[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 70 (Thursday, April 11, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17824-17845]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-7096]



[[Page 17823]]

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

Part III





Environmental Protection Agency





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



40 CFR Part 63



National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Wet-Formed 
Fiberglass Mat Production; Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 70 / Thursday, April 11, 2002 / Rules 
and Regulations  

[[Page 17824]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[FRL-7163-3]
RIN 2060-AH89


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Wet-
Formed Fiberglass Mat Production

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule and notice of revisions to list of categories of 
major and area sources and to the promulgation schedule for standards.

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

SUMMARY: This action adds wet-formed fiberglass mat production to the 
list of categories of major sources of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) 
published under section 112(c) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and to the 
source category schedule for national emission standards for hazardous 
air pollutants (NESHAP).
    This action promulgates the NESHAP for new and existing sources at 
wet-formed fiberglass mat production facilities. The primary organic 
HAP emitted by these facilities are formaldehyde, methanol, and vinyl 
acetate. Exposure to these HAP can cause reversible or irreversible 
adverse health effects including carcinogenic, respiratory, nervous 
system, developmental, reproductive, and/or dermal health effects. 
These NESHAP will reduce nationwide emissions of HAP from the drying 
and curing ovens at these facilities by 199 megagrams per year (Mg/yr) 
(219 tons per year or tons/yr), an approximate 74 percent reduction 
from the current level of emissions.
    These NESHAP are based on the Administrator's determination that 
wet-formed fiberglass mat production facilities emit several of the 188 
HAP listed in the CAA from the various process operations found within 
the industry, and that these facilities can be major sources of HAP. 
These NESHAP will protect the public by requiring all wet-formed 
fiberglass mat production facilities that are major sources to meet HAP 
emission standards reflecting the application of the maximum achievable 
control technology (MACT).

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 11, 2002. The incorporation by reference of 
certain publications listed in the subpart is approved by the Director 
of the Federal Register as of April 11, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Docket. Docket No. A-97-54 contains the information 
considered by EPA in developing this rule. This docket is located at 
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Docket and 
Information Center, 401 M Street, SW., Room M-1500, Waterside Mall, 
Washington, DC 20460 and may be inspected from 8 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning the final 
rule, contact Mr. Juan Santiago, Minerals and Inorganic Chemicals 
Group, Emission Standards Division (MD-13), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711, 
telephone number (919) 541-1084, e-mail address: [email protected]. 
For information regarding Method 316 or Method 318, contact Ms. Rima N. 
Howell; Emissions, Monitoring, and Analysis Division (MD-19); U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 
27711, telephone number (919) 541-0443, e-mail address: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Docket. The docket is an organized and 
complete file of all the information considered by EPA 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 and Radiation 
Docket and Information Center 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 this notice will be available on the WWW through 
the Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following signature, a copy of 
the notice will be posted on the TTN's policy and guidance page at 
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. Entities potentially regulated by this action 
are those industrial facilities that manufacture wet-formed fiberglass 
mat. Wet-formed fiberglass mat production is classified under Standard 
Industrial Classification (SIC) code 3229325; the NAICS code is 327212, 
Non-woven Fabric Mills. Regulated categories and entities are shown in 
table 1. This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be regulated by the 
final rule. This table lists the types of entities that EPA is now 
aware could potentially be regulated by the final rule. To determine 
whether your facility would be regulated by the final rule, carefully 
examine the applicability criteria in Sec. 63.2981 of the final rule. 
If there are any questions regarding the applicability of this action 
to a particular entity, consult Mr. Juan Santiago (See FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT).

                                   Table 1.--Regulated Categories and Entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Category                          SIC/NAICS                        Description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industrial..................................        3229325/327212   Wet-formed fiberglass mat production
                                                                      facilities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Judicial Review. These NESHAP for wet-formed fiberglass mat 
production facilities were proposed on May 26, 2000 (65 FR 34278). This 
action announces EPA's final decisions on the rule. Under section 
307(b)(1) of the CAA, judicial review of the NESHAP is available only 
by filing a petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days of April 11, 2002. Under 
section 307(b)(2) of the CAA, the requirements that are the subject of 
today's final action may not be challenged later in civil or criminal 
proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these requirements.
    Organization of this Document. The information in this preamble is 
organized as follows:

I. Background

[[Page 17825]]

    A. Regulatory Background and Addition to Source Category List
    B. What is the source of authority for development of NESHAP?
    C. What are the health effects of pollutants emitted from this 
source category?
    D. Stakeholder and Public Participation
II. What are the requirements of these NESHAP?
    A. Do these NESHAP apply to me?
    B. What emission limits must I meet?
    C. What operating limits must I meet?
    D. What are the performance test and initial compliance 
provisions of these NESHAP?
    E. What monitoring requirements must I meet?
    F. What are the notification, recordkeeping, and reporting 
requirements of these NESHAP?
III. What are the impacts of these NESHAP?
    A. What are the air emission impacts?
    B. What are the water and solid waste impacts?
    C. Are there any additional environmental and health impacts?
    D. What are the energy impacts?
    E. What are the cost impacts?
    F. What are the economic impacts?
IV. Summary of Changes Since Proposal
    A. Operating Limits
    B. Performance Test and Initial Compliance Provisions
    C. Monitoring Requirements
    D. Definitions
V. Summary of Responses to Major Comments
VI. Administrative Requirements
    A. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Executive Order 13132--Federalism
    C. Executive Order 13175--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
    F. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 
U.S.C. 601, et seq.
    G. Paperwork Reduction Act
    H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    I. Congressional Review Act
    J. Executive Order 13211--Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

I. Background

A. Regulatory Background and Addition to Source Category List

    Section 112(c) of the CAA directs us to list each category of major 
and area sources, as appropriate, that emits one or more of the 188 HAP 
listed in section 112(b) of the CAA. The term ``major source'' is 
defined in section 112(a)(1) to mean:

* * * any stationary source or group of stationary sources located 
within a contiguous area under common control that emits or has the 
potential to emit, considering controls, in the aggregate 10 tons 
per year or more of any hazardous air pollutant or 25 tons per year 
or more of any combination of hazardous air pollutants * * *.

    We published an initial list of source categories on July 16, 1992 
(57 FR 31576). Included on the initial source category list were major 
sources of HAP emissions from the asphalt roofing and processing 
industry.
    As stated in the preamble to the proposed rule (65 FR 34279; May 
26, 2000), during development of the asphalt roofing and processing 
NESHAP, industry representatives informed us of the existence of the 
wet-formed fiberglass mat production industry and its relationship to 
the asphalt roofing production industry. We proposed separate NESHAP 
for wet-formed fiberglass mat production because the production 
processes and pollutant emissions differ from those in the asphalt 
roofing industry. In addition, wet-formed fiberglass mat is produced at 
both stand-alone facilities and those collocated with asphalt roofing 
and processing facilities. The CAA provides that we may amend the 
source category list anytime. Consequently, we proposed adding wet-
formed fiberglass mat production to the source category list under 
section 112(c) of the CAA.
    Wet-formed fiberglass mat is the substrate for several asphalt 
roofing products. In wet-formed fiberglass mat production, glass fibers 
are bonded with an organic resin. The mat is formed as the resin is 
dried and cured in heated ovens. The majority of HAP emissions 
associated with wet-formed fiberglass mat production are emitted from 
the drying and curing oven exhaust. Based on HAP emission data obtained 
during the development of the rule, we have determined that all wet-
formed fiberglass mat production facilities are major sources of HAP. 
Nine of the 14 facilities (10 of the 15 production lines) control the 
drying and curing oven exhaust emissions. Several of the five remaining 
facilities that do not control the drying and curing oven exhaust are 
also major sources of HAP.
    We received no public comments that were opposed to adding wet-
formed fiberglass mat facilities to the source category list. 
Therefore, today's action adds wet-formed fiberglass mat production to 
the list of source categories under section 112(c) of the CAA for which 
MACT standards are to be developed. Section 112(c)(5) requires that 
final standards for this source category be promulgated no later than 
May 26, 2002 (2 years after adding the source category to the list). 
Today's action satisfies that requirement.

B. What Is the Source of Authority for Development of NESHAP?

    Section 112 of the CAA requires us to promulgate standards for the 
control of HAP emissions from each source category listed under section 
112(c). The statute requires the standards to reflect the maximum 
degree of reduction in emissions of HAP that is achievable taking into 
consideration the cost of achieving the emission reduction, any non-air 
quality health and environmental impacts, and energy requirements. This 
level of control is commonly referred to as MACT. The MACT standards 
can be based on the emission reductions achievable through application 
of measures, processes, methods, systems, or techniques including, but 
not limited to: (1) Reducing the volume of, or eliminating emissions 
of, such pollutants through process changes, substitution of materials, 
or other modifications; (2) enclosing systems or processes to eliminate 
emissions; (3) collecting, capturing, or treating such pollutants when 
released from a process, stack, storage, or fugitive emissions point; 
(4) design, equipment, work practice, or operational standards 
(including requirements for operator training or certification) as 
provided in section 112(h) of the CAA; or (5) a combination of the 
above (see section 112(d)(2) of the CAA).
    For new sources, MACT standards cannot be less stringent than the 
emission control achieved in practice by the best-controlled similar 
source (see section 112(d)(3) of the CAA). The MACT standards for 
existing sources can be less stringent than standards for new sources. 
However, they cannot be less stringent than the average emission 
limitation achieved by the best-performing 12 percent of existing 
sources for categories and subcategories with 30 or more sources, or 
the best-performing five sources for categories or subcategories with 
fewer than 30 sources.
    The MACT floor is the minimum control level allowed for NESHAP and 
is defined under section 112(d)(3) of the CAA. In essence, MACT 
standards are designed to ensure that all major sources of air toxic 
emissions achieve the level of control already being achieved by the 
better-controlled and lower-emitting sources in each category or 
subcategory. This approach provides assurance to the public that each 
major source of toxic air pollution will be required to effectively 
control its emissions. At the same time, this

[[Page 17826]]

approach provides a level economic playing field, ensuring that 
facilities that employ cleaner processes and good emission controls are 
not disadvantaged relative to competitors with poorer controls.
    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 consideration of the cost of achieving the 
emission reductions, any non-air quality health and environmental 
impacts, and energy requirements.

C. What Are the Health Effects of Pollutants Emitted From This Source 
Category?

    The CAA was created, in part, ``to protect and enhance the quality 
of the Nation's air resources so as to promote the public health and 
welfare and the productive capacity of its population'' (see section 
101(b) of the CAA). These NESHAP will protect public health by reducing 
emissions of HAP from wet-formed fiberglass mat production facilities.
    Emission data collected during development of the NESHAP show that 
formaldehyde, vinyl acetate, and methanol are emitted from wet-formed 
fiberglass mat production facilities. The emission limits in these 
NESHAP will reduce emissions of these pollutants emitted from drying 
and curing ovens. As a result of controlling these HAP, the final 
NESHAP will also reduce emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC). 
A summary of the potential health effects caused by exposure to these 
pollutants is presented in the preamble to the proposed rule (65 FR 
34280; May 26, 2000).

D. Stakeholder and Public Participation

    Various stakeholders were involved in the development of these 
standards. Individual wet-formed fiberglass mat production facilities 
and the Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper Industry (TAPPI) 
were consulted throughout the development of these standards. 
Representatives from State and Regional enforcement agencies, as well 
as representatives from other offices within EPA, participated in the 
regulatory development process by reviewing and commenting on the 
standards during development.
    The NESHAP for wet-formed fiberglass mat production (40 CFR part 
63, subpart HHHH) was proposed in the Federal Register on May 26, 2000 
(65 FR 34278). The public comment period ended on July 25, 2000. 
Industry representatives, regulatory authorities, and environmental 
groups had the opportunity to comment on the proposed NESHAP and to 
provide additional information during the public comment period. 
Although the Agency offered the opportunity at proposal for oral 
presentation of data, views, or arguments concerning the proposed rule, 
no one requested a hearing and, therefore, a hearing was not held. The 
EPA received five letters containing comments on the proposed NESHAP 
from various groups including a State university and two trade 
associations representing industry. These final NESHAP reflect EPA's 
full consideration of the comments. The major public comments, along 
with EPA's responses to these comments on the proposed rule, are 
summarized in this preamble. A discussion of all public comments and 
EPA's responses is contained in the docket.

II. What Are the Requirements of These NESHAP?

A. Do These NESHAP Apply to Me?

    These NESHAP apply to you if you own or operate an existing or 
newly constructed or reconstructed drying and curing oven located at a 
wet-formed fiberglass mat production facility that is a major source of 
HAP or that is collocated with a major source of HAP emissions. A major 
source means any source that has the potential to emit 10 tons/yr or 
more of any one HAP or 25 tons/yr or more of any combination of HAP.
    You would not be subject to the NESHAP if your facility is 
determined to be an area source. An area source of HAP is any facility 
that is not a major source as defined in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A.

B. What Emission Limits Must I Meet?

    These NESHAP regulate emissions of formaldehyde as a surrogate for 
total HAP emissions. Control of formaldehyde by thermal oxidation will 
also result in control of vinyl acetate and methanol. You must meet 
either a mass HAP emission limit or percentage reduction requirement 
for each drying and curing oven. The HAP emission limits are the same 
for new and existing drying and curing ovens. The HAP emission limits 
for the exhaust from new and existing drying and curing ovens are a 
maximum formaldehyde emission rate of 0.03 kilograms per megagram (kg/
Mg) of wet-formed fiberglass mat produced (0.05 pounds per ton (lb/ton) 
of wet-formed fiberglass mat produced) or a minimum of 96 percent 
destruction efficiency of formaldehyde (as shown in Table 2). You can 
choose to comply with either the emission rate limit or the percent 
reduction requirement. If you use a thermal oxidizer or other control 
device to achieve the mass emission limit or percentage reduction 
requirement, you must collect and convey the emissions from each drying 
and curing oven to the control device according to the procedures 
specified in chapters 3 and 5 of ``Industrial Ventilation: A Manual of 
Recommended Practice.'' Section 63.3003 of the rule explains how to 
obtain a copy of this reference.

 Table 2.--Summary of Emission Limits for New and Existing Drying and Curing Ovens at Wet-Formed Fiberglass Mat
                                              Manufacturing Plants
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Process                                              Emission limit
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each existing and new drying and curing oven  0.03 kg of formaldehyde per Mg of fiberglass mat (0.05 lb of
                                               formaldehyde per ton of fiberglass mat)
                                                or
                                              96 percent reduction of formaldehyde.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What Operating Limits Must I Meet?

    In addition to the emission limits, the final NESHAP contain 
specific operating limits, summarized in Table 3. The operating limits 
require you to maintain certain process or control device parameters 
within the levels established during the initial performance test. All 
operating limits must reflect operation of the process and control 
device during a performance test that demonstrates achievement of the 
emission limit during operating conditions that would achieve the 
highest potential emission rate.

[[Page 17827]]



                   Table 3.--Summary of Operating Limits for New and Existing Affected Sources
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Affected source                 Parameter, operation, or process to monitor    Operating limits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each affected drying and curing oven          Resin free-formaldehyde content, and          Use a resin with a
 (regardless of control technology).                                                         free-formaldehyde
                                                                                             content no greater
                                                                                             than that of the
                                                                                             resin used during
                                                                                             the performance
                                                                                             test, as determined
                                                                                             by the resin
                                                                                             purchase
                                                                                             specification or
                                                                                             test method.
                                              Application rate of urea-formaldehyde resin   Do not exceed the
                                               solids, and                                   urea-formaldehyde
                                                                                             resin solids
                                                                                             application rate
                                                                                             achieved during the
                                                                                             performance test.
                                              Corrective action...........................  Initiate corrective
                                                                                             action within 1
                                                                                             hour of an
                                                                                             established
                                                                                             operating parameter
                                                                                             deviation and
                                                                                             complete and
                                                                                             document action per
                                                                                             operation,
                                                                                             maintenance and
                                                                                             monitoring plan.
Each affected drying and curing oven          Thermal oxidizer operating temperature, and   Maintain the average
 controlled by a thermal oxidizer.                                                           temperature for
                                                                                             each 3-hour period
                                                                                             at or above the
                                                                                             average operating
                                                                                             temperature
                                                                                             achieved during the
                                                                                             performance test.
                                              Thermal oxidizer operation..................  Operate the thermal
                                                                                             oxidizer in
                                                                                             accordance with the
                                                                                             operation,
                                                                                             maintenance, and
                                                                                             monitoring plan;
                                                                                             annually inspect
                                                                                             the thermal
                                                                                             oxidizer for
                                                                                             structural and
                                                                                             design integrity.
Each affected drying and curing oven          Process or control device parameters.         Maintain the process
 controlled by process modifications or a                                                    or control device
 control device other than a thermal                                                         parameter within
 oxidizer.                                                                                   the ranges
                                                                                             established during
                                                                                             the performance
                                                                                             test.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    You must also prepare an operation, maintenance, and monitoring 
(OMM) plan. The OMM plan must specify the parameters that must be 
monitored, how they will be monitored, the operating limits, and the 
corrective actions that must be followed whenever a monitored parameter 
deviates from the operating limits. The OMM plan shall be incorporated 
by reference into your title V permit.
    Following the performance test, whenever you detect that a 
monitored parameter deviates from the established operating limits, you 
must initiate the corrective actions specified in the OMM plan within 1 
hour. You must complete the corrective actions in an expeditious manner 
and implement them as specified in your OMM plan.
    If you use a thermal oxidizer to achieve compliance with the 
emission limits, you must operate the thermal oxidizer so that the 
average operating temperature in any 3-hour block period does not fall 
below the average temperature established during the performance test. 
Additionally, an annual inspection of the thermal oxidizer is required 
to ensure that the structural and design integrity of the combustion 
chamber is maintained in the same condition as during the performance 
test. If you use process modifications or an add-on control device 
other than a thermal oxidizer to achieve compliance with the emission 
standards, you must maintain the process or control device parameter(s) 
within the operating limits that you established during the performance 
test. In addition, you must receive EPA Administrator approval for the 
alternative monitoring. You must also include the alternative 
monitoring and alternative operating limits in your OMM plan, which is 
incorporated by reference into your title V permit.
    The operating limits also require you to maintain the free-
formaldehyde content of the resin and the urea-formaldehyde resin 
solids application rate within the levels you established during a 
compliance test and as specified in your OMM plan. These operating 
limits apply regardless of which type of control you use to comply with 
the HAP emission limits.

D. What Are the Performance Test and Initial Compliance Provisions of 
These NESHAP?

    You must conduct a performance test to demonstrate initial 
compliance with the emission limits. The performance test must be 
performed initially and every 5 years following the initial performance 
test. A performance test is also required to change the value or range 
of an operating limit. Under the final NESHAP, you must conduct the 
performance test while operating at the maximum urea-formaldehyde resin 
solids application rate and using the resin with the highest free-
formaldehyde content. You must measure formaldehyde emissions as the 
average of three test runs using EPA Method 316 in appendix A of 40 CFR 
part 63, ``Sampling and Analysis for Formaldehyde from Stationary 
Sources in the Mineral Wool and Wool Fiberglass Industries'' or EPA 
Method 318 in appendix A of 40 CFR part 63, ``Extractive FTIR Method 
for the Measurement of Emissions from the Mineral Wool and Wool 
Fiberglass Industries.'' You must demonstrate compliance with either 
the mass emission limit or the percentage reduction requirement using 
the instructions and equations contained in the performance test 
requirements section of these final NESHAP.
    If you use a thermal oxidizer to comply with these NESHAP, you must 
conduct a performance evaluation for the thermal oxidizer temperature 
monitoring device prior to the initial performance test to determine 
compliance. The evaluation must be conducted according to the 
procedures in 40 CFR 63.8(e) of the NESHAP general provisions. The 
temperature monitoring device must meet the following performance and 
equipment specifications: (1) The temperature monitoring device must be 
installed either at the exit of the combustion zone of each thermal 
oxidizer or at the location specified by the manufacturer, and the 
device must be installed in a location before any heat recovery or heat 
exchange equipment; (2) the recorder response range must include zero 
and 1.5 times the average temperature; and (3) the reference method 
must be a National Institute of Standards and Technology calibrated 
reference thermocouple-potentiometer system or an alternate reference, 
subject to the approval of the Administrator.
    During the performance tests, you must continuously monitor the 
thermal oxidizer operating temperature and record the average 
temperature in 15-minute blocks during each 1-hour test run. After 
completion of the three required test runs, you must determine the 3-
hour average operating temperature of the thermal oxidizer. If you use 
process modifications or an add-on control device other than a thermal 
oxidizer to comply with the emission limits, you must determine the

[[Page 17828]]

appropriate control device or process parameters to monitor to indicate 
whether compliance is being achieved. You must include the process or 
control device parameters, monitoring frequency, and the averaging 
periods in your site-specific test plan required by the 40 CFR part 63 
general provisions prior to conducting your initial performance test. 
You may perform multiple tests to establish the least restrictive value 
or operating range for the selected parameters that still demonstrate 
compliance.
    During the performance tests, you must also determine and record 
the average hourly urea-formaldehyde resin solids application rate 
during each of the three test runs and the free-formaldehyde content of 
the resin used to produce the mat.
    The final NESHAP allow facilities subject to the NESHAP to conduct 
short-term experimental production runs, where the resin free-
formaldehyde content or urea-formaldehyde resin solids application rate 
deviate from the levels established during previous performance tests, 
without conducting additional performance tests. You must apply for 
approval from the Administrator or delegated State agency to conduct 
such experimental production runs. The application must be made at 
least 30 days prior to conducting the run. The application would 
include information on the nature and duration of the test runs 
including plans to perform emissions testing. If you conduct such 
experimental production runs without first receiving approval from the 
Administrator or delegated State agency, then you must conduct a 
performance test under those same experimental run conditions to show 
that you were in compliance with the formaldehyde emission limit or 
percent reduction.

E. What Monitoring Requirements Must I Meet?

    Continuous compliance is demonstrated after the initial performance 
test and between subsequent performance tests by monitoring operating 
parameters of emission control devices and processes. The allowable 
monitoring parameter values or ranges are determined during your 
initial performance test and must be included in your OMM plan.
    If you use a thermal oxidizer to achieve compliance with the 
emission limits, you must: (1) Install, operate, calibrate, and 
maintain a device that continuously measures the operating temperature 
of each thermal oxidizer; and (2) determine and record the temperature 
in 15-minute and 3-hour block averages. This is typically done using a 
thermocouple (a standard feature on most thermal oxidizers) and a data 
logger.
    If process modifications or a control device other than a thermal 
oxidizer is used to achieve compliance with the emission limits, you 
must monitor the parameters that were established during the 
performance test and included in your OMM plan.
    You are also required to record the urea-formaldehyde-to-latex 
ratio in the binder, measure the loss-on-ignition value using the 
method in Appendix B to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH, measure the 
weight per square of the wet-formed fiberglass mat produced and the 
hourly mat production rate, and calculate the urea-formaldehyde resin 
solids content of the product manufactured. The values of these 
parameters are determined in order to calculate the hourly average 
urea-formaldehyde resin solids application rate. You must also 
determine the free-formaldehyde content of the urea-formaldehyde resins 
using either the method in Appendix A to 40 CFR part 63, subpart HHHH, 
or the material supplier's documentation. Because these process 
parameters affect the amount of HAP emitted from the drying and curing 
oven, you must monitor them to ensure that operation of the production 
process is consistent with the conditions of the performance test, and 
that the production process does not vary in such a way as to increase 
HAP emissions from the drying and curing oven exhaust.
    The final NESHAP contain provisions that allow you to change the 
thermal oxidizer operating temperature, operating parameters for add-on 
control devices other than thermal oxidizers, and process operating 
parameter values from those established using the initial and 5-year 
performance tests. These provisions allow you to make process changes 
or to demonstrate that different monitoring parameter values would more 
appropriately demonstrate compliance with the final emission limits. 
You may revise the monitoring or process parameter values by conducting 
additional performance tests to verify compliance at the revised 
operating levels. For example, if you intend to use a urea-formaldehyde 
resin with a higher free-formaldehyde content or operate at a higher 
urea-formaldehyde resin solids application rate, you must perform 
additional performance tests to verify compliance under conditions of 
the increased operating or process parameters. You must notify the 
Administrator in writing of your intention to conduct these additional 
performance tests and follow the procedures in 40 CFR 63.7.

F. What Are the Notification, Recordkeeping, and Reporting Requirements 
of These NESHAP?

    All notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in the 
40 CFR part 63 general provisions, as well as additional requirements, 
apply to wet-formed fiberglass mat manufacturing facilities. The 
notification and reporting requirements include, but are not limited 
to: (1) Initial notification of applicability of the rule, notification 
of the dates for conducting the performance test, and notification of 
compliance status including the measured range of each monitored 
parameter and the operating limits established during the performance 
test; (2) a report of performance test results; (3) periodic reports of 
any startup, shutdown, and malfunction events that occur; and (4) 
semiannual reports of deviations and continuous monitoring system 
performance. A deviation is any instance when any requirement or 
obligation established by the rule including, but not limited to, the 
emission limits and operating limits, is not met. If no deviations 
occur during a semiannual reporting period, you must submit a 
semiannual report stating that the affected source has been in 
continuous compliance during that period. If deviations from 
established monitoring parameters occur, the frequency of submitting 
the semiannual reports becomes quarterly until a request to return to 
semiannual reporting is approved by the Administrator. You cannot 
submit the request to reduce the frequency of the reporting period 
until the affected source's reports of deviations and continuous 
monitoring system performance remain continually within the established 
parameter ranges for 1 full year.
    When using a thermal oxidizer or other control device to reduce HAP 
emissions, you will have to make your startup, shutdown, and 
malfunction plan available for inspection if the Administrator requests 
to see it, but you do not have to submit it to the Administrator for 
approval. You must keep the plan for the life of the affected source or 
until the source is no longer subject to the rule. If you revise the 
plan, you must keep the previous superseded versions on record for 5 
years following the revision.
    You must maintain records of the following, as applicable: (1) All 
results of performance tests; (2) thermal oxidizer operating 
temperature; (3) process parameters for drying and

[[Page 17829]]

curing ovens that comply with the emission limits using process 
modifications or an add-on control device other than a thermal 
oxidizer; (4) free-formaldehyde content of the resin; (5) urea-
formaldehyde-to-latex ratio; (6) loss-on-ignition value of the wet-
formed fiberglass mat produced; (7) urea-formaldehyde resin solids 
content per ton of the wet-formed fiberglass mat produced; (8) weight 
of the mat per roofing square; (9) average hourly wet-formed fiberglass 
mat production rate; (10) for operating parameter deviations, the date, 
time, and duration of each deviation, the date and time corrective 
actions were initiated and completed, a brief description of the cause 
of the deviation, and a description of the corrective actions taken to 
return the parameter to the limit or within the range established in 
the OMM plan and during the most recent performance test; (11) the OMM 
plan; (12) the occurrence and duration of each startup, shutdown, or 
malfunction of the control device; (13) actions taken during startup, 
shutdown, and malfunction that are different from the procedures 
specified in the affected source's startup, shutdown, and malfunction 
plan; (14) maintenance and inspections performed on control devices; 
and (15) any other information required to be recorded by the general 
provisions.
    The NESHAP general provisions require that records be maintained 
for at least 5 years from the date of each record. You must retain the 
records onsite for at least 2 years but you may retain the records 
offsite for the remaining 3 years. The records must be readily 
available and in a form suitable for efficient inspection and review. 
The files may be retained on paper, microfilm, microfiche, a computer, 
computer disks, or magnetic tape. Reports may be made on paper or on a 
labeled computer disk using commonly available and compatible computer 
software.

III. What Are the Impacts of These NESHAP?

A. What Are the Air Emission Impacts?

    At the current level of control, nationwide emissions of HAP from 
the 14 facilities in the industry are estimated to be approximately 268 
Mg/yr (295 tons/yr). Under the final NESHAP, it is expected that 
thermal oxidizers will be added to the five uncontrolled drying and 
curing ovens, and that existing thermal oxidizers will be replaced with 
new units for three out of the ten controlled drying and curing ovens. 
This would result in an estimated reduction in nationwide HAP emissions 
of 199 Mg/yr (219 tons/yr).
    Formaldehyde emissions from wet-formed fiberglass mat manufacturing 
lines account for about 65 percent of the baseline HAP emissions. 
Methanol emissions account for approximately 30 percent, with vinyl 
acetate comprising the remaining 5 percent of the baseline HAP 
emissions. (These percentages are national averages. The actual 
emission profiles from individual lines will vary with the type of 
resin and binder used.) Estimated nationwide emissions of formaldehyde 
from existing wet-formed fiberglass mat production lines are 174 Mg/yr 
(192 tons/yr) at the current level of control. Implementing the NESHAP 
will reduce nationwide formaldehyde emissions from existing sources by 
about 130 Mg/yr (143 tons/yr), and combined emissions of vinyl acetate 
and methanol will be reduced by 70 Mg/yr (77 tons/yr).
    Secondary emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) from 
thermal oxidizer controls are formed as a result of natural gas 
combustion. Total emissions of NOX from all affected sources 
are estimated to increase by about 15 Mg/yr (16 tons/yr).

B. What Are the Water and Solid Waste Impacts?

    Because compliance with the NESHAP is based on the use of thermal 
oxidizers, no water pollution or solid waste impacts would result from 
the NESHAP.

C. Are There Any Additional Environmental and Health Impacts?

    Reducing HAP emissions will lower occupational HAP and VOC exposure 
levels. The operation of thermal oxidizers may increase occupational 
noise levels in the five facilities that currently do not control HAP 
emissions.

D. What Are the Energy Impacts?

    Thermal oxidizers require electrical energy to operate fans. 
Additional electrical energy requirements are estimated to be 4,260 
megawatt hours per year (MW-hr/yr). An additional 275,000 million 
British thermal units per year (Btu/yr) of natural gas are estimated to 
be required for eight additional thermal oxidizers that would be added 
to existing sources. The total additional energy (electricity and 
natural gas) required as a result of the NESHAP is 290 billion Btu/yr 
in the fifth year following promulgation of the NESHAP.
    We do not have sufficient information to predict the number of new 
glass mat production lines that will be built and come on line in the 5 
years after promulgation or to predict the energy needs for control 
devices on those new lines. However, the average energy need for the 
control device on a new line would be about the same as the average 
energy need for a control device on an existing line, or about 530 MW-
hr/yr of electricity and 34,400 million Btu of natural gas.

E. What Are the Cost Impacts?

    Cost impacts of the final NESHAP for drying and curing ovens were 
analyzed using site-specific information included in the TAPPI survey 
responses coupled with procedures from the ``OAQPS Cost Manual.'' For 
some facilities where site-specific data necessary for estimating costs 
(e.g., a vent flow rate) were not available, average factors developed 
from industry survey data were used to estimate the missing data.
    The total capital costs to achieve the final NESHAP are estimated 
to be $5,272,000. These capital cost impacts arise from the purchase 
and installation of eight thermal oxidizers--five thermal oxidizers for 
the five facilities without existing controls and three thermal 
oxidizers for three facilities that must replace existing thermal 
oxidizers that cannot meet the final NESHAP. The average capital cost 
of installing a new thermal oxidizer is estimated at $716,000 per 
oxidizer. The capital cost estimate to install a new thermal oxidizer 
to achieve compliance includes the cost of auxiliary burners, 
combustion chambers, primary heat exchangers, weather-tight housing and 
insulation, a fan, flow and temperature controls, a stack, and 
structural supports.
    The monitoring requirements for the thermal oxidizer operating 
temperature are not current industry practice and are expected to 
impose additional costs on facilities with existing thermal oxidizers. 
To estimate the impact of the additional monitoring equipment (i.e., a 
data logging system), a cost of $7,000 ($1,000 for each of the seven 
facilities with an existing thermal oxidizer that is achieving the 
NESHAP) was included in the capital cost estimate. No additional 
capital costs were estimated for monitoring equipment for the new 
thermal oxidizers since temperature monitors and recording devices are 
standard equipment and are included in the cost estimates for new 
thermal oxidizers.
    The total annualized cost of the final NESHAP for eight new thermal 
oxidizers is about $2,414,000. The average annual cost for a typical 
facility that installs a new thermal oxidizer is $302,000. The 
annualized cost estimate includes the cost of operation,

[[Page 17830]]

maintenance, supervisory labor, maintenance materials, utilities, 
administrative charges, taxes, insurance, and capital recovery.

F. What Are the Economic Impacts?

    Fourteen facilities owned by nine different companies produce wet-
formed fiberglass mat domestically. All of these facilities may 
potentially be affected by the NESHAP because they are major sources or 
are collocated with other sources (e.g., asphalt roofing plants) that 
together may be major sources.
    The estimated nationwide annualized cost of the NESHAP is $1.595 
million. This cost estimate represents approximately 0.069 percent of 
the 1995 sales revenues for domestically produced wet-formed fiberglass 
mat. Based upon this estimate, it is reasonable to assume that market 
price increases and production decreases resulting from the final 
NESHAP are likely to be very small. Thus, we conclude that the final 
NESHAP are not likely to have a significant economic impact on the wet-
formed fiberglass mat industry as a whole or on secondary markets such 
as the labor market and foreign trade.
    We performed a streamlined economic analysis to determine facility-
specific impacts. The facility-specific impacts are examined by 
calculating the ratio of the estimated annualized costs of emission 
controls for each facility to the estimated revenues per facility 
(i.e., a cost-to-sales ratio) to assess the likelihood of facility 
closures and employment impacts. Cost-to-sales ratios refer to the 
change in the cost of emission controls divided by the sales revenue of 
wet-formed fiberglass mat, the goods produced in the process for which 
additional pollution control is required. This ratio can be estimated 
for either individual firms or as an average for some set of firms such 
as affected small business firms. While it has different significance 
for different market situations, it is a good rough gauge of potential 
impact. If costs for the individual (or group of) firms are completely 
passed onto the purchasers of the good(s) being produced, the ratio is 
an estimate of the price change (in percentage form after multiplying 
the ratio by 100). If costs are completely absorbed by the producer, 
this ratio is an estimate of changes in pretax profits (in percentage 
form after multiplying the ratio by 100). The distribution of cost-to-
sales ratios across the whole market, the competitiveness of the 
market, and profit-to-sales ratios are among the obvious factors that 
may influence the significance of any particular cost-to-sales ratio 
for an individual facility.
    For these NESHAP, a cost-to-sales ratio exceeding 1 percent was 
determined to be an initial indicator of the potential for a 
significant facility impact. Each of the 14 facilities affected by the 
final NESHAP has cost-to-sales ratios of less than 1 percent of sales. 
Therefore, the facility-specific impacts are not considered to be 
significant for any facility affected by the NESHAP. No facility is 
likely to close as a result of the final NESHAP. Facilities in the wet-
formed fiberglass mat production industry are likely to increase the 
price charged for the product in response to market price changes, to 
absorb the costs with no price increase, or to respond with a 
combination of these alternatives. The economic impacts to consumers 
and producers of wet-formed fiberglass mat are anticipated to be 
minimal. The generally small scale of the impacts suggests that there 
will also be no significant impacts on markets for the products made 
using wet-formed fiberglass mat. For more information, consult the 
economic impact report entitled ``Economic Impact Analysis for the 
Proposed National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants from 
the Production of Wet-Formed Fiberglass Mat,'' January 1999 (Docket A-
97-54).

IV. Summary of Changes Since Proposal

    We have made changes in the final NESHAP for wet-formed fiberglass 
mat production facilities in response to comments on the proposed rule. 
The principal changes made since proposal are summarized below. 
Additional discussion of changes and the rationale for these changes is 
presented in section V of this preamble.

A. Operating Limits

    In Sec. 63.2984, we have removed the operating limits for binder 
urea-formaldehyde (UF) content, UF resin solids content, UF resin 
solids per ton of product, product loss-on-ignition, and production 
rate. They have been replaced with an operating limit for maximum 
hourly urea-formaldehyde resin solids application rate, measured as the 
urea-formaldehyde resin solids left in the product after curing.

B. Performance Test and Initial Compliance Provisions

    We revised Sec. 63.2993 of the final rule to allow the use of 
either EPA Method 318, ``Extractive FTIR Method for the Measurement of 
Emissions from the Mineral Wool and Wool Fiberglass Industries'' for 
measuring formaldehyde concentrations, or EPA Method 316,''Sampling and 
Analysis for Formaldehyde Emissions from Stationary Sources in the 
Mineral Wool and Wool Fiberglass Industries.''

C. Monitoring Requirements

    In Sec. 63.2984(a), we revised the rule to clarify that a deviation 
of a process or control device parameter from a level established 
during a performance test is a deviation from an operating limit and is 
separately enforceable from the emission limit in Sec. 63.2983. We also 
added a definition of Deviation in Sec. 63.3004 of the final rule.
    In response to comments, we revised Sec. 63.2984(d) of the final 
rule to delete the requirement to reference the operating limits in the 
40 CFR part 70 operating permit application. Instead, you will include 
the operating limits in the OMM plan and reference the OMM plan in the 
40 CFR part 70 operating permit application. You must also include the 
operating limits or ranges in the notification of compliance status and 
the performance test report required under Sec. 63.3000(b) and (d), 
respectively.
    In the final rule, we have deleted Sec. 63.2988 and the requirement 
that you have your OMM plan approved by the Administrator. You must 
include in your 40 CFR part 70 operating permit a requirement that you 
develop an OMM plan and operate according to it at all times. To revise 
the operating limits specified in your OMM plan, you must conduct a new 
performance test and include the revised operating limits in the 
notification of compliance status and performance test results 
submitted to the Administrator after the test. You must also include 
the revised operating limits in the revised OMM plan. You may begin 
operating according to the revised operating limits as soon as you have 
completed the performance test demonstrating compliance.
    We revised Sec. 63.2994(b)(1) of the final rule to allow the gas 
temperature monitoring device to be installed either at the exit of the 
combustion zone or at the location specified by the manufacturer. 
However, the temperature monitoring device must be installed in a 
location before any heat recovery or heat exchange equipment, and it 
must remain in the same location for both the performance test and the 
continuous monitoring of the temperature.
    In response to comments, we have revised the monitoring 
requirements in Sec. 63.2996 so that you must monitor and record the 
data needed to calculate the hourly urea-formaldehyde resin solids 
application rate.

[[Page 17831]]

D. Definitions

    In response to comments, we replaced the definition of Binder 
formulation urea formaldehyde content with a definition of Urea 
formaldehyde content in binder formulation for clarification purposes.

V. Summary of Responses to Major Comments

    We received five comment letters on the proposed NESHAP for wet-
formed fiberglass mat production. A copy of each comment letter is 
available for public inspection in the docket for the rulemaking.
    We reviewed and carefully considered all of the comments received 
and made changes to the rule where appropriate. A summary of responses 
to major comments received on the proposed rule is presented below. 
Additional discussion of our responses to public comments is presented 
in the document ``National Emission Standards for Wet-Formed Fiberglass 
Mat Production--Background for Promulgated Standards, Comment and 
Response Document'' which is in the docket.
    Comment: One commenter stated that basing the operating limits and 
monitoring requirements on resin free-formaldehyde content, binder UF 
content, resin UF solids content, resin UF solids content per ton of 
product, and product loss-on-ignition (LOI) is not practical because 
most manufacturers do not have a single product that has the maximum 
value for all these parameters. Therefore, the facility operators would 
need to perform several performance tests using different products with 
the maximum for each of these variables.
    The commenter recommended that EPA specify an operating standard 
and monitoring requirement only for urea-formaldehyde (dry) weight per 
roofing square (100 square feet) of product. According to the 
commenter, formaldehyde is emitted as the UF binder cures and bonds the 
glass fibers together into a mat. The greater the amount of UF binder 
solids per square of mat, the greater the formaldehyde emissions per 
square of mat, according to the commenter.
    The commenter suggested using the following equation for 
calculating the pounds of UF solids per square of mat:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR11AP02.020

Where:

LOI = loss on ignition (percent);
UFL = UF-to-latex ratio in the binder (percent of UF solids in total 
combined solids for UF and latex);
MW = weight of the mat per square (pounds per roofing square).

    Response: We agree with the commenter that the suggested monitoring 
parameters better predict potential emissions than those in the 
proposed standards and offer greater operating flexibility. We have 
revised the testing, monitoring, and operating limit requirements in 
the final rule to reflect the approach recommended by the commenter.
    The final rule establishes an operating limit for UF solids hourly 
application rate. This operating limit is based on the equation 
suggested by the commenter, with the addition of a term for the glass 
mat production rate (squares per hour) so the hourly UF solids 
application rate is calculated.
    You must conduct the performance test while producing a product 
with the greatest hourly UF solids application rate. The hourly UF 
solids application rate is the product of UF solids per square of mat 
times the hourly production rate in squares. The hourly UF solids 
application rate achieved during the initial performance test will 
become an operating limit that you cannot exceed after the test. After 
the compliance test, you must monitor the parameters used to calculate 
the hourly UF solids application rate and use Equation 3 of 
Sec. 63.2995 of the final rule to ensure compliance with the operating 
limit for hourly UF solids application rate.
    We continue to believe that the resin free-formaldehyde content is 
an important variable affecting emissions. Therefore, the final rule 
still requires an operating limit for the resin free-formaldehyde 
content. The operating limit established for the resin free-
formaldehyde content during the initial performance test must not be 
exceeded after the initial performance test. Continuous compliance with 
the operating limit will be determined through resin purchase 
specifications and records. These records are the minimum data 
requirements necessary to verify continuous compliance with the 
operating limit.
    Comment: One commenter asked EPA to revise the provisions of 
Sec. 63.2989(a)(4) and (b) for changing an approved OMM plan. As 
currently written, a facility that has proposed changes to its approved 
plan must continue to operate according to the approved plan pending 
the Administrator's approval of the proposed changes. The commenter 
advocates that a facility be allowed to operate according to the 
proposed changes, pending the Administrator's approval of the revised 
plan, after they have demonstrated compliance with the formaldehyde 
emission limits. The commenter stated that the suggested change is 
consistent with the title V permit application shield.
    Response: The EPA believes the commenter is incorrect that there is 
a corresponding provision for permit revisions in title V of the CAA or 
the permit regulations in 40 CFR part 70. The permit application shield 
applies only to the original permit application and renewals. The 
shield protects the facility from enforcement actions for operating 
without a permit in cases where the facility submits an application on 
time, but there are delays in issuing the permit. However, the permit 
application shield does not apply to permit revisions. A facility owner 
or operator submitting an application to revise their operating permit 
must operate under the approved permit until the revised permit is 
approved.
    However, we have revised the provisions of Sec. 63.2988 to delete 
the provisions requiring the Administrator's approval of a facility's 
OMM plan. We have also modified the provisions of Sec. 63.2989(a)(1) 
through (4) to allow a facility to make changes to the OMM plan without 
the requirement for obtaining the Administrator's approval. Changes in 
operating limits still require another performance test to verify 
compliance. In addition, we have revised Sec. 63.2984(d) of the final 
rule to delete the requirement to reference the operating standards and 
their allowable ranges or limits in the 40 CFR part 70 permit. Instead, 
your OMM plan must be incorporated by reference in your title V permit. 
These changes allow you to revise the allowable ranges or limits of the 
operating standards without reopening your permit or going through an 
approval process. We have also added paragraph (c) to Sec. 63.2989 
which provides that if you can anticipate potential changes to 
operating conditions or multiple operating conditions while 
demonstrating compliance during an initial or most recent performance 
test, then those anticipated operating conditions could be accounted 
for in the OMM plan, and the plan would not need to be revised later. 
The purpose of the OMM plan is to ensure compliance while at the same 
time allowing the owner or operator of the affected source flexibility 
to operate under representative conditions for the affected source.
    Comment: One commenter asked EPA to revise Sec. 63.2993 to allow 
the use of EPA Method 318, ``Extractive Fourier Transfer Infrared 
Spectrometry (FTIR)

[[Page 17832]]

for Measurement of Emissions from the Mineral Wool and Wool Fiberglass 
Industries,'' for measuring formaldehyde concentrations.
    Response: We agree with the commenter that facilities should be 
able to use FTIR, as specified in EPA Method 318, to measure 
formaldehyde concentrations. Therefore, Sec. 63.2993 of the final rule 
has been revised to allow the use of either EPA Method 316, ``Sampling 
and Analysis for Formaldehyde Emissions from Stationary Sources in the 
Mineral Wool and Wool Fiberglass Industries,'' or EPA Method 318 (FTIR) 
to measure formaldehyde concentrations.
    Comment: The proposal preamble stated that EPA estimates that only 
one of the two small business companies in the glass mat industry will 
have to install an add-on control device at its plant (65 FR 34289). As 
stated in the preamble, EPA estimates that the annual control cost for 
this one small business would not exceed 1 percent of total sales of 
the company. A representative of the facility in question disagreed 
with EPA's estimate and stated that if this facility is required to 
install a thermal oxidizer, the cost-to-sales ratio would be greater 
than 1 percent of sales. The comment letter and included test report 
for this glass mat facility indicated that total HAP emissions from the 
wet-formed fiberglass mat production line at the plant are less than 10 
tons per year.
    Response: We estimated the annualized cost of a thermal oxidizer 
for the facility in question based on the volumetric flow rate from the 
drying and curing oven submitted by the facility in response to the EPA 
survey. We had no other site-specific information that would have 
resulted in a more accurate cost estimate. The survey response from the 
facility reported a volumetric flow rate from the glass mat line stack 
of 747 standard cubic feet per minute (scfm). Based on this flow rate, 
we estimated that the total annual cost would be 0.344 percent of 
annual sales for the company. However, the flow rate reported in the 
test report submitted with the comment letter was 2,520 scfm. We 
revised the estimated annual add-on control costs using this higher 
flow rate, but the revised annual cost is still less than the threshold 
(1.0 percent of sales) used as an indicator in considering whether the 
rule has a significant economic impact on small businesses.
    Since the estimated cost as a percentage of sales is relatively 
minimal, it is anticipated that the final rule will not have a 
significant impact on this company's profitability. Nonetheless, EPA 
has tried to reduce the impact of this rule on small entities by 
providing flexibility by offering a choice of compliance and monitoring 
options. Compliance options include mass emission limits or percent 
reduction standards. Compliance with the standards can be achieved 
through the use of a thermal oxidizer, other control devices, or 
process modifications that meet the standards. Finally, if the facility 
in question, after considering all operations present at the source, is 
not a major source of HAP emissions, it would not be subject to the 
NESHAP and would have no compliance costs as a result of the standards.

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 obligations of 
recipients thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been 
determined that this rule is not a significant regulatory action under 
the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is therefore not subject to OMB 
review.

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 rule. 
The EPA also may not issue a regulation that has federalism 
implications and that preempts State law unless the EPA consults with 
State and local officials early in the process of developing the rule.
    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 the 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 
final rule with federalism implications to OMB for review pursuant to 
Executive Order 12866, EPA must include a certification from its 
federalism official stating that EPA has met the requirements of 
Executive Order 13132 in a meaningful and timely manner.
    Today's 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. 
This is because today's rule applies to affected sources in the wet-
formed fiberglass mat industry, not to State or local governments. Nor 
will State law be preempted, or any mandates be imposed on State or 
local government. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive 
Order do not apply to today's final rule. The EPA notes, however, that 
although not required to do so by this Executive Order (or otherwise), 
EPA did consult with State and local officials during development of 
today's final rule.

[[Page 17833]]

C. Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination with Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal 
implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, 
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the 
Federal government and Indian tribes.''
    This final rule does not have tribal implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship 
between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. No 
known wet-formed fiberglass mat production facility is located within 
the jurisdiction of any tribal government. Thus, Executive Order 13175 
does not apply to this rule.

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 the 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 considered by EPA.
    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 establishes an environmental standard 
based on available technology rather than reduction of health risk. No 
children's risk analysis was performed because no alternative 
technologies exist that would provide greater stringency at a 
reasonable cost. Furthermore, today's final rule has been determined 
not to be a economically significant regulatory action as defined by 
Executive Order 12866.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 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 
the 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, 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 the EPA 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 final 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 EPA has also determined that this 
rule contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments since it contains no requirements 
that apply to such governments or that impose obligations upon them. 
The total nationwide capital cost for the standard is estimated at $5.3 
million; the annualized nationwide cost is estimated at $2.4 million. 
Thus, today's final rule is not subject to the requirements of the 
UMRA.

F. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as Amended by the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), 5 U.S.C. 601, et 
seq.

    The RFA generally requires an agency to conduct 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 rule on small 
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business that has 
less than 750 employees; (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 impacts of the final rule on small 
entities, we have determined that only two of the nine companies 
producing wet-formed fiberglass mat are small businesses. One of these 
small businesses is not anticipated to incur emission control costs 
because it already has controls in place which should achieve the MACT 
emission levels. Therefore, only one small firm in the wet-formed 
fiberglass mat production industry is likely to incur emission control 
costs as a result of the rule. After the proposed rule was published, 
the company submitted information indicating that HAP emissions from 
the facility's glass mat line are less than 10 tons per year and, thus, 
it is not a major source. However, this particular glass mat line is 
collocated with an asphalt roofing manufacturing facility and emissions 
from all collocated sources, in aggregate, must be considered in 
determining whether a source is a major source. The company also stated 
in their letter that if this facility is required to install a thermal 
oxidizer as a result of the rule, their cost-to-sales ratio would be 
greater than 1 percent. As a result, EPA revised the estimated annual 
add-on control costs for this facility using the higher flow rate of 
2,520 scfm as reported in the comment from this facility. However, the 
revised annual cost-to-

[[Page 17834]]

sales ratio is still less than the threshold (1.0 percent of sales) 
used as an indicator in considering whether the rule has a significant 
economic impact on small businesses. As a result of the increased costs 
of emission controls, this small entity in the affected industry will 
likely either increase the price of its product in response to a market 
change in price, will absorb the cost increase with no price increase, 
or will respond with a combination of these responses. Since the 
estimated costs as a percentage of sales are relatively minimal, it is 
anticipated that the rule will not have a significant impact on this 
company's profitability if, indeed, it is a major source and subject to 
the NESHAP.
    Although this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities, EPA nonetheless has tried to 
reduce the impact of the rule on small entities by providing 
flexibility by offering a choice of compliance and monitoring options. 
Compliance options include mass emission limits or percent reduction 
standards. Compliance with the final standards can be achieved through 
the use of a thermal oxidizer or other control device. Pollution 
prevention practices, such as process modifications, are also included 
in the rule.

G. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The information collection requirements in this final rule have 
been submitted for approval to OMB under the requirements of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An Information 
Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared by EPA (ICR No. 
1964.01), and a copy may be obtained from Sandy Farmer, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Information, 
Collection Strategies Division (2822), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC 20460, or by calling (202) 260-2740. A copy may also be 
downloaded off the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/icr. The information 
requirements are not effective until OMB approves them.
    The information requirements contained in the NESHAP are necessary 
to determine initial and continuous compliance with the emission 
standards. The information requirements include the notification, 
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements of the NESHAP general 
provisions, authorized under section 114 of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7414), 
which are mandatory for all owners or operators subject to national 
emission standards. All information submitted to EPA for which a claim 
of confidentiality is made is safeguarded according to Agency policies 
in 40 CFR part 2, subpart B. The rule does not require any 
notifications or reports beyond the minimum required by the general 
provisions. Subpart HHHH requires additional records of information 
specific to the wet-formed fiberglass mat production industry which are 
needed to determine compliance with the rule.
    The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this 
collection is estimated at 2,983 labor hours per year at an annual cost 
of $98,183. This estimate includes an initial performance test and 
report (with repeat tests where needed); one-time preparation of a 
startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan with semiannual reports of any 
event in which the procedures in the plan were not followed; semiannual 
deviation reports; notifications; the OMM plan; and recordkeeping. The 
annualized capital cost associated with monitoring requirements is 
estimated at $2,300.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources 
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or 
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time 
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize 
technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, 
verifying, processing, maintaining, disclosing, and providing 
information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously 
applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to respond to 
a collection of information; search existing data sources; complete and 
review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise 
disclose the information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number.

H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act (NTTAA), Public Law 104-113, directs all Federal Agencies to use 
voluntary consensus standards in regulatory and procurement activities 
unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise 
impractical. Voluntary consensus standards (VCS) are technical 
standards (such as materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, and business practices) developed or adopted by voluntary 
consensus standard bodies. 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, the EPA conducted searches to identify 
voluntary consensus standards for the EPA's emissions sampling and 
analysis reference methods and industry recommended materials analysis 
procedures cited in this rule. Candidate voluntary consensus standards 
for materials analysis were identified for product loss-on-ignition and 
free-formaldehyde content. Consensus comments provided by industry 
experts were that the candidate standards did not meet industry 
materials analysis requirements. Therefore, EPA has determined that 
these VCS were impractical for the wet-formed fiberglass mat production 
NESHAP. The EPA, in consultation with TAPPI, has formulated industry-
specific materials analysis consensus standards which were proposed 
along with the proposed rule and are published with the final rule as 
appendix A and appendix B.
    The EPA search to identify VCS for the EPA's emissions sampling and 
analysis reference methods cited in this rule identified six candidate 
standards that appeared to have possible use in lieu of EPA standard 
reference methods. However, after reviewing available standards, EPA 
determined that four of the candidate consensus standards identified 
for measuring emissions of the HAP or surrogates subject to emission 
limits in the rule would not be practical due to lack of equivalency, 
documentation, and validation data. Two of the remaining candidate 
consensus standards are new standards under development that EPA plans 
to follow, review and consider adopting at a later date.
    Section 63.2993 of subpart HHHH lists the EPA testing methods. 
These testing methods have been used by States and industry for more 
than 10 years.

I. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, et seq., as added by 
the SBREFA, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the 
agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes 
a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the 
Comptroller General of the United States. Therefore, we will submit a 
report containing this final rule and other required information to the 
U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller 
General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the 
Federal

[[Page 17835]]

Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is 
published in the Federal Register. This final rule is not a ``major 
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2), and therefore will be effective 
April 11, 2002.

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

    This rule is not a ``significant energy action'' as defined in 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not 
likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy. The EPA has determined that this rule 
will not affect in a material way productivity, competition, or prices 
in the energy sector. The rule will not create a serious inconsistency 
or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another 
agency regarding energy. In addition, it will not raise novel legal or 
policy issues related to energy arising out of legal mandates, the 
President's priorities, or the principles set forth in Executive Orders 
12866 and 13211.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

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

    Dated: March 19, 2002.
Christine Todd Whitman,
Administrator.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 
63 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

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

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

    2. Part 63 is amended by adding subpart HHHH to read as follows:

Subpart HHHH--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants for Wet-Formed Fiberglass Mat Production

Sec.

What This Subpart Covers

63.2980   What is the purpose of this subpart?
63.2981   Does this subpart apply to me?
63.2982   What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?

Emission Limitations

63.2983   What emission limits must I meet?
63.2984   What operating limits must I meet?
63.2985   When do I have to comply with these standards?
63.2986   How do I comply with the standards?

Operation, Maintenance, and Monitoring Plan

63.2987   What must my operation, maintenance, and monitoring (OMM) 
plan include?
63.2988   [Reserved]
63.2989   How do I change my (OMM) plan?
63.2990   Can I conduct short-term experimental production runs that 
cause parameters to deviate from operating limits?

Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements

63.2991   When must I conduct performance tests?
63.2992   How do I conduct a performance test?
63.2993   What test methods must I use in conducting performance 
tests?
63.2994   How do I verify the performance of monitoring equipment?
63.2995   What equations must I use to determine compliance?

Monitoring Requirements

63.2996   What must I monitor?
63.2997   What are the requirements for monitoring devices?

Notifications, Reports, and Records

63.2998   What records must I maintain?
63.2999   In what form and for how long must I maintain records?
63.3000   What notifications and reports must I submit?

Other Requirements and Information

63.3001   What sections of the general provisions apply to me?
63.3002   Who implements and enforces this subpart?
63.3003   Incorporation by reference.
63.3004   What definitions apply to this subpart?
63.3005--63.3079   [Reserved].

Tables to Subpart HHHH of Part 63

Table 1 to Subpart HHHH--Minimum Requirements for Monitoring and 
Recordkeeping
Table 2 to Subpart HHHH--Applicability of General Provisions (40 CFR 
part 63, subpart A) to Subpart HHHH

Appendices to Subpart HHHH of Part 63

Appendix A to Subpart HHHH--Method for Determining Free-Formaldehyde 
in Urea-Formaldehyde Resins by Sodium Sulfite (Iced & Cooled)
Appendix B to Subpart HHHH--Method for the Determination of Loss-on-
Ignition

Subpart HHHH--National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants for Wet-Formed Fiberglass Mat Production

What This Subpart Covers


Sec. 63.2980  What is the purpose of this subpart?

    This subpart establishes national emission standards for hazardous 
air pollutants (NESHAP) for emissions from facilities that produce wet-
formed fiberglass mat. This subpart also establishes requirements to 
demonstrate initial and continuous compliance with the emission 
limitations.


Sec. 63.2981  Does this subpart apply to me?

    You must comply with this subpart if you meet the criteria in 
paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section:
    (a) You own or operate a drying and curing oven at a wet-formed 
fiberglass mat production facility.
    (b) Your drying and curing oven or the facility at which your 
drying and curing oven is located is a major source of hazardous air 
pollutants (HAP). A major source is any stationary source or group of 
stationary sources located within a contiguous area and under common 
control that emits or can potentially emit, considering controls, in 
the aggregate, 9.07 megagrams (10 tons) or more per year of a single 
HAP or 22.68 megagrams (25 tons) or more per year of any combination of 
HAP.


Sec. 63.2982  What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?

    (a) This subpart applies to each new, reconstructed, or existing 
affected source. The affected source (the portion of your plant covered 
by this subpart) is each wet-formed fiberglass mat drying and curing 
oven.
    (b) An affected source is a new affected source if you commenced 
construction of the affected source after May 26, 2000, and you meet 
the applicability criteria in Sec. 63.2981 at start-up.
    (c) An affected source is reconstructed if you meet the criteria as 
defined in Sec. 63.2.
    (d) An affected source is existing if it is not new or 
reconstructed.

Emission Limitations


Sec. 63.2983  What emission limits must I meet?

    (a) You must limit the formaldehyde emissions from each drying and 
curing oven by either:
    (1) Limiting emissions of formaldehyde to 0.03 kilograms or less 
per megagram (0.05 pounds per ton) of fiberglass mat produced; or

[[Page 17836]]

    (2) Reducing uncontrolled formaldehyde emissions by 96 percent or 
more.
    (b) [Reserved]


Sec. 63.2984  What operating limits must I meet?

    (a) You must maintain operating parameters within established 
limits or ranges specified in your operation, maintenance, and 
monitoring (OMM) plan described in Sec. 63.2987. If there is a 
deviation of any of the specified parameters from the limit or range 
specified in the OMM plan, you must address the deviation according to 
paragraph (b) of this section. You must comply with the operating 
limits specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section:
    (1) You must operate the thermal oxidizer so that the average 
operating temperature in any 3-hour block period does not fall below 
the temperature established during your performance test and specified 
in your OMM plan.
    (2) You must not use a resin with a free-formaldehyde content 
greater than that of the resin used during your performance test and 
specified in your OMM plan.
    (3) You must operate the wet-formed fiberglass mat production 
process so that the average urea formaldehyde resin solids application 
rate in any 3-hour block period does not exceed the average application 
rate achieved during your performance test and specified in your OMM 
plan.
    (4) If you use an add-on control device other than a thermal 
oxidizer or wish to monitor an alternative parameter and comply with a 
different operating limit, you must obtain approval for the alternative 
monitoring under Sec. 63.8(f). You must include the approved 
alternative monitoring and operating limits in the OMM plan specified 
in Sec. 63.2987.
    (b) When during a period of normal operations you detect that an 
operating parameter deviates from the limit or range established in 
paragraph (a) of this section, you must initiate corrective actions 
within 1 hour according to the provisions of your OMM plan. During 
periods of start up, shut down, or malfunction you must follow your 
start up, shut down and malfunction plan (SSMP). The corrective action 
actions must be completed in an expeditious manner as specified in the 
OMM plan or SSMP.
    (c) You must maintain and inspect control devices according to the 
procedures specified in the OMM plan.
    (d) You must include the operating limits specified in paragraphs 
(a)(1) through (4) of this section and their allowable ranges or levels 
in your OMM plan. Your 40 CFR part 70 operating permit for the drying 
and curing oven must contain a requirement that you develop and operate 
according to an OMM plan at all times.
    (e) If you use a thermal oxidizer or other control device to 
achieve the emission limits in Sec. 63.2983, you must capture and 
convey the formaldehyde emissions from each drying and curing oven 
according to the procedures in chapters 3 and 5 of ``Industrial 
Ventilation: A Manual of Recommended Practice'' (23rd Edition). This 
publication is incorporated by reference in Sec. 63.3003.


Sec. 63.2985  When do I have to comply with these standards?

    (a) Existing drying and curing ovens must be in compliance with 
this subpart no later than April 11, 2005.
    (b) New or reconstructed drying and curing ovens must be in 
compliance with this subpart at startup or by April 11, 2002, whichever 
is later.
    (c) If your facility is an area source that increases its emissions 
or its potential to emit such that it becomes a major source of 
hazardous air pollutants, the following apply:
    (1) Any portion of the existing facility that is a new affected 
source or a new reconstructed affected source must be in compliance 
upon startup.
    (2) All other parts of the source must be in compliance with this 
subpart 1 year after becoming a major source or by April 11, 2005, 
whichever is later.


Sec. 63.2986  How do I comply with the standards?

    (a) You must install, maintain, and operate a thermal oxidizer or 
other control device or implement a process modification that reduces 
formaldehyde emissions from each drying and curing oven to the emission 
limits specified in Sec. 63.2983.
    (b) You must comply with the operating limits specified in 
Sec. 63.2984. The operating limits prescribe the requirements for 
demonstrating continuous compliance based on the OMM plan. You must 
begin complying with the operating limits on the date by which you must 
complete the initial performance test.
    (c) You must conduct a performance test according to Secs. 63.2991, 
63.2992, and 63.2993 to demonstrate compliance for each drying and 
curing oven subject to the emission limits in Sec. 63.2983, and to 
establish or modify the operating limits or ranges for process or 
control device parameters that will be monitored to demonstrate 
continuous compliance.
    (d) You must install, calibrate, maintain, and operate devices that 
monitor the parameters specified in your OMM plan at the frequency 
specified in the plan. All continuous parameter monitoring systems must 
be installed and operating no later than the applicable compliance date 
specified in Sec. 63.2985.
    (e) You must prepare and follow a written OMM plan as specified in 
Sec. 63.2987.
    (f) You must comply with the monitoring, recordkeeping, 
notification, and reporting requirements of this subpart as required by 
Secs. 63.2996 through 63.3000.
    (g) You must comply with the requirements in paragraphs (g)(1) 
through (3) of this section.
    (1) You must be in compliance with the emission limits in 
Sec. 63.2983 and the operating limits in Sec. 63.2984 at all times, 
except during periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction.
    (2) 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).
    (3) You must develop and implement a written SSMP according to the 
provisions in Sec. 63.6(e)(3). The SSMP must address the startup, 
shutdown, and corrective actions taken for malfunctioning process and 
air pollution control equipment.

Operation, Maintenance, and Monitoring Plan


Sec. 63.2987  What must my operation, maintenance, and monitoring (OMM) 
plan include?

    (a) You must prescribe the monitoring that will be performed to 
ensure compliance with these emission limitations. Minimum monitoring 
requirements are listed in table 1 of this subpart. Your plan must 
specify the items listed in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) of this 
section:
    (1) Each process and control device to be monitored, the type of 
monitoring device that will be used, and the operating parameters that 
will be monitored.
    (2) A monitoring schedule that specifies the frequency that the 
parameter values will be determined and recorded.
    (3) The operating limits or ranges for each parameter that 
represent continuous compliance with the emission limits in 
Sec. 63.2983. Operating limits and ranges must be based on values of 
the monitored parameters recorded during performance tests.
    (b) You must establish routine and long-term maintenance and 
inspection

[[Page 17837]]

schedules for each control device. You must incorporate in the 
schedules the control device manufacturer's recommendations for 
maintenance and inspections or equivalent procedures. If you use a 
thermal oxidizer, the maintenance schedule must include procedures for 
annual or more frequent inspection of the thermal oxidizer to ensure 
that the structural and design integrity of the combustion chamber is 
maintained. At a minimum, you must meet the requirements of paragraphs 
(b)(1) through (10) of this section:
    (1) Inspect all burners, pilot assemblies, and pilot sensing 
devices for proper operation. Clean pilot sensor if necessary.
    (2) Ensure proper adjustment of combustion air and adjust if 
necessary.
    (3) Inspect, when possible, all internal structures (such as 
baffles) to ensure structural integrity per the design specifications.
    (4) Inspect dampers, fans, and blowers for proper operation.
    (5) Inspect motors for proper operation.
    (6) Inspect, when possible, combustion chamber refractory lining. 
Clean and repair or replace lining if necessary.
    (7) Inspect the thermal oxidizer shell for proper sealing, 
corrosion, and hot spots.
    (8) For the burn cycle that follows the inspection, document that 
the thermal oxidizer is operating properly and make any necessary 
adjustments.
    (9) Generally observe whether the equipment is maintained in good 
operating condition.
    (10) Complete all necessary repairs as soon as practicable.
    (c) You must establish procedures for responding to operating 
parameter deviations. At a minimum, the procedures must include the 
information in paragraphs (c)(1) through (3) of this section.
    (1) Procedures for determining the cause of the operating parameter 
deviation.
    (2) Actions for correcting the deviation and returning the 
operating parameters to the allowable ranges or limits.
    (3) Procedures for recording the date and time that the deviation 
began and ended, and the times corrective actions were initiated and 
completed.
    (d) Your plan must specify the recordkeeping procedures to document 
compliance with the emissions and operating limits. Table 1 of this 
subpart establishes the minimum recordkeeping requirements.


Sec. 63.2988  [Reserved]


Sec. 63.2989  How do I change my OMM plan?

    Changes to the operating limits or ranges in your OMM plan require 
a new performance test.
    (a) In order to revise the ranges or levels established for your 
operating limits in Sec. 63.2984, you must meet the requirements in 
paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section:
    (1) Submit a notification of performance test to the Administrator 
as specified in Sec. 63.7(b) to revise your operating ranges or limits.
    (2) After completing the performance test to demonstrate that 
compliance with the emissions limits can be achieved at the revised 
levels of the operating limits, you must submit the performance test 
results and the revised operating limits as part of the notification of 
compliance status required under Sec. 63.9(h).
    (b) If you are revising the inspection and maintenance procedures 
in your plan that are specified in Sec. 63.2987(b), you do not need to 
conduct a new performance test.
    (c) If you plan to operate your process or control device under 
alternative operating conditions and do not wish to revise your OMM 
plan when you change operating conditions, you can perform a separate 
compliance test to establish operating limits for each condition. You 
can then include the operating limits for each condition in your OMM 
plan. After completing the performance tests, you must record the date 
and time when you change operations from one condition to another, the 
condition under which you are operating, and the operating limits that 
apply under that condition. If you can perform a single performance 
test that establishes the most stringent operating limits that cover 
all alternative operating conditions, then you do not need to comply 
with the provisions of this paragraph.


Sec. 63.2990  Can I conduct short-term experimental production runs 
that cause parameters to deviate from operating limits?

    With the approval of the Administrator, you may conduct short-term 
experimental production runs during which your operating parameters 
deviate from the operating limits. Experimental runs may include, but 
are not limited to, runs using resin with a higher free-formaldehyde 
content than specified in the OMM plan, or using experimental pollution 
prevention techniques. To conduct a short-term experimental production 
run, you must complete the requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b) of 
this section.
    (a) Prepare an application to the Administrator for approval to 
conduct the experimental production runs. Your application must include 
the items listed in paragraphs (a)(1) through (6) of this section.
    (1) The purpose of the experimental production run.
    (2) Identification of the affected line.
    (3) An explanation of how the operating parameters will deviate 
from the previously approved ranges and limits.
    (4) The duration of the experimental production run.
    (5) The date and time of the experimental production run.
    (6) A description of any emission testing to be performed during 
the experimental production run.
    (b) Submit the application to the Administrator for approval at 
least 30 days before you conduct the experimental production run.
    (c) If you conduct such experimental production runs without first 
receiving approval from the Administrator, then you must conduct a 
performance test under those same experimental production run 
conditions to show that you were in compliance with the formaldehyde 
emission limits in Sec. 63.2983.

Testing and Initial Compliance Requirements


Sec. 63.2991  When must I conduct performance tests?

    You must conduct a performance test for each drying and curing oven 
subject to this subpart according to the provisions in paragraphs (a) 
through (c) of this section:
    (a) Initially. You must conduct an initial performance test no 
later than 180 days after the applicable compliance date specified in 
Sec. 63.2985. The initial performance test is used to demonstrate 
initial compliance and establish operating parameter limits and ranges 
to be used to demonstrate continuous compliance with the emission 
standards.
    (b) Every 5 years. You must conduct a performance test every 5 
years as part of renewing your 40 CFR part 70 operating permit.
    (c) To change your OMM plan. You must conduct a performance test 
according to the requirements specified in Sec. 63.2992 to change the 
limit or range for any operating limit specified in your OMM plan 
established during a previous compliance test.

[[Page 17838]]

Sec. 63.2992  How do I conduct a performance test?

    (a) You must verify the performance of monitoring equipment as 
specified in Sec. 63.2994 before performing the test.
    (b) You must conduct the performance test according to the 
procedures in Sec. 63.7.
    (c) You must conduct the performance test under the conditions 
specified in paragraphs (c)(1) and (2) of this section.
    (1) The resin must have the highest specified free-formaldehyde 
content that will be used.
    (2) You must operate at the maximum feasible urea-formaldehyde 
resin solids application rate (pounds urea-formaldehyde resin solids 
applied per hour) that will be used.
    (d) During the performance test, you must monitor and record the 
operating parameters that you will use to demonstrate continuous 
compliance after the test. These parameters are listed in table 1 of 
this subpart.
    (e) You may not conduct performance tests during periods of 
startup, shutdown, or malfunction as specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(1).
    (f) You must conduct three separate test runs for each performance 
test as specified in Sec. 63.7(e)(3), and each test run must last at 
least 1 hour.


Sec. 63.2993  What test methods must I use in conducting performance 
tests?

    (a) Use EPA Method 1 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) for selecting the 
sampling port location and the number of sampling ports.
    (b) Use EPA Method 2 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) for measuring the 
volumetric flow rate.
    (c) Use EPA Method 316 or 318 (40 CFR part 63, appendix A) for 
measuring the concentration of formaldehyde.
    (d) Use the method contained in appendix A of this subpart or the 
resin purchase specification and the vendor specification sheet for 
each resin lot for determining the free-formaldehyde content in the 
urea-formaldehyde resin.
    (e) Use the method in appendix B of this subpart for determining 
product loss-on-ignition.


Sec. 63.2994  How do I verify the performance of monitoring equipment?

    (a) Before conducting the performance test, you must take the steps 
listed in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) of this section:
    (1) Install and calibrate all process equipment, control devices, 
and monitoring equipment.
    (2) Conduct a performance evaluation of the continuous monitoring 
system (CMS) according to Sec. 63.8(e) which specifies the general 
requirements and requirements for notifications, the site-specific 
performance evaluation plan, conduct of the performance evaluation, and 
reporting of performance evaluation results.
    (b) If you use a thermal oxidizer, the temperature monitoring 
device must meet the performance and equipment specifications listed in 
paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) of this section:
    (1) The temperature monitoring device must be installed either at 
the exit of the combustion zone of each thermal oxidizer, or at the 
location specified by the manufacturer. The temperature monitoring 
device must also be installed in a location before any heat recovery or 
heat exchange equipment, and it must remain in the same location for 
both the performance test and the continuous monitoring of temperature.
    (2) The recorder response range must include zero and 1.5 times the 
average temperature required in Sec. 63.2984(a)(1).
    (3) The measurement method or reference method for calibration must 
be a National Institute of Standards and Technology calibrated 
reference thermocouple-potentiometer system or an alternate reference 
subject to the approval of the Administrator.


Sec. 63.2995  What equations must I use to determine compliance?

    (a) Percent reduction for formaldehyde. To determine compliance 
with the percent reduction formaldehyde emission standard, use equation 
1 of this section as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR11AP02.021

    Where:

Ef = Formaldehyde control efficiency, percent.
Mi = Mass flow rate of formaldehyde entering the control 
device, kilograms (pounds) per hour.
Mo = Mass flow rate of formaldehyde exiting the control 
device, kilograms (pounds) per hour.

    (b) Formaldehyde mass emissions rate. To determine compliance with 
the kilogram per megagram (pound per ton) formaldehyde emission 
standard, use equation 2 of this section as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR11AP02.022

    Where:

E = Formaldehyde mass emissions rate, kilograms (pounds) of 
formaldehyde per megagram (ton) of fiberglass mat produced.
M = Formaldehyde mass emissions rate, kilograms (pounds) per hour.
P = The wet-formed fiberglass mat production rate during the emissions 
sampling period, including any material trimmed from the final product, 
megagrams (tons) per hour.

    (c) Urea-formaldehyde (UF) resin solids application rate. To 
determine the UF resin solids application rate, use equation 3 of this 
section as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR11AP02.023

    Where:

UF solids/hour = UF resin solids application rate (pounds per hour).
LOI = loss on ignition (weight faction), or pound of organic binder per 
pound of mat.
UFL = UF-to-latex ratio in the binder (mass fraction of UF resin solids 
in total combined resin solids for UF and latex), or pound of UF solids 
per pound of total resin solids (UF and latex).
MW = weight of the final mat per square (pounds per roofing square).
SQ = roofing squares produced per hour.

Monitoring Requirements


Sec. 63.2996  What must I monitor?

    You must monitor the parameters listed in table 1 of this subpart 
and any other parameters specified in your OMM plan. The parameters 
must be monitored, at a minimum, at the corresponding frequencies 
listed in table 1 of this subpart.


Sec. 63.2997  What are the requirements for monitoring devices?

    (a) If formaldehyde emissions are controlled using a thermal 
oxidizer, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) 
of this section:
    (1) Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a device to monitor 
and record continuously the thermal oxidizer temperature at the exit of 
the combustion zone before any substantial

[[Page 17839]]

heat exchange occurs or at the location consistent with the 
manufacturer's recommendations.
    (2) Continuously monitor the thermal oxidizer temperature and 
determine and record the average temperature in 15-minute and 3-hour 
block averages. You may determine the average temperature more 
frequently than every 15 minutes and every 3 hours, but not less 
frequently.
    (b) If formaldehyde emissions are controlled by process 
modifications or a control device other than a thermal oxidizer, you 
must install, calibrate, maintain, and operate devices to monitor the 
parameters established in your OMM plan at the frequency established in 
the plan.

Notifications, Reports, and Records


Sec. 63.2998  What records must I maintain?

    You must maintain records according to the procedures of 
Sec. 63.10. You must maintain the records listed in paragraphs (a) 
through (g) of this section.
    (a) All records required by Sec. 63.10. Table 2 of this subpart 
presents the applicable requirements of the general provisions.
    (b) The OMM plan.
    (c) Records of values of monitored parameters listed in table 1 of 
this subpart to show continuous compliance with each operating limit 
specified in table 1 of this subpart.
    (d) Records of maintenance and inspections performed on the control 
devices.
    (e) If an operating parameter deviation occurs, you must record:
    (1) The date, time, and duration of the operating parameter 
deviation;
    (2) A brief description of the cause of the operating parameter 
deviation;
    (3) The dates and times at which corrective actions were initiated 
and completed;
    (4) A brief description of the corrective actions taken to return 
the parameter to the limit or to within the range specified in the OMM 
plan; and
    (5) A record of whether the deviation occurred during a period of 
startup, shutdown, or malfunction.
    (f) Keep all records specified in Sec. 63.6(e)(3)(iii) through (v) 
related to startup, shutdown, and malfunction.
    (g) If you operate your process or control device under alternative 
operating condition and have established operating limits for each 
condition as specified in Sec. 63.2989(c), then you must keep records 
of the date and time you changed operations from one condition to 
another, the condition under which you are operating, and the 
applicable operating limits for that condition.


Sec. 63.2999  In what form and for how long must I maintain records?

    (a) You must maintain each record required by this subpart for 5 
years. You must maintain the most recent 2 years of records at the 
facility. The remaining 3 years of records may be retained offsite.
    (b) Your records must be readily available and in a form so they 
can be easily inspected and reviewed. You can keep the records on paper 
or an alternative media, such as microfilm, computer, computer disks, 
magnetic tape, or on microfiche.


Sec. 63.3000  What notifications and reports must I submit?

    (a) You must submit all notifications and reports required by the 
applicable general provisions and this section. Table 2 of this subpart 
presents the applicable requirements of the general provisions.
    (b) Notification of compliance status. You must submit the 
notification of compliance status, including the performance test 
results, the operating limits or ranges as determined during the 
performance test, and other information specified in Sec. 63.9(h), 
before the close of business on the 60th calendar day after you 
complete the performance test according to Sec. 63.10(d)(2).
    (c) Semiannual compliance reports. You must submit semiannual 
compliance reports according to the requirements of paragraphs (c)(1) 
through (5) of this section.
    (1) Dates for submitting reports. Unless the Administrator has 
agreed to a different schedule for submitting reports under 
Sec. 63.10(a), you must deliver or postmark each semiannual compliance 
report no later than 30 days following the end of each semiannual 
reporting period. The first semiannual reporting period begins on the 
compliance date for your affected source and ends on June 30 or 
December 31, whichever date immediately follows your compliance date. 
Each subsequent semiannual reporting period for which you must submit a 
semiannual compliance report begins on July 1 or January 1 and ends 6 
calendar months later. As required by Sec. 63.10(e)(3), you must begin 
submitting quarterly compliance reports if you deviate from the 
emission limits in Sec. 63.2983 or the operating limits in 
Sec. 63.2984.
    (2) Inclusion with title V report. For each affected source that is 
subject to permitting regulations pursuant to 40 CFR part 70 or 71, and 
for which the permitting authority has established dates for submitting 
semiannual reports pursuant to 40 CFR 70.6(a)(3)(iii)(A) or 71.6 
(a)(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 paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
    (3) Contents of reports. The semiannual compliance report must 
contain the information in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) through (vi) of this 
section:
    (i) Company name and address.
    (ii) 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.
    (iii) Date of report and beginning and ending dates of the 
reporting period.
    (iv) A summary of the total duration of continuous parameter 
monitoring system downtime during the semiannual reporting period and 
the total duration of continuous parameter monitoring system downtime 
as a percent of the total source operating time during that semiannual 
reporting period.
    (v) The date of the latest continuous parameter monitoring system 
certification or audit.
    (vi) A description of any changes in the wet-formed fiberglass mat 
manufacturing process, continuous parameter monitoring system, or add-
on control device since the last semiannual reporting period.
    (4) No deviations. If there were no deviations from the emission 
limit in Sec. 63.2983 or the operating limits in Sec. 63.2984, the 
semiannual compliance report must include a statement to that effect. 
If there were no periods during which the continuous parameter 
monitoring systems were out-of-control as specified in Sec. 63.8(c)(7), 
the semiannual compliance report must include a statement to that 
effect.
    (5) Deviations. If there was a deviation from the emission limit in 
Sec. 63.2983 or an operating limit in Sec. 63.2984, the semiannual 
compliance report must contain the information in paragraphs (c)(5)(i) 
through (ix) of this section:
    (i) The date and time that each malfunction started and stopped.
    (ii) The date and time that each continuous parameter monitoring 
system was inoperative, except for zero (low-level) and high-level 
checks.
    (iii) The date, time, and duration that each continuous parameter 
monitoring system was out-of-control, including the information in 
Sec. 63.8(c)(8).
    (iv) The date and time that each deviation started and stopped, and 
whether each deviation occurred during

[[Page 17840]]

a period of startup, shutdown, or malfunction or during another period.
    (v) The date and time that corrective actions were taken, a 
description of the cause of the deviation, and a description of the 
corrective actions taken.
    (vi) A summary of the total duration of each deviation during the 
semiannual reporting period and the total duration as a percent of the 
total source operating time during that semiannual reporting period.
    (vii) A breakdown of the total duration of the deviations during 
the semiannual reporting period into those that were due to startup, 
shutdown, control equipment problems, process problems, other known 
causes, and other unknown causes.
    (viii) A brief description of the process units.
    (ix) A brief description of the continuous parameter monitoring 
system.
    (d) Performance test reports. You must submit reports of 
performance test results for add-on control devices no later than 60 
days after completing the tests as specified in Sec. 63.10(d)(2). You 
must include in the performance test reports the values measured during 
the performance test for the parameters listed in table 1 of this 
subpart and the operating limits or ranges to be included in your OMM 
plan. For the thermal oxidizer temperature, you must include 15-minute 
averages and the average for the three 1-hour test runs.
    (e) Startup, shutdown, malfunction reports. If you have a startup, 
shutdown, or malfunction during the semiannual reporting period, you 
must submit the reports specified Sec. 63.10(d)(5).

Other Requirements and Information


Sec. 63.3001  What sections of the general provisions apply to me?

    You must comply with the requirements of the general provisions of 
40 CFR part 63, subpart A, as specified in table 2 of this subpart.


Sec. 63.3002  Who implements and enforces this subpart?

    (a) This subpart can be implemented and enforced by the U.S. EPA 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 is the primary enforcement authority. 
If the Administrator has not delegated authority to your State, only 
EPA enforces this subpart. You should contact your U.S. EPA Regional 
Office to find out if implementation and enforcement of 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 section 40 CFR part 
63, subpart E, the authorities contained in paragraphs (b)(1) through 
(4) of this section are retained by the Administrator of U.S. EPA and 
are not transferred to the State, local, or tribal agency.
    (1) The authority under Sec. 63.6(g) to approve alternatives to the 
emission limits in Sec. 63.2983 and operating limits in Sec. 63.2984 is 
not delegated.
    (2) The authority under Sec. 63.7(e)(2)(ii) and (f) to approve of 
major alternatives (as defined in Sec. 63.90) to the test methods in 
Sec. 63.2993 is not delegated.
    (3) The authority under Sec. 63.8(f) to approve major alternatives 
(as defined in Sec. 63.90) to the monitoring requirements in 
Secs. 63.2996 and 63.2997 is not delegated.
    (4) The authority under Sec. 63.10(f) to approve major alternatives 
(as defined in Sec. 63.90) to recordkeeping, notification, and 
reporting requirements in Secs. 63.2998 through 63.3000 is not 
delegated.


Sec. 63.3003  Incorporation by reference.

    (a) The following material is incorporated by reference and 
referred to at Sec. 63.2984: chapters 3 and 5 of ``Industrial 
Ventilation: A Manual of Recommended Practice,'' American Conference of 
Governmental Industrial Hygienists, (23rd edition, 1998). The 
incorporation by reference of this material is approved by the Director 
of the Office of the Federal Register as of the date of publication of 
the final rule according to 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. This 
material is incorporated as it exists on the date of approval and 
notice of any change in the material will be published in the Federal 
Register.
    (b) The materials referenced in this section are incorporated by 
reference and are available for inspection at the Office of the Federal 
Register, 800 North Capitol Street NW, Suite 700, 7th Floor, 
Washington, DC; and at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information 
Center, U.S. EPA, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC. The material is also 
available for purchase from the following address: Customer Service 
Department, American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists 
(ACGIH), 1330 Kemper Meadow Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45240, telephone 
number (513) 742-2020.


Sec. 63.3004  What definitions apply to this subpart?

    Terms used in this subpart are defined the Clean Air Act, in 
Sec. 63.2, and in this section as follows:
    Administrator means the Administrator of the United States 
Environmental Protection Agency or his or her authorized representative 
(e.g., a State that has been delegated the authority to implement the 
provisions of this part).
    Binder application vacuum exhaust means the exhaust from the vacuum 
system used to remove excess resin solution from the wet-formed 
fiberglass mat before it enters the drying and curing oven.
    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, or 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, or 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.
    Drying and curing oven means the process section that evaporates 
excess moisture from a fiberglass mat and cures the resin that binds 
the fibers.
    Emission limitation means an emission limit, operating limit, or 
work practice standard.
    Fiberglass mat production rate means the weight of finished 
fiberglass mat produced per hour of production including any trim 
removed after the binder is applied and before final packaging.
    Loss-on-ignition means the percentage decrease in weight of 
fiberglass mat measured before and after it has been ignited to burn 
off the applied binder. The loss-on-ignition is used to monitor the 
weight percent of binder in fiberglass mat.
    Nonwoven wet-formed fiberglass mat manufacturing means the 
production of a fiberglass mat by bonding glass fibers to each other 
using a resin solution. Nonwoven wet-formed fiberglass mat 
manufacturing is also referred to as wet-formed fiberglass mat 
manufacturing.
    Roofing square means the amount of finished product needed to cover 
an area 10 feet by 10 feet (100 square feet) of finished roof.
    Thermal oxidizer means an air pollution control device that uses 
controlled flame combustion inside a combustion chamber to convert

[[Page 17841]]

combustible materials to noncombustible gases.
    Urea-formaldehyde content in binder formulation means the mass-
based percent of urea-formaldehyde resin in the total binder mix as it 
is applied to the glass fibers to form the mat.


Secs. 63.3005-63.3079  [Reserved].

Tables to Subpart HHHH of Part 63

    Table 1 to Subpart HHHH.--Minimum Requirements for Monitoring and
                              Recordkeeping
    [As stated in Sec.  63.2998(c), you must comply with the minimum
  requirements for monitoring and recordkeeping in the following table]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   You must monitor these                            And record for the
         parameters:           At this frequency:   monitored perameter:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Thermal oxidizer           Continuously........  15-minute and 3-hour
 temperature \a\.                                    block averages.
2. Other process or control   As specified in your  As specified in your
 device parameters specified   OMM plan.             OMM plan.
 in your OMM \b\ plan.
3. Urea-formaldehyde resin    On each operating     The average lb/hr
 solids application rate.      day, calculate the    value for each
                               average lb/hr         product
                               application rate      manufactured during
                               for each product      the day.
                               manufactured during
                               that day.
4. Resin free-formaldehyde    For each lot of       The value for each
 content.                      resin purchased.      lot used during the
                                                     operating day.
5. Loss-on-ignition \c\.....  Measured at least     The value for each
                               once per day, for     product
                               each product          manufactured during
                               manufactured during   the operating day.
                               that day.
6. UF-to-latex ratio in the   For each batch of     The value for each
 binder \c\.                   binder prepared the   batch of binder
                               operating day.        prepared during the
                                                     operating day.
7. Weight of the final mat    Each product          The value for each
 product per square (lb/       manufactured during   product
 roofing square)\c\.           the operating day.    manufactured during
                                                     the operating day.
8. Average nonwoven wet-      For each product      The average value
 formed fiberglass mat         manufactured during   for each product
 production rate (roofing      the operating day.    manufactured during
 squares per the hour) \c\.                          operating day.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Required if a thermal oxidizer is used to control formaldehyde
  emissions.
\b\ Required if process modifications or a control device other than a
  thermal oxidizer is used to control emissions.
\c\ These parameters must be monitored and values recorded, but no
  operating limits apply.


    Table 2 to Subpart HHHH.--Applicability of General Provisions (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart A) to Subpart HHHH
  [As stated in Sec.  63.3001, you must comply with the applicable General Provisions requirements according to
                                              the following table]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Citation                     Requirement          Applies to subpart HHHH         Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.  63.1(a)(1)-(4).............  General Applicability....  Yes
Sec.  63.1(a)(5).................  .........................  No                        [Reserved].
Sec.  63.1(a)(6)-(8).............  .........................  Yes
Sec.  63.1(a)(9).................  .........................  No                        [Reserved].
Sec.  63.1(a)(10)-(14)...........  .........................  Yes
Sec.  63.1(b)....................  Initial Applicability      Yes
                                    Determination.
Sec.  63.1(c)(1).................  Applicability After        Yes
                                    Standard Established.
Sec.  63.1(c)(2).................  .........................  Yes                       Some plants may be area
                                                                                         sources.
Sec.  63.1(c)(3).................  .........................  No                        [Reserved].
Sec.  63.1(c)(4)-(5).............  .........................  Yes
Sec.  63.1(d)....................  .........................  No                        [Reserved].
Sec.  63.1(e)....................  Applicability of Permit    Yes
                                    Program.
Sec.  63.2.......................  Definitions..............  Yes                       Additional definitions
                                                                                         in Sec.  63.3004.
Sec.  63.3.......................  Units and Abbreviations..  Yes
Sec.  63.4(a)(1)-(3).............  Prohibited Activities....  Yes
Sec.  63.4(a)(4).................  .........................  No                        [Reserved].
Sec.  63.4(a)(5).................  .........................  Yes
Sec.  63.4(b)-(c)................  Circumvention/             Yes
                                    Severability.
Sec.  63.5(a)....................  Construction/              Yes
                                    Reconstruction.
Sec.  63.5(b)(1).................  Existing/Constructed/      Yes
                                    Reconstruction.
Sec.  63.5(b)(2).................  .........................  No                        [Reserved].
Sec.  63.5(b)(3)-(6).............  .........................  Yes
Sec.  63.5(c)....................  .........................  No                        [Reserved].
Sec.  63.5(d)....................  Application for Approval   Yes
                                    of Construction/
                                    Reconstruction.
Sec.  63.5(e)....................  Approval of Construction/  Yes
                                    Reconstruction.
Sec.  63.5(f)....................  Approval of Construction/  Yes
                                    Reconstruction Based on
                                    State Review.
Sec.  63.6(a)....................  Compliance with Standards  Yes
                                    and Maintenance--
                                    Applicability.
Sec.  63.6(b)(1)-(5).............  New and Reconstructed      Yes
                                    Sources-Dates.
Sec.  63.6(b)(6).................  .........................  No                        [Reserved].
Sec.  63.6(b)(7).................  .........................  Yes
Sec.  63.6(c)(1)-(2).............  Existing Sources Dates...  Yes                       Sec.  63.2985 specifies
                                                                                         dates.
Sec.  63.6(c)(3)-(4).............  .........................  No                        [Reserved].
Sec.  63.6(c)(5).................  .........................  Yes

[[Page 17842]]

 
Sec.  63.6(d)....................  .........................  No                        [Reserved].
Sec.  63.6(e)....................  Operation and Maintenance  Yes                       Secs.  63.2984 and
                                    Requirements.                                        63.2987 specify
                                                                                         additional
                                                                                         requirements.
Sec.  63.6(f)....................  Compliance with Emission   Yes
                                    Standards.
Sec.  63.6(g)....................  Alternative Standard.....  Yes                       EPA retains approval
                                                                                         authority.
Sec.  63.6(h)....................  Compliance with Opacity/   No                        Subpart HHHH does not
                                    Visible Emissions                                    specify opacity or
                                    Standards.                                           visible emission
                                                                                         standards.
Sec.  63.6(i)(1)-(14)............  Extension of Compliance..  Yes
Sec.  63.6(i)(15)................  .........................  No                        [Reserved].
Sec.  63.6(i)(16)................  .........................  Yes
Sec.  63.6(j)....................  Exemption from Compliance  Yes
Sec.  63.7(a)....................  Performance Test           Yes
                                    Requirements--Applicabil
                                    ity and Dates.
Sec.  63.7(b)....................  Notification of            Yes
                                    Performance Test.
Sec.  63.7(c)....................  Quality Assurance Program/ Yes
                                    Test Plan.
Sec.  63.7(d)....................  Testing Facilities.......  Yes
Sec.  63.7(e)....................  Conduct of Tests.........  Yes                       Sec.  63.2991-63.2994
                                                                                         specify additional
                                                                                         requirements.
Sec.  63.7(f)....................  Alternative Test Method..  Yes                       EPA retains approval
                                                                                         authority
Sec.  63.7(g)....................  Data Analysis............  Yes
Sec.  63.7(h)....................  Waiver of Tests..........  Yes
Sec.  63.8(a)(1)-(2).............  Monitoring Requirements--  Yes
                                    Applicability.
Sec.  63.8(a)(3).................  .........................  No                        [Reserved].
Sec.  63.8(a)(4).................  .........................  Yes
Sec.  63.8(b)....................  Conduct of Monitoring....  Yes
Sec.  63.8(c)(1)-(3).............  Continuous Monitoring      Yes
                                    System (CMS) Operation
                                    and Maintenance.
Sec.  63.8(c)(4).................  .........................  Yes
Sec.  63.8(c)(5).................  .........................  No                        Subpart HHHH does not
                                                                                         specify opacity or
                                                                                         visible emission
                                                                                         standards
Sec.  63.8(c)(6)-(8).............  .........................  Yes
Sec.  63.8(d)....................  Quality Control..........  Yes
Sec.  63.8(e)....................  CMS Performance            Yes
                                    Evaluation.
Sec.  63.8(f)(1)-(5).............  Alternative Monitoring     Yes                       EPA retains approval
                                    Method.                                              authority
Sec.  63.8(f)(6).................  Alternative to Relative    No                        Subpart HHHH does not
                                    Accuracy Test.                                       require the use of
                                                                                         continuous emissions
                                                                                         monitoring systems
                                                                                         (CEMS)
Sec.  63.8(g)(1).................  Data Reduction...........  Yes
Sec.  63.8(g)(2).................  Data Reduction...........  No                        Subpart HHHH does not
                                                                                         require the use of CEMS
                                                                                         or continuous opacity
                                                                                         monitoring systems
                                                                                         (COMS).
Sec.  63.8(g)(3)-(5).............  Data Reduction...........  Yes
Sec.  63.9(a)....................  Notification               Yes
                                    Requirements--Applicabil
                                    ity.
Sec.  63.9(b)....................  Initial Notifications....  Yes
Sec.  63.9(c)....................  Request for Compliance     Yes
                                    Extension.
Sec.  63.9(d)....................  New Source Notification    Yes
                                    for Special Compliance
                                    Requirements.
Sec.  63.9(e)....................  Notification of            Yes
                                    Performance Test.
Sec.  63.9(f)....................  Notification of Visible    No                        Subpart HHHH does not
                                    Emissions/Opacity Test.                              specify opacity or
                                                                                         visible emission
                                                                                         standards.
Sec.  63.9(g)(1).................  Additional CMS             Yes
                                    Notifications.
Sec.  63.9(g)(2)-(3).............  .........................  No                        Subpart HHHH does not
                                                                                         require the use of COMS
                                                                                         or CEMS.
Sec.  63.9(h)(1)-(3).............  Notification of            Yes                       Sec.  63.3000(b)
                                    Compliance Status.                                   specifies additional
                                                                                         requirements.
Sec.  63.9(h)(4).................  .........................  No                        [Reserved].
Sec.  63.9(h)(5)-(6).............  .........................  Yes
Sec.  63.9(i)....................  Adjustment of Deadlines..  Yes
Sec.  63.9(j)....................  Change in Previous         Yes
                                    Information.
Sec.  63.10(a)...................  Recordkeeping/Reporting--  Yes
                                    Applicability.
Sec.  63.10(b)...................  General Recordkeeping      Yes                       Sec.  63.2998 includes
                                    Requirements.                                        additional
                                                                                         requirements.
Sec.  63.10(c)(1)................  Additional CMS             Yes
                                    Recordkeeping.
Sec.  63.10(c)(2)-(4)............  .........................  No                        [Reserved].
Sec.  63.10(c)(5)-(8)............  .........................  Yes
Sec.  63.10(c)(9)................  .........................  No                        [Reserved].
Sec.  63.10(c)(10)-(15)..........  .........................  Yes
Sec.  63.10(d)(1)................  General Reporting          Yes                       Sec.  63.3000 includes
                                    Requirements.                                        additional
                                                                                         requirements.

[[Page 17843]]

 
Sec.  63.10(d)(2)................  Performance Test Results.  Yes                       Sec.  63.3000 includes
                                                                                         additional requirements
Sec.  63.10(d)(3)................  Opacity or Visible         No                        Subpart HHHH does not
                                    Emissions Observations.                              specify opacity or
                                                                                         visible emission
                                                                                         standards.
Sec.  63.10(d)(4)-(5)............  Progress Reports/Startup,  Yes
                                    Shutdown, and
                                    Malfunction Reports.
Sec.  63.10(e)(1)................  Additional CMS Reports--   No                        Subpart HHHH does not
                                    General.                                             require CEMS.
Sec.  63.10(e)(2)................  Reporting results of CMS   Yes
                                    performance evaluations.
Sec.  63.10(e)(3)................  Excess Emission/CMS        Yes
                                    Performance Reports.
Sec.  63.10(e)(4)................  COMS Data Reports........  No                        Subpart HHHH does not
                                                                                         specify opacity or
                                                                                         visible emission
                                                                                         standards.
Sec.  63.10(f)...................  Recordkeeping/Reporting    Yes                       EPA retains approval
                                    Waiver.                                              authority
Sec.  63.11......................  Control Device             No                        Facilities subject to
                                    Requirments--Applicabili                             subpart HHHH do not use
                                    ty.                                                  flares as control
                                                                                         devices.
Sec.  63.12......................  State Authority and        Yes
                                    Delegations.
Sec.  63.13......................  Addresses................  Yes
Sec.  63.14......................  Incorporation by           No
                                    Reference.
Sec.  63.15......................  Availability of            Yes
                                    Information/
                                    Confidentiality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Appendices to Subpart HHHH of Part 63

Appendix A to Subpart HHHH--Method for Determining Free-Formaldehyde in 
Urea-Formaldehyde Resins by Sodium Sulfite (Iced & Cooled)

1.0  Scope

    This procedure corresponds to the Housing and Urban Development 
method of determining free-formaldehyde in urea-formaldehyde resins. 
This method applies to samples that decompose to yield formaldehyde 
under the conditions of other free-formaldehyde methods. The primary 
use is for urea-formaldehyde resins.

2.0  Part A--Testing Resins

    Formaldehyde will react with sodium sulfite to form the sulfite 
addition products and liberate sodium hydroxide (NaOH); however, at 
room temperature, the methanol groups present will also react to 
liberate NaOH. Titrate at 0 degrees Celsius ( deg.C) to minimize the 
reaction of the methanol groups.
    2.1  Apparatus Required.
    2.1.1  Ice crusher.
    2.1.2  One 100-milliliter (mL) graduated cylinder.
    2.1.3  Three 400-mL beakers.
    2.1.4  One 50-mL burette.
    2.1.5  Analytical balance accurate to 0.1 milligrams (mg).
    2.1.6  Magnetic stirrer.
    2.1.7  Magnetic stirring bars.
    2.1.8  Disposable pipettes.
    2.1.9  Several 5-ounce (oz.) plastic cups.
    2.1.10  Ice cube trays (small cubes).
    2.2  Materials Required.
    2.2.1  Ice cubes (made with distilled water).
    2.2.2  A solution of 1 molar (M) sodium sulfite 
(Na2SO3) (63 grams (g) 
Na2SO3/500 mL water (H2O) 
neutralized to thymolphthalein endpoint).
    2.2.3  Standardized 0.1 normal (N) hydrochloric acid (HCl).
    2.2.4  Thymolphthalein indicator (1.0 g thymolphthalein/199 g 
methanol).
    2.2.5  Sodium chloride (NaCl) (reagent grade).
    2.2.6  Sodium hydroxide (NaOH).
    2.3  Procedure.
    2.3.1  Prepare sufficient quantity of crushed ice for three 
determinations (two trays of cubes).
    2.3.2  Put 70 cubic centimeters (cc) of 1 M 
Na2SO3 solution into a 400-mL beaker. Begin 
stirring and add approximately 100 g of crushed ice and 2 g of NaCl. 
Maintain 0  deg.C during test, adding ice as necessary.
    2.3.3  Add 10-15 drops of thymolphthalein indicator to the 
chilled solution. If the solution remains clear, add 0.1 N NaOH 
until the solution turns blue; then add 0.1 N HCl back to the 
colorless endpoint. If the solution turns blue upon adding the 
indicator, add 0.1 N HCl to the colorless endpoint.
    2.3.4  On the analytical balance, accurately weigh the amount of 
resin indicated under the ``Resin Sample Size'' chart (see below) as 
follows.

                            Resin Sample Size
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Sample
              Approximate free HCHO  (percent)                  weight
                                                               (gram(s))
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.5.........................................................          10
0.5-1.0.....................................................           5
1.0-3.0.....................................................           2
3.0.........................................................           1
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2.3.4.1  Pour about 1 inch of resin into a 5 oz. plastic cup.
    2.3.4.2  Determine the gross weight of the cup, resin, and 
disposable pipette (with the narrow tip broken off) fitted with a 
small rubber bulb.
    2.3.4.3  Pipette out the desired amount of resin into the 
stirring, chilled solution (approximately 1.5 to 2 g per pipette-
full).
    2.3.4.4  Quickly reweigh the cup, resin, and pipette with the 
bulb.
    2.3.4.5  The resultant weight loss equals the grams of resin 
being tested.
    2.3.5  Rapidly titrate the solution with 0.1 N HCl to the 
colorless endpoint described in Step 3 (2.3.3).
    2.3.6  Repeat the test in triplicate.
    2.4  Calculation.
    2.4.1  The percent free-formaldehyde (%HCHO) is calculated as 
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR11AP02.024

    2.4.2  Compute the average percent free-formaldehyde of the 
three tests.
    (Note: If the results of the three tests are not within a range 
of 0.5 percent or if the average of the three tests does 
not meet expected limits, carry out Part B and then repeat Part A.)

[[Page 17844]]

3.0  Part B--Standard Check

    Part B ensures that test reagents used in determining percent 
free-formaldehyde in urea-formaldehyde resins are of proper 
concentration and that operator technique is correct. Should any 
doubts arise in either of these areas, the formaldehyde standard 
solution test should be carried out.
    3.1  Preparation and Standardization of a 1 Percent Formalin 
Solution.
    Prepare a solution containing approximately 1 percent 
formaldehyde from a stock 37 percent formalin solution. Standardize 
the prepared solution by titrating the hydroxyl ions resulting from 
the formation of the formaldehyde bisulfite complex.
    3.2  Apparatus Required.

    Note: All reagents must be American Chemical Society analytical 
reagent grade or better.

    3.2.1  One 1-liter (L) volumetric flask (class A).
    3.2.2  One 250-mL volumetric flask (class A).
    3.2.3  One 250-mL beaker.
    3.2.4  One 100-mL pipette (class A).
    3.2.5  One 10-mL pipette (class A).
    3.2.6  One 50-mL graduated cylinder (class A).
    3.2.7  A pH meter, standardized using pH 7 and pH 10 buffers.
    3.2.8  Magnetic stirrer.
    3.2.9  Magnetic stirring bars.
    3.2.10  Several 5-oz. plastic cups.
    3.2.11  Disposal pipettes.
    3.2.12  Ice cube trays (small cubes).
    3.3  Materials Required.
    3.3.1  A solution of 37 percent formalin.
    3.3.2  Anhydrous Na2SO3.
    3.3.3  Distilled water.
    3.3.4  Standardized 0.100 N HCl.
    3.3.5  Thymolphthalein indicator (1.0 g thymolphthalein/199 g 
methanol).
    3.4  Preparation of Solutions and Reagents.
    3.4.1  Formaldehyde Standard Solution (approximately 1 percent). 
Measure, using a graduated cylinder, 27.0 mL of analytical reagent 
37 percent formalin solution into a 1-L volumetric flask. Fill the 
flask to volume with distilled water.
    (Note: You must standardize this solution as described in 
section 3.5. This solution is stable for 3 months.)
    3.4.2  Sodium Sulfite Solution 1.0 M (used for standardization 
of Formaldehyde Standard Solution). Quantitatively transfer, using 
distilled water as the transfer solvent, 31.50 g of anhydrous 
Na2SO3 into a 250-mL volumetric flask. 
Dissolve in approximately 100 mL of distilled water and fill to 
volume.
    (Note: You must prepare this solution daily, but the calibration 
of the Formaldehyde Standard Solution needs to be done only once.)
    3.4.3  Hydrochloric Acid Standard Solution 0.100 M. This reagent 
should be readily available as a primary standard that only needs to 
be diluted.
    3.5  Standardization.
    3.5.1  Standardization of Formaldehyde Standard Solution.
    3.5.1.1  Pipette 100.0 mL of 1 M sodium sulfite into a stirred 
250-mL beaker.
    3.5.1.2  Using a standardized pH meter, measure and record the 
pH. The pH should be around 10. It is not essential the pH be 10; 
however, it is essential that the value be accurately recorded.
    3.5.1.3  To the stirring Na2SO3 solution, 
pipette in 10.0 mL of Formaldehyde Standard Solution. The pH should 
rise sharply to about 12.
    3.5.1.4  Using the pH meter as a continuous monitor, titrate the 
solution back to the original exact pH using 0.100 N HCl. Record the 
milliliters of HCl used as titrant. (Note: Approximately 30 to 35 mL 
of HCl will be required.)
    3.5.1.5  Calculate the concentration of the Formaldehyde 
Standard Solution using the equation as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR11AP02.025

    3.6  Procedure.
    3.6.1  Prepare a sufficient quantity of crushed ice for three 
determinations (two trays of cubes).
    3.6.2  Put 70 cc of 1 M Na2SO3 solution 
into a 400-mL beaker. Begin stirring and add approximately 100 g of 
crushed ice and 2 g NaCl. Maintain 0  deg.C during the test, adding 
ice as necessary.
    3.6.3  Add 10-15 drops of thymolphthalein indicator to the 
chilled solution. If the solution remains clear, add 0.1 N NaOH 
until the solution turns blue; then add 0.1 N HCl back to the 
colorless endpoint. If the solution turns blue upon adding the 
indicator, add 0.1 N HCl to the colorless endpoint.
    3.6.4  On the analytical balance, accurately weigh a sample of 
Formaldehyde Standard Solution as follows.
    3.6.4.1  Pour about 0.5 inches of Formaldehyde Standard Solution 
into a 5-oz. plastic cup.
    3.6.4.2  Determine the gross weight of the cup, Formaldehyde 
Standard Solution, and a disposable pipette fitted with a small 
rubber bulb.
    3.6.4.3  Pipette approximately 5 g of the Formaldehyde Standard 
Solution into the stirring, chilled Na2SO3 
solution.
    3.6.4.4  Quickly reweigh the cup, Formaldehyde Standard 
Solution, and pipette with the bulb.
    3.6.4.5  The resultant weight loss equals the grams of 
Formaldehyde Standard Solution being tested.
    3.6.5  Rapidly titrate the solution with 0.1 N HCl to the 
colorless endpoint in Step 3 (3.6.3).
    3.6.6  Repeat the test in triplicate.
    3.7  Calculation for Formaldehyde Standard Solution.
    3.7.1  The percent free-formaldehyde (% HCHO) is calculated as 
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR11AP02.026

    3.7.2  The range of the results of three tests should be no more 
than 5 percent of the actual Formaldehyde Standard 
Solution concentration. Report results to two decimal places.
    3.8  Reference.
    West Coast Adhesive Manufacturers Trade Association Test 10.1.

Appendix B to Subpart HHHH--Method for the Determination of Loss-on-
Ignition

1.0  Purpose

    The purpose of this test is to determine the loss-on-ignition 
(LOI) of wet-formed fiberglass mat.

2.0  Equipment

    2.1 Scale sensitive to 0.001 gram (g).
    2.2  Drying oven equipped with a means of constant temperature 
regulation and mechanical air convection.
    2.3  Furnace designed to heat to at least 625  deg.C (1,157 
deg.F) and controllable to 25  deg.C (45 
deg.F).
    2.4  Crucible, high form, 250 milliliter (mL).
    2.5  Desiccator.
    2.6  Pan balance (see Note 2 in 4.9)

3.0  Sample Collection Procedure

    3.1  Obtain a sample of mat in accordance with Technical 
Association of the Pulp and Paper Industry (TAPPI) method 1007 
``Sample Location.''
    3.2  Use a 5- to 10-g sample cut into pieces small enough to fit 
into the crucible.
    3.3  Place the sample in the crucible. (Note 1: To test without 
the use of a crucible, see Note 2 after Section 4.8.)
    3.4  Condition the sample in the furnace set at 105  
3  deg.C (221  9  deg.F) for 5 minutes  30 
seconds.

4.0  Procedure

    4.1  Condition each sample by drying for 5 minutes  
30 seconds at 105  3  deg.C (22  5  deg.F).
    4.2  Remove the test sample from the furnace and cool in the 
desiccator for 30 minutes in the standard atmosphere for testing 
glass textiles.
    4.3  Place the empty crucible in the furnace at 625  
25  deg.C (1,157  45  deg.F). After 30 minutes, remove 
and cool the crucible in the standard atmosphere (TAPPI method 1008) 
for 30 minutes.
    4.4  Identify each crucible with respect to each test sample of 
mat.
    4.5  Weigh the empty crucible to the nearest 0.001 g. Record 
this weight as the tare mass, T.

[[Page 17845]]

    4.6  Place the test sample in the crucible and weigh to the 
nearest 0.001 g. Record this weight as the initial mass, A.
    4.7  Place the test sample and crucible in the furnace and 
ignite at 625  25  deg.C (1,157  45  deg.F).
    4.8  After ignition for at least 30 minutes, remove the test 
sample and crucible from the furnace and cool in the desiccator for 
30 minutes in the standard atmosphere (TAPPI method 1008).
    4.9  Remove each crucible, and test each sample separately from 
the desiccator, and immediately weigh each sample to the nearest 
0.001 g. Record this weight as the ignited mass, B. (Note 2: When it 
is known that no ash residue separates from the test sample during 
the weighing and igniting processes, you may weigh the sample 
separately without the crucible. When this occurs, the tare mass (T) 
equals zero. With appropriate care, you can dry and weigh a single 
piece of mat and place with tongs into the ignition oven on 
appropriate refractory supports. When the ignition time is over, 
remove the sample as an intact fragile web and weigh it directly on 
a pan balance.)

5.0  Calculation

    5.1  Calculate the LOI for each sample as follows:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR11AP02.027
    
Where:

A = initial mass of crucible and sample before ignition (g);
B = mass of crucible and glass residue after ignition (g); and
T = tare mass of crucible, (g) (see Note 2).

    5.2  Report the percent LOI of the glass mat to the nearest 0.1 
percent.

6.0  Precision

    The repeatability of this test method for measurements on 
adjacent specimens from the same sample of mat is better than 1 
percent.

[FR Doc. 02-7096 Filed 4-10-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P