process      New rayon operations  Reduce total
 vents.                                               uncontrolled
                                                      sulfide emissions
                                                      (reported as carbon
                                                      disulfide) by at
                                                      least 75% based on
                                                      a 6-month rolling
                                                      average.
5  The sum of all cellophane   Existing and new      Reduce total
 production process vents.      cellophane            uncontrolled
                                operations.           sulfide emissions
                                                      (reported as carbon
                                                      disulfide) by at
                                                      least 85% based on
                                                      a 6-month rolling
                                                      average.
6  The sum of all solvent      Existing and new      Reduce uncontrolled
 coating process vents.         cellophane            toluene emissions
                                operations.           by at least 95%
                                                      based on a 6-month
                                                      rolling average.
7  The sum of all process      Existing and new      Reduce total
 vents.                         cellulosic sponge     uncontrolled
                                operations.           sulfide emissions
                                                      (reported as carbon
                                                      disulfide) by at
                                                      least 75% based on
                                                      a 6-month rolling
                                                      average.
8  The sum of all process      Existing and new      Reduce total
 vents.                         cellulose ether       uncontrolled
                                operations.           organic HAP
                                                      emissions by at
                                                      least 99% based on
                                                      a 6-month rolling
                                                      average.
9  Closed-loop systems.......  Existing and new      Comply by operating
                                cellulose ether       the existing closed-
                                operations.           loop system.
10  Each carbon disulfide      Existing and new      Reduce uncontrolled   Reduce uncontrolled   Install a
 unloading and storage          cellulose food        carbon disulfide      carbon disulfide      nitrogen
 operation.                     casing, rayon,        emissions by at       emissions by at       unloading and
                                cellophane, and       least 83% from        least 0.14% from      storage system
                                cellulosic sponge     unloading and         process vents.        (as defined in
                                operations.           storage operations                          Sec.  63.5610)
                                                      based on a 6-month
                                                      rolling average.
11  Each toluene storage       Existing and new      Reduce uncontrolled
 vessel.                        cellophane            toluene emissions
                                operations.           by at least 95%
                                                      based on a 6-month
                                                      rolling average.
12  All sources of waste-      Existing and new      Comply with the
 water emissions.               cellulose ether       applicable process
                                operations.           wastewater
                                                      provisions of Secs.
                                                      63.132-63.140 of
                                                      subpart G of this
                                                      part.
13  Equipment leaks..........  Existing and new      Comply with the       Comply with the
                                cellulose ether       applicable            applicable
                                operations.           equipment leak        equipment leak
                                                      standards of Secs.    standards of Secs.
                                                      63.162-63.179 of      65.106-65.118 of
                                                      subpart H of this     subpart F of 40 CFR
                                                      part.                 part 65.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


               Table 2 to Subpart UUUU.--Operating Limits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  For the following control
       technique . . .                       You must . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1  Condenser.................  Maintain the 3-hour average condenser
                                outlet gas temperature no higher than
                                the maximum value established during the
                                performance test.
2  Thermal oxidizer..........  Maintain the 3-hour average thermal
                                oxidizer firebox temperature no lower
                                than the minimum value established
                                during the performance test.
3  Water scrubber............  Maintain the 3-hour average scrubber
                                pressure drop and scrubber liquid flow
                                rate within the operating values
                                established during the performance test.
4  Caustic scrubber..........  Maintain the 3-hour average scrubber
                                pressure drop, scrubber liquid pH, and
                                scrubber liquid flow rate within the
                                operating values established during the
                                performance test.
5  Flare.....................  Maintain the applicable flare operating
                                parameters in Sec.  63.11 within the
                                operating values established during the
                                performance test.
6  Biofilter.................  Maintain the 3-hour average biofilter
                                inlet gas temperature, gas flow rate,
                                and nutrient and water values; biofilter
                                effluent pH, conductivity, and nutrient
                                levels; and pressure drop within the
                                operating values established during the
                                performance test.

[[Page 52195]]

 
7  Carbon adsorber...........  Maintain the regeneration frequency, bed
                                heating temperature, bed cooling
                                temperature, and regeneration stream
                                flow for each regeneration cycle within
                                the values established during the
                                performance test.
8  Oil absorber..............  Maintain the 3-hour average absorption
                                liquid flow, absorption liquid
                                temperature, and steam flow within the
                                values established during the
                                performance test.
9  Alternative control         1. Submit for approval a proposed site-
 technique.                     specific monitoring plan that includes
                                (1) a description of the alternative
                                control device, (2) test results
                                verifying the performance of the control
                                device, (3) the appropriate operating
                                parameters that will be monitored, and
                                (4) the frequency of measuring and
                                recording to establish continuous
                                compliance with the operating limits.
                               2. Install, operate, and maintain the
                                parameter monitoring system for the
                                alternative control device in accordance
                                with the monitoring plan approved by the
                                Administrator.
                               3. Establish operating limits during the
                                initial performance test based on the
                                operating parameters for the alternative
                                control device included in the approved
                                monitoring plan.
                               4. Maintain the 3-hour average operating
                                parameter values for the alternative
                                control technique within the values
                                established during the performance test.
10  Any of the control         1. If you wish to establish alternative
 techniques specified in this   operating parameters, submit the
 table.                         application for approval of the
                                alternative operating parameters no
                                later than the notification of the
                                performance test.
                               2. The application must include (1)
                                information justifying the request for
                                alternative operating parameters (such
                                as the infeasibility or impracticality
                                of using the operating parameters in
                                this proposed rule), (2) a description
                                of the proposed alternative control
                                device operating parameters, (3) the
                                monitoring approach, (4) the frequency
                                of measuring and recording the
                                alternative parameters, (5) how the
                                operating limits are to be calculated,
                                and (6) information documenting that the
                                alternative operating parameters would
                                provide equivalent or better assurance
                                of compliance with the standard.
                               3. Install, operate, and maintain the
                                alternative parameter monitoring systems
                                in accordance with the application
                                approved by the Administrator.
                               4. Establish operating limits during the
                                initial performance test based on the
                                alternative operating parameters
                                included in the approved application.
                               5. Maintain the 3-hour average
                                alternative operating parameter values
                                within the values established during the
                                performance test.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


          Table 3 to Subpart UUUU.--Initial Compliance With Emission Limits and Work Practice Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  For the following       You have demonstrated
            For . . .                      At . . .            emission limit or work   initial  compliance if .
                                                               practice standard . . .             . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1  The sum of all process vents..  Existing cellulose food    Reduce total              1. The average total
                                    casing operations.         uncontrolled sulfide      sulfide emissions,
                                                               emissions (reported as    measured during the 3-
                                                               carbon disulfide) by at   hour performance test
                                                               least 25% based on a 6-   using Method 15, are
                                                               month rolling average.    reduced by the
                                                                                         applicable amount; and
                                                                                        2. You have a record of
                                                                                         the average operating
                                                                                         parameter values over
                                                                                         the 3-hour performance
                                                                                         test during which the
                                                                                         average total sulfide
                                                                                         emissions were reduced
                                                                                         by the applicable
                                                                                         amount; and
                                                                                        3. You prepare a
                                                                                         material balance that
                                                                                         includes data on carbon
                                                                                         disulfide usage and
                                                                                         carbon disulfide,
                                                                                         hydrogen sulfide, and
                                                                                         carbonyl sulfide
                                                                                         emissions at the inlet
                                                                                         and outlet to the
                                                                                         control device and the
                                                                                         stack. The material
                                                                                         balance must be based
                                                                                         on information from the
                                                                                         initial performance
                                                                                         test.
2  The sum of all process vents..  New cellulose food casing  Reduce total              1. The average total
                                    operations.                uncontrolled sulfide      sulfide emissions,
                                                               emissions (reported as    measured during the 3-
                                                               carbon disulfide) by at   hour performance test
                                                               least 75% based on a 6-   using Method 15, are
                                                               month rolling average.    reduced by the
                                                                                         applicable amount; and
                                                                                        2. You have a record of
                                                                                         the average operating
                                                                                         parameter values over
                                                                                         the 3-hour performance
                                                                                         test during which the
                                                                                         average total sulfide
                                                                                         emissions were reduced
                                                                                         by the applicable
                                                                                         amount; and

[[Page 52196]]

 
                                                                                        3. You prepare a
                                                                                         material balance that
                                                                                         includes data on carbon
                                                                                         disulfide usage and
                                                                                         carbon disulfide,
                                                                                         hydrogen sulfide, and
                                                                                         carbonyl sulfide
                                                                                         emissions at the inlet
                                                                                         and outlet to the
                                                                                         control device and the
                                                                                         stack. The material
                                                                                         balance must be based
                                                                                         on information from the
                                                                                         initial performance
                                                                                         test.
3  The sum of all process vents..  Existing rayon operations  Reduce total              1. The average total
                                                               uncontrolled sulfide      sulfide emissions,
                                                               emissions (reported as    measured during the 3-
                                                               carbon disulfide) by at   hour performance test
                                                               least 55% based on a 6-   using Method 15, are
                                                               month rolling average.    reduced by the
                                                                                         applicable amount; and
                                                                                        2. You have a record of
                                                                                         the average operating
                                                                                         parameter values over
                                                                                         the 3-hour performance
                                                                                         test during which the
                                                                                         average total sulfide
                                                                                         emissions were reduced
                                                                                         by the applicable
                                                                                         amount; and
                                                                                        3. You prepare a
                                                                                         material balance that
                                                                                         includes data on carbon
                                                                                         disulfide usage and
                                                                                         carbon disulfide,
                                                                                         hydrogen sulfide, and
                                                                                         carbonyl sulfide
                                                                                         emissions at the inlet
                                                                                         and outlet to the
                                                                                         control device and the
                                                                                         stack. The material
                                                                                         balance must be based
                                                                                         on information from the
                                                                                         initial performance
                                                                                         test.
4  The sum of all process vents..  New rayon operations.....  Reduce total              1. The average total
                                                               uncontrolled sulfide      sulfide emissions,
                                                               emissions (reported as    measured during the 3-
                                                               carbon disulfide) by at   hour performance test
                                                               least 75% based on a 6-   using Method 15, are
                                                               month rolling average.    reduced by the
                                                                                         applicable amount; and
                                                                                        2. You have a record of
                                                                                         the average operating
                                                                                         parameter values over
                                                                                         the 3-hour performance
                                                                                         test during which the
                                                                                         average total sulfide
                                                                                         emissions were reduced
                                                                                         by the applicable
                                                                                         amount; and
                                                                                        3. You prepare a
                                                                                         material balance that
                                                                                         includes data on carbon
                                                                                         disulfide usage and
                                                                                         carbon disulfide,
                                                                                         hydrogen sulfide, and
                                                                                         carbonyl sulfide
                                                                                         emissions at the inlet
                                                                                         and outlet to the
                                                                                         control device and the
                                                                                         stack. The material
                                                                                         balance must be based
                                                                                         on information from the
                                                                                         initial performance
                                                                                         test.
5  The sum of all cellophane       Existing and new           Reduce total              1. The average total
 production process vents.          cellophane operations.     uncontrolled sulfide      sulfide emissions,
                                                               emissions (as carbon      measured during the 3-
                                                               disulfide) by at least    hour performance test
                                                               85% based on a 6-month    using Method 15, are
                                                               rolling average.          reduced by the
                                                                                         applicable amount; and
                                                                                        2. You have a record of
                                                                                         the average operating
                                                                                         parameter values over
                                                                                         the 3-hour performance
                                                                                         test during which the
                                                                                         average total sulfide
                                                                                         emissions were reduced
                                                                                         by the applicable
                                                                                         amount; and

[[Page 52197]]

 
                                                                                        3. You prepare a
                                                                                         material balance that
                                                                                         includes data on carbon
                                                                                         disulfide usage and
                                                                                         carbon disulfide,
                                                                                         hydrogen sulfide, and
                                                                                         carbonyl sulfide
                                                                                         emissions at the inlet
                                                                                         and outlet to the
                                                                                         control device and the
                                                                                         stack. The material
                                                                                         balance must be based
                                                                                         on information from the
                                                                                         initial performance
                                                                                         test.
6  The sum of all solvent coating  Existing and new           Reduce uncontrolled       1. Average toluene
 process vents.                     cellophane operations.     toluene emissions by at   emissions, measured
                                                               least 95% based on a 6-   during the 3-hour
                                                               month rolling average.    performance test using
                                                                                         Method 18, are reduced
                                                                                         by 95%; and
                                                                                        2. You have a record of
                                                                                         the average operating
                                                                                         parameter values over
                                                                                         the 3-hour performance
                                                                                         test during which the
                                                                                         average toluene
                                                                                         emissions were reduced
                                                                                         by 95%; and
                                                                                        3. You prepare a
                                                                                         material balance that
                                                                                         includes data on
                                                                                         toluene usage and
                                                                                         emissions at the inlet
                                                                                         and outlet to the
                                                                                         control device and the
                                                                                         stack. The material
                                                                                         balance must be based
                                                                                         on information from the
                                                                                         initial performance
                                                                                         test.
7  The sum of all process vents..  Existing and new           Reduce total              1. The average total
                                    cellulosic sponge          uncontrolled sulfide      sulfide emissions,
                                    operations.                emissions (as carbon      measured during the 3-
                                                               disulfide) by at least    hour performance test
                                                               75% based on a 6-month    using Method 15, are
                                                               rolling average.          reduced by the
                                                                                         applicable amount; and
                                                                                        2. You have a record of
                                                                                         the average operating
                                                                                         parameter values over
                                                                                         the 3-hour performance
                                                                                         test during which the
                                                                                         average total sulfide
                                                                                         emissions were reduced
                                                                                         by the applicable
                                                                                         amount; and
                                                                                        3. You prepare a
                                                                                         material balance that
                                                                                         includes data on carbon
                                                                                         disulfide usage and
                                                                                         carbon disulfide,
                                                                                         hydrogen sulfide, and
                                                                                         carbonyl sulfide
                                                                                         emissions at the inlet
                                                                                         and outlet to the
                                                                                         control device and the
                                                                                         stack. The material
                                                                                         balance must be based
                                                                                         on information from the
                                                                                         initial performance
                                                                                         test.
8  The sum of all process vents..  Existing and new           Reduce total              1. Average total organic
                                    cellulose ether            uncontrolled organic      HAP emissions, measured
                                    operations.                HAP emissions by at       during the 3-hour
                                                               least 99% based on a 6-   performance test using
                                                               month rolling average.    Method 18, are reduced
                                                                                         by 99%; and
                                                                                        2. You have a record of
                                                                                         the average operating
                                                                                         parameter values over
                                                                                         the 3-hour performance
                                                                                         test during which the
                                                                                         average total organic
                                                                                         HAP emissions were
                                                                                         reduced by 99%.
9  Closed-loop systems...........  Existing and new           Operate and maintain the  You have a record
                                    cellulose ether            closed-loop system for    certifying that a
                                    operations.                cellulose ether           closed-loop system is
                                                               operations.               in use for cellulose
                                                                                         ether operations.

[[Page 52198]]

 
10  Each carbon disulfide          Existing and new           Reduce uncontrolled       1. You have a record
 unloading and storage operation.   cellulose food casing,     carbon disulfide          documenting the 83%
                                    rayon, cellophane, and     emissions by at least     reduction in carbon
                                    cellulosic sponge          83% from unloading and    disulfide emissions
                                    operations.                storage operations        relative to water
                                                               based on a 6-month        systems.
                                                               rolling average.         2. If you meet the 83
                                                              Or......................   percent emission limit
                                                                                         by installing a
                                                                                         nitrogen system, you
                                                                                         must calculate the
                                                                                         actual percent
                                                                                         reduction achieved
                                                                                         using the applicable
                                                                                         equation in Sec.
                                                                                         63.5535.
                                                                                        3. If you meet the 83
                                                                                         percent emission limit
                                                                                         by venting emissions to
                                                                                         a control device, then
                                                                                         you must conduct an
                                                                                         initial performance
                                                                                         test to demonstrate the
                                                                                         actual percent
                                                                                         reduction achieved,
                                                                                         prepare a material
                                                                                         balance based on
                                                                                         information from the
                                                                                         test and from records
                                                                                         at the affected source,
                                                                                         and establish the
                                                                                         appropriate control
                                                                                         device operating
                                                                                         parameters during the
                                                                                         test. You must
                                                                                         calculate the percent
                                                                                         reduction of emissions
                                                                                         measured during the
                                                                                         performance test using
                                                                                         the applicable equation
                                                                                         in Sec.  63.5535.
                                                                                        Or
11...............................  .........................  Reduce uncontrolled       1. You comply with the
                                                               carbon disulfide by at    initial compliance
                                                               least 0.14% from          requirements for
                                                               process vents based on    process vents at
                                                               a 6-month rolling         existing and new
                                                               average.                  cellulose food casing,
                                                              Or......................   rayon, cellophane, and
                                                                                         cellulosic sponge
                                                                                         operations.
                                                                                        2. The 0.14% reduction
                                                                                         must be in addition to
                                                                                         the reduction already
                                                                                         required for the
                                                                                         process vents for
                                                                                         cellulose food casing,
                                                                                         rayon, cellophane, and
                                                                                         cellulosic sponge
                                                                                         operations.
                                                                                        Or
12...............................  .........................  Install a nitrogen        You have a record
                                                               system for carbon         certifying that a
                                                               disulfide unloading and   nitrogen system is in
                                                               storage.                  use for carbon
                                                                                         disulfide unloading and
                                                                                         storage operations.
13  Each toluene storage vessel..  Existing and new           Reduce uncontrolled       1. Average toluene
                                    cellophane operations.     toluene emissions by at   emissions, measured
                                                               least 95% based on a 6-   during the 3-hour
                                                               month rolling average.    performance test using
                                                                                         Method 18, are reduced
                                                                                         by 95%; and
                                                                                        2. You have a record of
                                                                                         the average operating
                                                                                         parameter values over
                                                                                         the 3-hour performance
                                                                                         test during which the
                                                                                         average toluene
                                                                                         emissions were reduced
                                                                                         by 95%; and
                                                                                        3. You prepare a
                                                                                         material balance that
                                                                                         includes data on
                                                                                         toluene usage and
                                                                                         emissions at the inlet
                                                                                         and outlet to the
                                                                                         control device and the
                                                                                         stack. The material
                                                                                         balance must be based
                                                                                         on information from the
                                                                                         initial performance
                                                                                         test.
14  All sources of waste-water     Existing and new           Comply with the           You comply with the
 emissions.                         cellulose ether            applicable process        applicable process
                                    operations.                wastewater provisions     wastewater initial
                                                               of Secs.  63.132-63.140   compliance provisions
                                                               of subpart G of this      of Sec.  63.145 of
                                                               part.                     subpart G of this part.

[[Page 52199]]

 
15  Equipment leaks..............  Existing and new           Comply with the           You comply with the
                                    cellulose ether            applicable equipment      applicable equipment
                                    operations.                leak standards of Secs.   leak initial compliance
                                                               63.162-63.179 of          provisions of Sec.
                                                               subpart H of this part.   63.180 of subpart H of
                                                                                         this part.
16  Equipment leaks..............  Existing and new           Comply with the           You comply with the
                                    cellulose ether            applicable equipment      applicable equipment
                                    operations.                leak standards of Secs.   leak initial compliance
                                                               65.106-65.118 of          status report
                                                               subpart F of 40 CFR       provisions of Secs.
                                                               part 65.                  65.120 of subpart F of
                                                                                         40 CFR part 65.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                          Table 4 to Subpart UUUU.--Requirements for Performance Tests
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   According to
                                                                                                  the  following
          For . . .                  At . . .           You must . . .          Using . . .       requirements .
                                                                                                       . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1  The sum of all process     Any existing and new  Select sampling       Method 1 or 1A of 40  Sampling sites
 vents.                         affected source.      port's location and   CFR part 60,          must be
                                                      the number of         appendix A Sec.       located at the
                                                      traverse ports.       63.7(d)(1)(i).        inlet and
                                                                                                  outlet to the
                                                                                                  control device
                                                                                                  and the stack.
 2  The sum of all process     Any existing and new  Determine velocity    Method 2, 2A, 2C,     You may use
 vents.                         affected source.      and volumetric flow   2D, 2F, or 2G in      Method 2A, 2C,
                                                      rate.                 appendix A to part    2D, 2F, or 2G
                                                                            60 of this chapter.   as an
                                                                                                  alternative to
                                                                                                  using Method
                                                                                                  2.
 3  The sum of all process     Any existing and new  Conduct gas analysis  Method 3, 3A, or 3B   You may use
 vents.                         affected source.                            in appendix A to      Method 3A or
                                                                            part 60 of this       3B as an
                                                                            chapter.              alternative to
                                                                                                  using Method
                                                                                                  3.
 4  The sum of all process     Any existing and new  Measure moisture      Method 4 in appendix
 vents.                         affected source.      content of the        A to part 60 of
                                                      stack gas.            this chapter.
 5  The sum of all process     Existing and new      Measure total         Method 15 in          1. You must
 vents.                         cellulose food        sulfide emissions.    appendix A to part    conduct
                                casing, rayon,                              60 of this chapter.   testing of
                                cellophane, and                                                   emissions from
                                cellulosic sponge                                                 continuous
                                operations.                                                       process vents
                                                                                                  at
                                                                                                  representative
                                                                                                  conditions, as
                                                                                                  specified in
                                                                                                  Sec.  63.1257(
                                                                                                  b)(7) of
                                                                                                  subpart GGG of
                                                                                                  this part.
                                                                                                 2. You must
                                                                                                  conduct
                                                                                                  testing of
                                                                                                  emissions from
                                                                                                  batch process
                                                                                                  vents at
                                                                                                  absolute or
                                                                                                  hypothetical
                                                                                                  worst-case
                                                                                                  conditions or
                                                                                                  hypothetical
                                                                                                  worst-case
                                                                                                  conditions, as
                                                                                                  specified in
                                                                                                  Sec.  63.1257(
                                                                                                  b)(8) of
                                                                                                  subpart GGG of
                                                                                                  this part.
                                                                                                 3. You must
                                                                                                  collect
                                                                                                  operating
                                                                                                  parameter
                                                                                                  monitoring
                                                                                                  system data
                                                                                                  during the
                                                                                                  period of the
                                                                                                  initial
                                                                                                  performance
                                                                                                  test, and
                                                                                                  determine the
                                                                                                  operating
                                                                                                  parameter
                                                                                                  limit during
                                                                                                  the period of
                                                                                                  the initial
                                                                                                  performance
                                                                                                  test.

[[Page 52200]]

 
 6  The sum of all solvent     Existing and new      Measure toluene       Method 18 in          1. You must
 coating process vents.         cellophane            emissions.            appendix A to part    conduct
                                operations.                                 60 of this chapter.   testing of
                                                                                                  emissions from
                                                                                                  continuous
                                                                                                  process vents
                                                                                                  at
                                                                                                  representative
                                                                                                  conditions, as
                                                                                                  specified in
                                                                                                  Sec.  63.1257(
                                                                                                  b)(7) of
                                                                                                  subpart GGG of
                                                                                                  this part.
                                                                                                 2. You must
                                                                                                  conduct
                                                                                                  testing of
                                                                                                  emissions from
                                                                                                  batch process
                                                                                                  vents at
                                                                                                  absolute or
                                                                                                  hypothetical
                                                                                                  worst-case
                                                                                                  conditions or
                                                                                                  hypothetical
                                                                                                  worst-case
                                                                                                  conditions, as
                                                                                                  specified in
                                                                                                  Sec.  63.1257(
                                                                                                  b)(8) of
                                                                                                  subpart GGG of
                                                                                                  this part.
                                                                                                 3. You must
                                                                                                  collect
                                                                                                  operating
                                                                                                  parameter
                                                                                                  monitoring
                                                                                                  system data
                                                                                                  during the
                                                                                                  period of the
                                                                                                  initial
                                                                                                  performance
                                                                                                  test, and
                                                                                                  determine the
                                                                                                  operating
                                                                                                  parameter
                                                                                                  limit during
                                                                                                  the period of
                                                                                                  the initial
                                                                                                  performance
                                                                                                  test.
 7  The sum of all process     Existing and new      Measure total         Method 18, Method     1. You must use
 vents.                         cellulose ether       organic HAP           25, or Method 25A     Method 25 to
                                operations.           emissions.            in appendix A to      determine the
                                                                            part 60 of this       destruction
                                                                            chapter.              efficiency of
                                                                                                  thermal
                                                                                                  oxidizers for
                                                                                                  organic
                                                                                                  compounds.
                                                                                                 2. You may use
                                                                                                  Method 25A if:
                                                                                                 a. An exhaust
                                                                                                  gas volatile
                                                                                                  organic matter
                                                                                                  concentration
                                                                                                  of 50 ppmv or
                                                                                                  less is
                                                                                                  required in
                                                                                                  order to
                                                                                                  comply with
                                                                                                  the emission
                                                                                                  limit, or
                                                                                                 b. The volatile
                                                                                                  organic matter
                                                                                                  concentration
                                                                                                  at the inlet
                                                                                                  to the control
                                                                                                  device and the
                                                                                                  required level
                                                                                                  of control are
                                                                                                  such as to
                                                                                                  result in
                                                                                                  exhaust
                                                                                                  volatile
                                                                                                  organic matter
                                                                                                  concentrations
                                                                                                  of 50 ppmv or
                                                                                                  less, or
                                                                                                 c. Because of
                                                                                                  the high
                                                                                                  efficiency of
                                                                                                  the control
                                                                                                  device, the
                                                                                                  anticipated
                                                                                                  volatile
                                                                                                  organic matter
                                                                                                  concentration
                                                                                                  at the control
                                                                                                  device exhaust
                                                                                                  is 50 ppmv or
                                                                                                  less,
                                                                                                  regardless of
                                                                                                  the inlet
                                                                                                  concentration.

[[Page 52201]]

 
                                                                                                 3. You must
                                                                                                  conduct
                                                                                                  testing of
                                                                                                  emissions from
                                                                                                  continuous
                                                                                                  process vents
                                                                                                  at
                                                                                                  representative
                                                                                                  conditions, as
                                                                                                  specified in
                                                                                                  Sec.  63.1257(
                                                                                                  b)(7) of
                                                                                                  subpart GGG of
                                                                                                  this part.
                                                                                                 4. You must
                                                                                                  conduct
                                                                                                  testing of
                                                                                                  emissions from
                                                                                                  batch process
                                                                                                  vents at
                                                                                                  absolute or
                                                                                                  hypothetical
                                                                                                  worst-case
                                                                                                  conditions or
                                                                                                  hypothetical
                                                                                                  worst-case
                                                                                                  conditions, as
                                                                                                  specified in
                                                                                                  Sec.  63.1257(
                                                                                                  b)(8) of
                                                                                                  subpart GGG of
                                                                                                  this part.
                                                                                                 5. You must
                                                                                                  collect
                                                                                                  operating
                                                                                                  parameter
                                                                                                  monitoring
                                                                                                  system data
                                                                                                  during the
                                                                                                  period of the
                                                                                                  initial
                                                                                                  performance
                                                                                                  test, and
                                                                                                  determine the
                                                                                                  operating
                                                                                                  parameter
                                                                                                  limit during
                                                                                                  the period of
                                                                                                  the initial
                                                                                                  performance
                                                                                                  test.
 8  Each toluene storage       Existing and new      Measure toluene       Method 18 in          3. You must
 vessel.                        cellophane            emissions.            appendix A to part    collect
                                operations.                                 60 of this chapter.   operating
                                                                                                  parameter
                                                                                                  monitoring
                                                                                                  system data
                                                                                                  during the
                                                                                                  period of the
                                                                                                  initial
                                                                                                  performance
                                                                                                  test, and
                                                                                                  determine the
                                                                                                  operating
                                                                                                  parameter
                                                                                                  limit during
                                                                                                  the period of
                                                                                                  the initial
                                                                                                  performance
                                                                                                  test.
 9  All sources of waste-      Existing and new      Measure wastewater    Applicable process    You must follow
 water emissions.               cellulose ether       HAP emissions.        wastewater test       all
                                operations.                                 methods in Sec.       requirements
                                                                            63.145 of subpart G   for the
                                                                            of this part.         applicable
                                                                                                  process
                                                                                                  wastewater
                                                                                                  test methods
                                                                                                  in Sec.
                                                                                                  63.145 of
                                                                                                  subpart G of
                                                                                                  this part.
10  Equipment leaks..........  Existing and new      Measure leak rate...  Applicable equipment  You must follow
                                cellulose ether                             leak test methods     all
                                operations.                                 in Sec.  63.180 of    requirements
                                                                            subpart H of this     for the
                                                                            part or Sec.          applicable
                                                                            65.104 of subpart F   equipment leak
                                                                            of 40 CFR part 65.    test methods
                                                                                                  in Sec.
                                                                                                  63.180 of
                                                                                                  subpart H of
                                                                                                  this part or
                                                                                                  Sec.  65.104
                                                                                                  of subpart F
                                                                                                  of 40 CFR part
                                                                                                  65.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 52202]]


        Table 5 to Subpart UUUU.--Continuous Compliance With Emission Limits and Work Practice Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                     You must
                                                       For the following    Using the following    demonstrate
          For . . .                  At . . .          emission limit or    control technique .     continuous
                                                         work practice              . .          compliance by .
                                                        standard . . .                                 . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1  The sum of all process      Existing and new      Applicable emission   Process change......  1. Maintaining
 vents.                         cellulose food        limit.                                      a material
                                casing, rayon,                                                    balance that
                                cellophane, and                                                   includes data
                                cellulosic sponge                                                 on the amount
                                operations.                                                       of carbon
                                                                                                  disulfide that
                                                                                                  would have
                                                                                                  been used in
                                                                                                  the absence of
                                                                                                  the process
                                                                                                  change, the
                                                                                                  amount of
                                                                                                  carbon
                                                                                                  disulfide that
                                                                                                  was used after
                                                                                                  the process
                                                                                                  change was
                                                                                                  implemented,
                                                                                                  and the total
                                                                                                  sulfide (as
                                                                                                  carbon
                                                                                                  disulfide)
                                                                                                  emitted from
                                                                                                  the process;
                                                                                                  and
                                                                                                 2. Documenting
                                                                                                  the percent
                                                                                                  reduction
                                                                                                  using the
                                                                                                  carbon
                                                                                                  disulfide
                                                                                                  usage and
                                                                                                  emissions data
                                                                                                  from the
                                                                                                  material
                                                                                                  balance.
2  The sum of all process      Existing and new      Applicable emission   Any control           1. Maintaining
 vents.                         cellulose food        limit.                technique.            a material
                                casing, rayon,                                                    balance that
                                cellophane, and                                                   includes data
                                cellulosic sponge                                                 on carbon
                                operations.                                                       disulfide
                                                                                                  usage and
                                                                                                  carbon
                                                                                                  disulfide,
                                                                                                  hydrogen
                                                                                                  sulfide, and
                                                                                                  carbonyl
                                                                                                  sulfide
                                                                                                  emissions at
                                                                                                  the inlet and
                                                                                                  outlet to the
                                                                                                  control device
                                                                                                  and the stack;
                                                                                                  and
                                                                                                 2. Documenting
                                                                                                  the percent
                                                                                                  reduction of
                                                                                                  total sulfide
                                                                                                  (as carbon
                                                                                                  disulfide)
                                                                                                  using the
                                                                                                  emissions data
                                                                                                  from the
                                                                                                  material
                                                                                                  balance.
3  The sum of all solvent      Existing and new      Reduce uncontrolled   Any control           1. Maintaining
 coating process vents.         cellophane            toluene emissions     technique.            a material
                                operations.           by 95% based on a 6-                        balance that
                                                      month rolling                               includes data
                                                      average.                                    on toluene
                                                                                                  usage and
                                                                                                  emissions at
                                                                                                  the inlet and
                                                                                                  outlet to the
                                                                                                  control device
                                                                                                  and the stack;
                                                                                                  and
                                                                                                 2. Documenting
                                                                                                  the percent
                                                                                                  reduction of
                                                                                                  toluene using
                                                                                                  the emissions
                                                                                                  data from the
                                                                                                  material
                                                                                                  balance.
4  The sum of all process      Existing and new      Reduce total          Any control           1. Reducing
 vents.                         cellulose ether       uncontrolled          technique.            average total
                                operations.           organic HAP                                 organic HAP
                                                      emissions by at                             emissions,
                                                      least 99% based on                          measured using
                                                      a 6-month rolling                           Method 18, by
                                                      average.                                    99%; and
                                                                                                 2. Keeping a
                                                                                                  record
                                                                                                  documenting
                                                                                                  the 99%
                                                                                                  reduction of
                                                                                                  the average
                                                                                                  total organic
                                                                                                  HAP emissions.

[[Page 52203]]

 
5  Closed-loop systems.......  Existing and new      Operate and maintain  Closed-loop system..  Keeping a
                                cellulose ether       a closed-loop                               record
                                operations.           system.                                     certifying
                                                                                                  that a closed-
                                                                                                  loop system is
                                                                                                  in use for
                                                                                                  cellulose
                                                                                                  ether
                                                                                                  operations.
6  Each carbon disulfide       Existing and new      Reduce uncontrolled   Any control           Keeping a
 unloading and storage          cellulose food        carbon disulfide      technique.            record
 operation.                     casing, rayon,        emissions by 83%                            documenting
                                cellophane, and       based on a 6-month                          the 83%
                                cellulosic sponge     rolling average.                            reduction in
                                operations.                                                       carbon
                                                                                                  disulfide
                                                                                                  emissions
                                                                                                  relative to
                                                                                                  water systems.
7  Each carbon disulfide       Existing and new      Reduce total          Any control           1. Maintaining
 unloading and storage          cellulose food        uncontrolled          technique.            a material
 operation.                     casing, rayon,        sulfide emissions                           balance that
                                cellophane, and       by 0.14% from                               includes data
                                cellulosic sponge     process vents based                         on carbon
                                operations.           on a 6-month                                disulfide
                                                      rolling average.                            usage and
                                                                                                  carbon
                                                                                                  disulfide,
                                                                                                  hydrogen
                                                                                                  sulfide, and
                                                                                                  carbonyl
                                                                                                  sulfide
                                                                                                  emissions at
                                                                                                  the inlet and
                                                                                                  outlet to the
                                                                                                  control device
                                                                                                  and the stack;
                                                                                                  and
                                                                                                 2. Documenting
                                                                                                  the percent
                                                                                                  reduction of
                                                                                                  total sulfide
                                                                                                  (as carbon
                                                                                                  disulfide)
                                                                                                  using the
                                                                                                  emissions data
                                                                                                  from the
                                                                                                  material
                                                                                                  balance.
8  Each carbon disulfide       Existing and new      Install a nitrogen    Nitrogen system.....  Keeping a
 unloading and storage          cellulose food        system for carbon                           record
 operation.                     casing, rayon,        disulfide unloading                         certifying
                                cellophane, and       and storage                                 that a
                                cellulosic sponge     operations.                                 nitrogen
                                operations.                                                       system is in
                                                                                                  use for carbon
                                                                                                  disulfide
                                                                                                  unloading and
                                                                                                  storage
                                                                                                  operations.
9  Each toluene storage        Existing and new      Reduce uncontrolled   Any control           1. Maintaining
 vessel.                        cellophane            toluene emissions     technique.            a material
                                operations.           by 95% based on a 6-                        balance that
                                                      month rolling                               includes data
                                                      average.                                    on toluene
                                                                                                  usage and
                                                                                                  emissions at
                                                                                                  the inlet and
                                                                                                  outlet to the
                                                                                                  control device
                                                                                                  and the stack;
                                                                                                  and
                                                                                                 2. Documenting
                                                                                                  the percent
                                                                                                  reduction of
                                                                                                  toluene using
                                                                                                  the emissions
                                                                                                  data from the
                                                                                                  material
                                                                                                  balance.
10  All sources of waste-      Existing and new      Applicable process    Applicable process    Complying with
 water emissions.               cellulose ether       wastewater            wastewater control    the applicable
                                operations.           provisions of Secs.   techniques of Sec.    process
                                                      63.132-63.140 of      63.139 of subpart G   wastewater
                                                      subpart G of this     of this part.         continuous
                                                      part.                                       compliance
                                                                                                  provisions of
                                                                                                  Sec.  63.143
                                                                                                  of subpart G
                                                                                                  of this part.
11  Equipment leaks..........  Existing and new      Applicable equipment  Applicable equipment  Complying with
                                cellulose ether       leak standards of     leak control          the applicable
                                operations.           Secs.  63.162-63.17   techniques of Secs.   equipment leak
                                                      9 of subpart H of     63.162-63.179 of      continuous
                                                      this part.            subpart H of this     compliance
                                                                            part.                 provisions of
                                                                                                  Secs.  63.162-
                                                                                                  63.179 of
                                                                                                  subpart H of
                                                                                                  this part.

[[Page 52204]]

 
12  Equipment leaks..........  Existing and new      Applicable equipment  Applicable equipment  Complying with
                                cellulose ether       leak standards of     leak control          the applicable
                                operations.           Secs.  65.106-65.11   techniques of Secs.   equipment leak
                                                      8 of subpart F of     65.106-65.118 of      continuous
                                                      40 CFR part 65.       subpart F of 40 CFR   compliance
                                                                            part 65.              provisions of
                                                                                                  Sec.  65.104
                                                                                                  of subpart F
                                                                                                  of 40 CFR part
                                                                                                  65.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                      Table 6 to Subpart UUUU.--Continuous Compliance With Operating Limits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the following control technique                                            You must demonstrate continuous
               . . .                 For the following operating limit . .           compliance by . . .
-------------------------------------------------------.--------------------------------------------------------
1  Condenser.......................  Maintain the 3-hour average condenser  1. Collecting the condenser outlet
                                      outlet gas temperature no higher       gas temperature data according to
                                      than the maximum value established     Sec.  63.5545; and
                                      during the performance test.          2. Reducing the condenser outlet gas
                                                                             temperature data to 3-hour
                                                                             averages; and
                                                                            3. Maintaining the 3-hour average
                                                                             condenser outlet gas temperature
                                                                             below the maximum value established
                                                                             during the performance test.
2  Thermal oxidizer................  Maintain the 3-hour average thermal    1. Collecting the thermal oxidizer
                                      oxidizer firebox temperature above     firebox temperature data according
                                      the minimum value established during   to Sec.  63.5545; and
                                      the performance test.                 2. Reducing the thermal oxidizer
                                                                             firebox temperature data to 3-hour
                                                                             averages; and
                                                                            3. Maintaining the 3-hour average
                                                                             thermal oxidizer firebox
                                                                             temperature above the minimum value
                                                                             established during the performance
                                                                             test.
3  Water scrubber..................  Maintain the 3-hour average scrubber   1. Collecting the scrubber pressure
                                      pressure drop and scrubber liquid      drop and scrubber liquid flow rate
                                      flow rate within the values            data according to Sec.  63.5545;
                                      established during the performance     and
                                      test.                                 2. Reducing the scrubber parameter
                                                                             data to 3-hour averages; and
                                                                            3. Maintaining the 3-hour scrubber
                                                                             parameter values within the values
                                                                             established during the performance
                                                                             test.
4  Caustic scrubber................  Maintain the 3-hour average scrubber   1. Collecting the scrubber pressure
                                      pressure drop, scrubber liquid pH,     drop, scrubber liquid pH, and
                                      and scrubber liquid flow rate within   scrubber liquid flow rate data
                                      the values established during the      according to Sec.  63.5545; and
                                      performance test.                     2. Reducing the scrubber parameter
                                                                             data to 3-hour averages; and
                                                                            3. Maintaining the 3-hour scrubber
                                                                             parameter values within the values
                                                                             established during the performance
                                                                             test.
5  Flare...........................  Maintain the applicable flare          1. Collecting the applicable flare
                                      operating parameter values in Sec.     operating parameter data according
                                      63.11 within the values established    to the requirements in Sec.  63.11;
                                      during the performance test.           and
                                                                            2. Maintaining the applicable flare
                                                                             operating parameter values in Sec.
                                                                             63.11 within the values established
                                                                             during the performance test.
6  Biofilter.......................  Maintain the 3-hour average biofilter  1. Collecting the biofilter inlet
                                      inlet gas temperature, gas flow        gas temperature, gas flow rate, and
                                      rate, and nutrient and water levels;   nutrient and water levels;
                                      biofilter effluent pH, conductivity,   biofilter effluent pH,
                                      and nutrient levels; and pressure      conductivity, and nutrient levels;
                                      drop within the values established     and biofilter pressure drop data
                                      during the performance test.           according to Sec.  63.5545; and
                                                                            2. Reducing the biofilter parameter
                                                                             data to 3-hour averages; and
                                                                            3. Maintaining the 3-hour biofilter
                                                                             parameter values within the values
                                                                             established during the performance
                                                                             test.
7  Carbon adsorber.................  Maintain the regeneration frequency,   1. Collecting the regeneration
                                      bed heating temperature, bed cooling   frequency, bed heating temperature,
                                      temperature, and regeneration stream   bed cooling temperature, and
                                      flow for each regeneration cycle       regeneration stream flow data for
                                      within the values established during   each regeneration cycle according
                                      the performance test.                  to Sec.  63.5545; and
                                                                            2. Maintaining the carbon adsorber
                                                                             parameter values for each
                                                                             regeneration cycle within the
                                                                             values established during the
                                                                             performance test.

[[Page 52205]]

 
8  Oil absorber....................  Maintain the 3-hour average            1. Collecting the absorption liquid
                                      absorption liquid flow, absorption     flow, absorption liquid
                                      liquid temperature, and steam flow     temperature, and steam flow data
                                      within the values established during   according to Sec.  63.5545; and
                                      the performance test.                 2. Reducing the oil absorber
                                                                             parameter data to 3-hour averages;
                                                                             and
                                                                            3. Maintaining the 3-hour oil
                                                                             absorber parameter values within
                                                                             the values established during the
                                                                             performance test.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                 Table 7 to Subpart UUUU.--Notifications
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                If . . .                            Then . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1  You operate a new or existing         You must submit all of the
 affected source.                         notifications in Sec.  63.6
                                          (h)(4) and (h)(5), Sec.  63.7
                                          (b) and (c), Sec.  63.8 (e)
                                          and (f)(4) and (f)(6), and
                                          Sec.  63.9 (b) through (h)
                                          that apply to you by the dates
                                          specified.
2  You start up your affected source     You must submit an initial
 before [the effective date of the        notification not later than
 final rule], as specified in Sec.        [120 days after the effective
 63.9(b)(2).                              date of the final rule].
3  You start up your new or              You must submit an initial
 reconstructed affected source on or      notification not later than
 after [the effective date of the final   120 calendar days after you
 rule], as specified in Sec.              become subject to this
 63.9(b)(3).                              subpart.
4  You are required to conduct a         You must submit a notification
 performance test.                        of intent to conduct a
                                          performance test at least 60
                                          calendar days before the
                                          performance test is scheduled
                                          to begin, as required in Sec.
                                          63.7(b)(1).
5  You are required to conduct a         1. You must submit a
 performance test or other initial        Notification of Compliance
 compliance demonstration as specified    Status, according to Sec.
 in Table 3 of this subpart.              63.9(h)(2)(ii).
                                         2. You must submit the
                                          Notification of Compliance
                                          Status, including the
                                          performance test results,
                                          before the close of business
                                          on the 60th calendar day
                                          following the completion of
                                          the performance test according
                                          to Sec.  63.10(d)(2).
6  You are required to conduct an        For each initial compliance
 initial compliance demonstration as      demonstration, you must submit
 specified in Table 3 of this subpart     the Notification of Compliance
 that does not include a performance      Status before the close of
 test.                                    business on the 30th calendar
                                          day following the completion
                                          of the initial compliance
                                          demonstration.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


            Table 8 to Subpart UUUU.--Reporting Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    The report must      You must submit
  You must submit a(n)  . . .       contain  . . .       the report  . .
----------------------------------------------------------------.-------
1  Compliance report..........  1. If there are no      Semiannually
                                 deviations from any     according to
                                 emission limit,         the
                                 operating limit, or     requirements in
                                 work practice           Sec.  63.5580(b
                                 standard during the     ).
                                 reporting period,
                                 then the report must
                                 contain the
                                 information in Sec.
                                 63.5580(c).
                                2. If there were no
                                 periods during which
                                 the CPMS was out-of-
                                 control, then the
                                 report must contain a
                                 statement that there
                                 were no periods
                                 during which the CPMS
                                 was out-of-control
                                 during the reporting
                                 period. You must
                                 develop and include
                                 specifications for
                                 out-of-control
                                 operation in the CPMS
                                 quality control plan
                                 required under Sec.
                                 63.8(d)(2).
                                3. If there is a
                                 deviation from any
                                 emission limit,
                                 operating limit, or
                                 work practice
                                 standard during the
                                 reporting period,
                                 then the report must
                                 contain the
                                 information in Sec.
                                 63.5580 (c) and (d).
                                4. If there were
                                 periods during which
                                 the CPMS was out-of-
                                 control, then the
                                 report must contain
                                 the information in
                                 Sec.  63.5580(e).
                                5. If you had a
                                 startup, shutdown or
                                 malfunction during
                                 the reporting period
                                 and you took actions
                                 consistent with your
                                 SSM plan, then the
                                 report must contain
                                 the information in
                                 Sec.  63.10(d)(5)(i).
2  Immediate SSM report if you  1. Actions taken for    1. By fax or
 took actions during a           the event.              telephone
 startup, shutdown, or                                   within 2
 malfunction during the                                  working days
 reporting period that are not                           after starting
 consistent with your SSM plan.                          actions
                                                         inconsistent
                                                         with the plan.

[[Page 52206]]

 
                                2. The information in   2. By letter
                                 Sec.  63.10(d)(5)(ii).  within 7
                                                         working days
                                                         after the end
                                                         of the event
                                                         unless you have
                                                         made
                                                         alternative
                                                         arrangements
                                                         with the
                                                         permitting
                                                         authority.
                                                         [Sec.  63.10(d)
                                                         (5)(ii)].
------------------------------------------------------------------------


          Table 9 to Subpart UUUU.--Recordkeeping Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          You must keep . . .             The record(s) must contain . .
--------------------------------------------------------.---------------
1  A copy of each notification and       All documentation supporting
 report that you submitted to comply      any initial notification or
 with this subpart.                       notification of compliance
                                          status that you submitted,
                                          according to the requirements
                                          in Sec.  63.10(b)(2)(xiv).
2  The records in Sec.  63.6(e)(3)       1. SSM plan.
 related to startup, shutdown, and
 malfunction.
                                         2. When actions taken during a
                                          startup, shutdown, or
                                          malfunction are consistent
                                          with the procedures specified
                                          in the SSM plan, records
                                          demonstrating that the
                                          procedures specified in the
                                          plan were followed.
                                         3. Records of the occurrence
                                          and duration of each startup,
                                          shutdown, or malfunction.
                                         4. When actions taken during a
                                          startup, shutdown, or
                                          malfunction are not consistent
                                          with the procedures specified
                                          in the SSM plan, records of
                                          the actions taken for that
                                          event.
3  Records of performance tests, as      All results of performance
 required in 63.10(b)(2)(viii).           tests, including analysis of
                                          samples, determination of
                                          emissions, and raw data.
4  Records for each continuous           Records required in Tables 5
 parameter monitoring system.             and 6 of this subpart to show
                                          continuous compliance with
                                          each emission limit and work
                                          practice standard that applies
                                          to you.
5  Records of closed-loop systems......  Records certifying that a
                                          closed-loop system is in use
                                          for cellulose ether
                                          operations.
6  Records of nitrogen systems.........  Records certifying that a
                                          nitrogen system is in use for
                                          carbon disulfide unloading and
                                          storage operations.
7  Records of material balances........  1. If use control device to
                                          comply, monthly records that
                                          include HAP usage and HAP
                                          emissions at the inlet and
                                          outlet to the control device
                                          and the stack.
                                         2. If use process changes to
                                          comply, monthly records that
                                          include the amount of HAP that
                                          would have been used in the
                                          absence of the process change,
                                          the amount of HAP that was
                                          used after the process change
                                          was implemented, and the
                                          amount of HAP emitted from the
                                          process.
8  Records of calculations.............  Documenting the percent
                                          reduction in HAP emissions
                                          using HAP usage and emissions
                                          data from the material
                                          balances and applicable
                                          equations in Sec.  63.5545.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                         Table 10.--Applicability of General Provisions to Subpart UUUU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Citation                   Subject                Brief description           Applies to Subpart UUUU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.  63.1.................  Applicability.........  Initial applicability            Yes.
                                                      determination; applicability
                                                      after standard established;
                                                      permit requirements;
                                                      extensions, notifications.
Sec.  63.2.................  Definitions...........  Definitions for part 63          Yes.
                                                      standards.
Sec.  63.3.................  Units and               Units and abbreviations for      Yes.
                              Abbreviations.          part 63 standards.
Sec.  63.4.................  Prohibited Activities.  Prohibited activities;           Yes.
                                                      compliance date;
                                                      circumvention, severability.
Sec.  63.5.................  Construction/           Applicability; applications;     Yes.
                              Reconstruction.         approvals.
Sec.  63.6(a)..............  Applicability.........  General provisions apply unless  Yes.
                                                      compliance extension; general
                                                      provisions apply to area
                                                      sources that become major.
Sec.  63.6(b)(1)-(4).......  Compliance Dates for    Standards apply at [effective    Yes.
                              New and Reconstructed   date of the final rule]; 3
                              sources.                years after [effective date of
                                                      the final rule]; upon startup;
                                                      10 years after construction or
                                                      reconstruction commences for
                                                      CAA Section 112(f).
Sec.  63.6(b)(5)...........  Notification..........  Must notify if commenced         Yes.
                                                      construction or reconstruction
                                                      after proposal.
Sec.  63.6(b)(6)...........  [Reserved]............

[[Page 52207]]

 
Sec.  63.6(b)(7)...........  Compliance Dates for    Area sources that become major   Yes.
                              New and Reconstructed   must comply with major source
                              Area Sources That       standards immediately upon
                              Become Major.           becoming major, regardless of
                                                      whether required to comply
                                                      when they were an area source.
Sec.  63.6(c)(1)-(2).......  Compliance Dates for    Comply according to date in      Yes.
                              Existing Sources.       subpart, which must be no
                                                      later than 3 years after
                                                      [effective date of the final
                                                      rule]; for CAA Section 112(f)
                                                      standards, comply within 90
                                                      days of [effective date of the
                                                      final rule] unless compliance
                                                      extension.
Sec.  63.6(c)(3)-(4).......  [Reserved]............
Sec.  63.6(c)(5)...........  Compliance Dates for    Area sources that become major   Yes.
                              Existing Area Sources   must comply with major source
                              That Become Major.      standards by date indicated in
                                                      subpart or by equivalent time
                                                      period (for example, 3 years).
Sec.  63.6(d)..............  [Reserved]............
Sec.  63.6(e)(1)-(2).......  Operation &             Operate to minimize emissions    Yes.
                              Maintenance.            at all times; correct
                                                      malfunctions as soon as
                                                      practicable; operation and
                                                      maintenance requirements
                                                      independently enforceable;
                                                      information Administrator will
                                                      use to determine if operation
                                                      and maintenance requirements
                                                      were met.
Sec.  63.6(e)(3)...........  Startup, Shutdown, and  Requirement for startup,         Yes.
                              Malfunction Plan.       shutdown, and malfunction and
                                                      SSM plan; content of SSM plan.
Sec.  63.6(f)(1)...........  Compliance Except       You must comply with emission    Yes.
                              During SSM.             standards at all times except
                                                      during SSM.
Sec.  63.6(f)(2)-(3).......  Methods for             Compliance based on performance  Yes.
                              Determining             test, operation and
                              Compliance.             maintenance plans, records,
                                                      inspection.
Sec.  63.6(g)(1)-(3).......  Alternative Standard..  Procedures for getting an        Yes.
                                                      alternative standard.
Sec.  63.6(h)..............  Opacity/Visible         Requirements for opacity and     No. Subpart UUUU has no
                              Emission (VE)           visible emission limits.         opacity or VE limits.
                              Standards.
Sec.  63.6(h)(1)-(9).......  Compliance with         You must comply with opacity/VE  No. Subpart UUUU has no
                              Opacity/VE Standards.   standards at all times except    opacity or VE limits.
                                                      during SSM.
Sec.  63.6(i)(1)-(14)......  Compliance Extension..  Procedures and criteria for      Yes.
                                                      Administrator to grant
                                                      compliance extension.
Sec.  63.6(j)..............  Presidential            President may exempt source      Yes.
                              Compliance Exemption.   category from requirement to
                                                      comply with subpart.
Sec.  63.7(a)(1)-(2).......  Performance Test Dates  Dates for conducting initial     Yes. Except for existing
                                                      performance test; testing and    sources that is included
                                                      other compliance                 in Sec.  63.5540.
                                                      demonstrations; must conduct
                                                      180 days after first subject
                                                      to subpart.
Sec.  63.7(a)(3)...........  Section 114 Authority.  Administrator may require a      Yes.
                                                      performance test under CAA
                                                      Section 114 at any time.
Sec.  63.7(b)(1)...........  Notification of         Must notify Administrator 60     Yes.
                              Performance Test.       days before the test.
Sec.  63.7(b)(2)...........  Notification of         If rescheduling a performance    Yes.
                              Rescheduling.           test is necessary, must notify
                                                      Administrator 5 days before
                                                      scheduled date of rescheduled
                                                      test.
Sec.  63.7(c)..............  Quality Assurance/Test  Requirement to submit site-      Yes.
                              Plan.                   specific test plan 60 days
                                                      before the test or on date
                                                      Administrator agrees with;
                                                      test plan approval procedures;
                                                      performance audit
                                                      requirements; internal and
                                                      external QA procedures for
                                                      testing.
Sec.  63.7(d)..............  Testing Facilities....  Requirements for testing         Yes.
                                                      facilities.
Sec.  63.7(e)(1)...........  Conditions for          Performance tests must be        Yes. Performance tests
                              Conducting              conducted under representative   conducted under
                              Performance Tests.      conditions; cannot conduct       representative conditions
                                                      performance tests during SSM;    for continuous process
                                                      not a violation to exceed        vents, worst-case
                                                      standard during SSM.             conditions for batch
                                                                                       process vents, as
                                                                                       specified in Table 4 of
                                                                                       this subpart.
Sec.  63.7(e)(2)...........  Conditions for          Must conduct according to        Yes.
                              Conducting              subpart and EPA test methods
                              Performance Tests.      unless Administrator approves
                                                      alternative.
Sec.  63.7(e)(3)...........  Test Run Duration.....  Must have three test runs of at  Yes.
                                                      least 1 hour each; compliance
                                                      is based on arithmetic mean of
                                                      three runs; conditions when
                                                      data from an additional test
                                                      run can be used.
Sec.  63.7(f)..............  Alternative Test        Procedures by which              Yes.
                              Method.                 Administrator can grant
                                                      approval to use an alternative
                                                      test method.

[[Page 52208]]

 
Sec.  63.7(g)..............  Performance Test Data   Must include raw data in         Yes.
                              Analysis.               performance test report; must
                                                      submit performance test data
                                                      60 days after end of test with
                                                      the notification of compliance
                                                      status; keep data for 5 years.
Sec.  63.7(h)..............  Waiver of Tests.......  Procedures for Administrator to  Yes.
                                                      waive performance test.
Sec.  63.8(a)(1)...........  Applicability of        Subject to all monitoring        Yes.
                              Monitoring              requirements in standard.
                              Requirements.
Sec.  63.8(a)(2)...........  Performance             Performance Specifications in    Yes.
                              Specifications.         Appendix B of 40 CFR Part 60
                                                      apply.
Sec.  63.8(a)(3)...........  [Reserved]............
Sec.  63.8(a)(4)...........  Monitoring with Flares  Unless your subpart says         Yes.
                                                      otherwise, the requirements
                                                      for flares in Sec.  63.11
                                                      apply.
Sec.  63.8(b)(1)...........  Monitoring............  Must conduct monitoring          Yes.
                                                      according to standard unless
                                                      Administrator approves
                                                      alternative.
Sec.  63.8(b)(2)-(3).......  Multiple Effluents and  Specific requirements for        Yes.
                              Multiple Monitoring     installing monitoring systems;
                              Systems.                must install on each effluent
                                                      before it is combined and
                                                      before it is released to the
                                                      atmosphere unless
                                                      Administrator approves
                                                      otherwise; if more than one
                                                      monitoring system on an
                                                      emission point, must report
                                                      all monitoring system results,
                                                      unless one monitoring system
                                                      is a backup.
Sec.  63.8(c)(1)...........  Monitoring System       Maintain monitoring system in a  Yes.
                              Operation and           manner consistent with good
                              Maintenance.            air pollution control
                                                      practices.
Sec.  63.8(c)(1)(i)........  Routine and             Follow the SSM plan for routine  Yes.
                              Predictable SSM.        repairs; keep parts for
                                                      routine repairs readily
                                                      available; reporting
                                                      requirements for SSM when
                                                      action is described in SSM
                                                      plan.
Sec.  63.8(c)(1)(ii).......  SSM not in SSM plan...  Reporting requirements for SSM   Yes.
                                                      when action is not described
                                                      in SSM plan.
Sec.  63.8(c)(1)(iii)......  Compliance with         How Administrator determines if  Yes.
                              Operation and           source complying with
                              Maintenance             operation and maintenance
                              Requirements.           requirements; review of source
                                                      O&M procedures, records;
                                                      manufacturer's instructions,
                                                      recommendations; inspection.
Sec.  63.8(c)(2)-(3).......  Monitoring System       Must install to get              Yes.
                              Installation.           representative emission of
                                                      parameter measurements; must
                                                      verify operational status
                                                      before or at performance test.
Sec.  63.8(c)(4)...........  Continuous Monitoring   CMS must be operating except     No. Replaced with language
                              System (CMS)            during breakdown, out-of         in Sec.  63.5560.
                              Requirements.           control, repair, maintenance,
                                                      and high-level calibration
                                                      drifts.
Sec.  63.8(c)(4)(i)-(ii)...  Continuous Monitoring   COMS must have a minimum of one  No. Subpart UUUU does not
                              System (CMS)            cycle of sampling and analysis   require CEMS.
                              Requirements.           for each successive 10-second
                                                      period and one cycle of data
                                                      recording for each successive
                                                      6-minute period; CEMS must
                                                      have a minimum of one cycle of
                                                      operation for each successive
                                                      15-minute period.
Sec.  63.8(c)(5)...........  COMS Minimum            COMS minimum procedures........  No. Subpart UUUU has no
                              Procedures.                                              opacity or VE limits.
Sec.  63.8(c)(6)...........  CMS Requirements......  Zero and high level calibration  No. Replaced with language
                                                      check requirements; out-of-      in Sec.  63.5545.
                                                      control periods.
Sec.  63.8(c)(7)-(8).......  CMS Requirements......  Out-of-control periods,          No. Replaced with language
                                                      including reporting.             in Sec.  63.5580(c)(6).
Sec.  63.8(d)..............  CMS Quality Control...  Requirements for CMS quality     No, except for
                                                      control, including               requirements in Sec.
                                                      calibration, etc.; must keep     63.8(d)(2).
                                                      quality control plan on record
                                                      for 5 years; keep old versions
                                                      for 5 years after revisions.
Sec.  63.8(e)..............  CMS Performance         Notification, performance        No. Subpart UUUU does not
                              Evaluation.             evaluation test plan, reports.   require performance
                                                                                       evaluation tests for the
                                                                                       CPMS.
Sec.  63.8(f)(1)-(5).......  Alternative Monitoring  Procedures for Administrator to  Yes.
                              Method.                 approve alternative monitoring.
Sec.  63.8(f)(6)...........  Alternative to          Procedures for Administrator to  No. Subpart UUUU does not
                              Relative Accuracy       approve alternative relative     require relative accuracy
                              Test.                   accuracy tests for CEMS.         tests for the CPMS.

[[Page 52209]]

 
Sec.  63.8(g)(1)-(4).......  Data Reduction........  COMS 6-minute averages           No. Replaced with language
                                                      calculated over at least 36      in Sec.  63.5545(a).
                                                      evenly spaced data points;
                                                      CEMS 1-hour averages computed
                                                      over at least four equally
                                                      spaced data points; data that
                                                      cannot be used in average.
Sec.  63.8(g)(5)...........  Data Reduction........  Data that cannot be used in      Yes. These requirements
                                                      computing averages for CEMS      are applicable to CPMS.
                                                      and COMS.
Sec.  63.9(a)..............  Notification            Applicability and State          Yes.
                              Requirements.           delegation.
Sec.  63.9(b)(1)-(5).......  Initial Notifications.  Submit notification subject 120  Yes.
                                                      days after [effective date of
                                                      the final rule]; notification
                                                      of intent to construct/recon-
                                                      struct; notification of
                                                      commencement of construct/
                                                      recon-struct; notification of
                                                      startup; contents of each.
Sec.  63.9(c)..............  Request for Compliance  Can request if cannot comply by  Yes.
                              Extension.              date or if installed BACT/LAER.
Sec.  63.9(d)..............  Notification of         For sources that commence        Yes.
                              Special Compliance      construction between proposal
                              Requirements for New    and promulgation and want to
                              Source.                 comply 3 years after
                                                      [effective date of the final
                                                      rule].
Sec.  63.9(e)..............  Notification of         Notify Administrator 60 days     Yes.
                              Performance Test.       prior.
Sec.  63.9(f)..............  Notification of VE/     Notify Administrator 30 days     No. Subpart UUUU has no
                              Opacity Test.           prior.                           opacity or VE limits.
Sec.  63.9(g)..............  Additional              Notification of performance      No. Subpart UUUU does not
                              Notifications When      evaluation; notification using   require CEMS.
                              Using CMS.              COMS data; notification that
                                                      exceeded criterion for
                                                      relative accuracy.
Sec.  63.9(h)(1)-(6).......  Notification of         Contents; due 60 days after end  Yes. Except subpart UUUU
                              Compliance Status.      of performance test or other     has no opacity or VE
                                                      compliance demonstration,        limits.
                                                      except for opacity/VE, which
                                                      are due 30 days after; when to
                                                      submit to Federal vs. State
                                                      authority.
Sec.  63.9(i)..............  Adjustment of           Procedures for Administrator to  Yes.
                              Submittal Deadlines.    approve change in when
                                                      notifications must be
                                                      submitted.
Sec.  63.9(j)..............  Change in Previous      Must submit within 15 days       Yes.
                              Information.            after the change.
Sec.  63.10(a).............  Recordkeeping/          Applies to all, unless           Yes.
                              Reporting.              compliance extension; when to
                                                      submit to Federal vs. State
                                                      authority; procedures for
                                                      owners of more than one source.
Sec.  63.10(b)(1)..........  Recordkeeping/          General Requirements; keep all   Yes.
                              Reporting.              records readily available;
                                                      keep for 5 years.
Sec.  63.10(b)(2)(i)-(iv)..  Records related to      Occurrence of each of operation  Yes.
                              Startup, Shutdown,      (process equipment);
                              and Malfunction.        occurrence of each malfunction
                                                      of air pollution equipment;
                                                      maintenance on air pollution
                                                      control equipment; actions
                                                      during startup, shutdown, and
                                                      malfunction.
Sec.  63.10(b)(2) (vi), (x)- CMS Records...........  Malfunctions, inoperative, out-  Yes.
 (xi).                                                of-control; calibration
                                                      checks, adjustments,
                                                      maintenance.
Sec.  63.10(b)(2) (vii)-     Records...............  Measurements to demonstrate      Yes. Except subpart UUUU
 (ix).                                                compliance with emission         has no opacity or VE
                                                      limits; performance test,        limits and does not
                                                      performance evaluation, and VE   require CEMS.
                                                      observation results;
                                                      measurements to determine
                                                      conditions of performance
                                                      tests and performance
                                                      evaluations.
Sec.  63.10(b)(2) (xii)....  Records...............  Records when under waiver......  Yes.
Sec.  63.10(b)(2) (xiii)...  Records...............  Records when using alternative   No. Subpart UUUU does not
                                                      to relative accuracy test.       require CEMS.
Sec.  63.10(b)(2) (xiv)....  Records...............  All documentation supporting     Yes.
                                                      initial notification and
                                                      notification of compliance
                                                      status.
Sec.  63.10(b)(3)..........  Records...............  Applicability determinations...  Yes.
Sec.  63.10(c)(1)-(6), (9)-  Records...............  Additional records for CMS.....  No. Subpart UUUU does not
 (15).                                                                                 require CEMS.
Sec.  63.10(c)(7)-(8)......  Records...............  Records of excess emissions and  No. Replaced with language
                                                      parameter monitoring             in Sec.  63.5585.
                                                      exceedances for CMS.
Sec.  63.10(d)(1)..........  General Reporting       Requirement to report..........  Yes.
                              Requirements.
Sec.  63.10(d)(2)..........  Report of Performance   When to submit to Federal or     Yes.
                              Test Results.           State authority.
Sec.  63.10(d)(3)..........  Reporting Opacity or    What to report and when........  No. Subpart UUUU has no
                              VE Observations.                                         opacity or VE limits.
Sec.  63.10(d)(4)..........  Progress Reports......  Must submit progress reports on  Yes.
                                                      schedule if under compliance
                                                      extension.
Sec.  63.10(d)(5)..........  Startup, Shutdown, and  Contents and submission........  Yes.
                              Malfunction Reports.

[[Page 52210]]

 
Sec.  63.10(e)(1)-(2)......  Additional CMS Reports  Must report results for each     No. Subpart UUUU does not
                                                      CEM on a unit; written copy of   require CEMS.
                                                      performance evaluation; three
                                                      copies of COMS performance
                                                      evaluation.
Sec.  63.10(e)(3)..........  Reports...............  Excess emission reports........  No. Replaced with language
                                                                                       in Sec.  63.5580.
Sec.  63.10(e)(3) (i)-(iii)  Reports...............  Schedule for reporting excess    No. Replaced with language
                                                      emissions and parameter          in Sec.  63.5580.
                                                      monitor exceedance (now
                                                      defined as deviations).
Sec.  63.10(e)(3) (iv)-(v).  Excess Emissions        Requirement to revert to         No. Replaced with language
                              Reports.                quarterly submission if there    in Sec.  63.5580.
                                                      is an excess emissions and
                                                      parameter monitor exceedance
                                                      (now defined as deviations);
                                                      provision to request
                                                      semiannual reporting after
                                                      compliance for 1 year; submit
                                                      report by 30th day following
                                                      end of quarter or calendar
                                                      half; if there has not been an
                                                      exceedance or excess emission
                                                      (now defined as deviations),
                                                      report contents is a statement
                                                      that there have been no
                                                      deviations.
Sec.  63.10(e)(3) (iv)-(v).  Excess Emissions        Must submit report containing    No. Replaced with language
                              Reports.                all of the information in Sec.   in Sec.  63.5580.
                                                       63.10(c)(5-13), Sec.
                                                      63.8(c)(7-8).
Sec.  63.10(e)(3) (vi)-      Excess Emissions        Requirements for reporting       No. Replaced with language
 (viii).                      Report and Summary      excess emissions for CMSs (now   in Sec.  63.5580.
                              Report.                 called deviations); requires
                                                      all of the information in Sec.
                                                       63.10(c)(5-13), Sec.
                                                      63.8(c)(7-8).
Sec.  63.10(e)(4)..........  Reporting COMS data...  Must submit COMS data with       No. Subpart UUUU has no
                                                      performance test data.           opacity or VE limits.
Sec.  63.10(f).............  Waiver for              Procedures for Administrator to  Yes.
                              Recordkeeping/          waive.
                              Reporting.
Sec.  63.11................  Flares................  Requirements for flares........  Yes.
Sec.  63.12................  Delegation............  State authority to enforce       Yes.
                                                      standards.
Sec.  63.13................  Addresses.............  Addresses where reports,         Yes.
                                                      notifications, and requests
                                                      are sent.
Sec.  63.14................  Incorporation by        Test methods incorporated by     Yes.
                              Reference.              reference.
Sec.  63.15................  Availability of         Public and confidential          Yes.
                              Information.            information.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 00-21073 Filed 8-25-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P