[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 145 (Friday, July 29, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44012-44036]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-14532]



[[Page 44011]]

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

Part IV





Environmental Protection Agency





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



40 CFR Part 63



National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Plywood and 
Composite Wood Products; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 145 / Friday, July 29, 2005 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 44012]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[OAR-2003-0048; FRL-7947-8]
RIN 2060-AM78


National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Plywood 
and Composite Wood Products

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule; amendments.

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

SUMMARY: On July 30, 2004, EPA promulgated national emission standards 
for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for the plywood and composite 
wood products (PCWP) source category. Stakeholders expressed concern 
with some of the final rule requirements, including definitions; the 
emissions testing procedures required for facilities demonstrating 
eligibility for the low-risk subcategory; stack height calculations to 
be used in low-risk subcategory eligibility demonstrations; and 
permitting and timing issues associated with the low-risk subcategory 
eligibility demonstrations. In this action, EPA proposes amendments to 
the final PCWP NESHAP to address these issues and to correct any other 
inconsistencies that were discovered during the review process. This 
action also clarifies some common applicability questions. We are 
seeking comment on the provisions of the final PCWP rule outlined in 
this action. We are not requesting comments addressing other provisions 
of the final PCWP rule.

DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before September 12, 
2005.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts EPA requesting to speak at a 
public hearing by August 8, 2005, a public hearing will be held on 
August 15, 2005. For further information on the public hearing and 
requests to speak, see the ADDRESSES section of this preamble.

ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. 
OAR-2003-0048 (Legacy Docket ID No. A-98-44) by one of the following 
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     Agency Web site: http://www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, 
EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred 
method for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
     E-mail: [email protected].
     Fax: (202) 566-1741.
     Mail: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, 
EPA, Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 
20460.
     Hand Delivery: Air and Radiation Docket and Information 
Center, EPA, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. 
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of 
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information.
    Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0048 
(Legacy Docket ID No. A-98-44). EPA's policy is that all comments 
received will be included in the public docket without change and may 
be made available online at http://www.epa.gov/edocket, including any 
personal information provided, unless the comment includes information 
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit 
information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through 
EDOCKET, regulations.gov, or e-mail. EPA EDOCKET and the Federal 
regulations.gov websites are ``anonymous access'' systems, which means 
EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you 
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment 
directly to EPA without going through EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your 
e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of 
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on 
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that 
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your 
comment and with any disk or CD ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic 
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of 
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Public Hearing. If a public hearing is held, it will be held on 
August 15, 2005 at the EPA facility, Research Triangle Park, NC or an 
alternative site nearby. Persons interested in attending the hearing or 
wishing to present oral testimony should notify Ms. Mary Tom Kissell at 
least 2 days in advance of the public hearing (see FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble). The public hearing will 
provide interested parties the opportunity to present data, views, or 
arguments concerning this proposed rule.
    Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for today's 
proposed amendments, including both Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0048 and 
Legacy Docket ID No. A-98-44. The official public docket consists of 
the documents specifically referenced in today's proposed amendments, 
any public comments received, and other information related to the 
proposed amendments. All items may not be listed under both docket 
numbers, so interested parties should inspect both docket numbers to 
ensure that they have received all materials relevant to today's 
proposed amendments. Although listed in the index, some information is 
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure 
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted 
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available 
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are 
available either electronically in EDOCKET or in hard copy at the Air 
and Radiation Docket and Information Center, EPA, Room B102, 1301 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is 
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is 
(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation 
Docket and Information Center is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general and technical information, 
and questions about the public hearing, contact Ms. Mary Tom Kissell, 
Waste and Chemical Processes Group, Emission Standards Division, 
Mailcode: C439-03, EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone 
number: (919) 541-4516; fax number: (919) 541-0246; e-mail address: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information presented in this preamble 
is organized as follows:

I. General Information
    A. Do these proposed amendments apply to me?
    B. How do I submit CBI?
    C. How do I obtain a copy of this document and other related 
information?
II. Background
III. Summary of the Proposed Amendments
IV. Rationale for the Proposed Amendments
    A. Amendments to Subpart DDDD of 40 CFR Part 63
    B. Amendments to Appendix B to Subpart DDDD of 40 CFR Part 63
    C. Other Amendments to the Rule
V. Additional Clarifications
    A. Integrated Drying Systems Where Combustion Units That Heat 
the Dryers Are Used as Control Devices
    B. Applicability of the PCWP Rule to Hot Pressing of Veneers 
onto a Substrate

[[Page 44013]]

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health & Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

I. General Information

A. Do these proposed amendments apply to me?

    Categories and entities potentially affected by today's proposed 
amendments include:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Category                SIC code \a\   NAICS code \b\         Examples of regulated entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry..........................            2421          321999  Sawmills with lumber kilns.
                                              2435          321211  Hardwood plywood and veneer plants.
                                              2436          321212  Softwood plywood and veneer plants.
                                              2493          321219  Reconstituted wood products plants
                                                                     (particleboard, medium density fiberboard,
                                                                     hardboard, fiberboard, and oriented
                                                                     strandboard plants).
                                              2439          321213  Structural wood members, not elsewhere
                                                                     classified (engineered wood products
                                                                     plants).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Standard Industrial Classification.
\b\ North American Industrial Classification System.

    This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by today's 
proposed amendments. To determine whether your facility is affected by 
today's proposed amendments, you should examine the applicability 
criteria in Sec.  63.2231 of the final rule. If you have questions 
regarding the applicability of today's proposed amendments to a 
particular entity, consult Ms. Mary Tom Kissell listed in the preceding 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

B. How do I submit CBI?

    Do not submit this information to EPA through EDOCKET, 
regulations.gov, or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of the 
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI in a disk or CD ROM that 
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then 
identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific 
information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version 
of the comment that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the 
comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be 
submitted for inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked 
will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 
40 CFR part 2.

C. How do I obtain a copy of this document and other related 
information?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of 
today's proposed amendments also will be available on the World Wide 
Web (WWW) through EPA's Technology Transfer Network (TTN). Following 
the Administrator's signature, a copy of these proposed amendments will 
be posted on the TTN's policy and guidance page for newly proposed 
rules at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg. The TTN provides information and 
technology exchange in various areas of air pollution control.

II. Background

    On July 30, 2004, we promulgated NESHAP for Plywood and Composite 
Wood Products Manufacturing as subpart DDDD in 40 CFR part 63 (69 FR 
45944). Subpart DDDD contains two appendices: an alternative procedure 
for determining capture efficiency from hot press enclosures (appendix 
A to subpart DDDD of 40 CFR part 63), and methodology and criteria for 
demonstrating that an affected source is part of the low-risk 
subcategory of PCWP manufacturing affected sources (appendix B to 
subpart DDDD of 40 CFR part 63). Today we are proposing corrections and 
clarifications to subpart DDDD and both of the appendices to subpart 
DDDD. For subpart DDDD, we are proposing several changes to ensure that 
the rule is implemented as intended: (1) Amend the sampling location 
for coupled control devices; (2) amend language to clarify rule 
applicability during unscheduled startups and shutdowns; (3) add 
language to clarify rule applicability for affected sources with no 
process units subject to compliance options or work practice 
requirements; and (4) amend selected definitions. A minor numbering 
error is proposed to be corrected in appendix A to subpart DDDD. The 
majority of the amendments discussed in today's action are being 
proposed for appendix B to subpart DDDD. We are proposing amendments to 
appendix B to subpart DDDD to reduce the number of emissions tests 
required while ensuring that emissions from all PCWP process units are 
considered when demonstrating eligibility for the low-risk subcategory. 
For emission points that would still require emission tests, we are 
proposing that the emissions tests may be conducted after the low-risk 
demonstration is submitted. We are also proposing that physical changes 
necessary to ensure low risk may be completed after the low-risk 
demonstration is submitted. We are proposing to clarify the calculation 
of average stack height and some timing issues related to low-risk 
demonstrations, including the deadline for submitting low-risk 
demonstrations. Furthermore, we are proposing to amend subpart A to 40 
CFR part 63 and subpart DDDD of 40 CFR part 63 and appendix B to 
subpart DDDD to allow use of a new hazardous air pollutants (HAP) test 
method developed by the National Council of the Paper Industry for Air 
and Stream Improvement (NCASI).
    Following promulgation of the PCWP rule, the Administrator received 
a petition for reconsideration filed by the Natural Resources Defense 
Council (NRDC) and Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) pursuant to 
section 307(d)(7)(B) of the Clean Air Act (CAA).\1\ The petition 
requested

[[Page 44014]]

reconsideration of nine aspects of the final rule: (1) Risk assessment 
methodology; (2) background pollution and co-located emission sources; 
(3) dose-response value used for formaldehyde; (4) costs and benefits 
of the low-risk subcategory; (5) ecological risk; (6) legal basis for 
the risk-based approach; (7) maximum achievable control technology 
(MACT) compliance date for affected sources previously qualifying for 
the low-risk subcategory; (8) startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) 
provisions; and (9) title V implementation mechanism for the risk-based 
approach. With the exception of the petitioners' issue with the SSM 
provisions in subpart DDDD of 40 CFR part 63, all of the petitioners' 
issues relate to the risk-based approach adopted in the final rule. The 
issues raised in the petition for reconsideration are broader in scope 
than the issues addressed in today's proposed amendments. We have 
published a separate notice of reconsideration to initiate rulemaking 
by requesting comments on the issues in the petition for 
reconsideration, including the full content of appendix B to subpart 
DDDD. We intend to address all comments received on the notice of 
reconsideration and today's proposed amendments by the time we finalize 
the amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In addition to the petition for reconsideration, four 
petitions for judicial review of the final PCWP rule were filed with 
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia by NRDC and 
Sierra Club (No. 04-1323, D.C. Cir.), EIP (No. 04-1235, D.C. Cir.), 
Louisiana-Pacific Corporation (No. 04-1328, D.C. Cir.), and Norbord 
Incorporated (No. 04-1329, D.C. Cir.). The four cases have been 
consolidated. In addition, the following parties have filed as 
interveners: American Forest and Paper Association (AF&PA), Hood 
Industries, Scotch Plywood, Coastal Lumber Company, Composite Panel 
Association, APA-The Engineered Wood Association, American Furniture 
Manufacturers Association, NRDC, Sierra Club, and EIP. Finally, the 
Formaldehyde Council, Inc. and the State and Territorial Air 
Pollution Program Administrators and Association of Local Air 
Pollution Control Officials (STAPPA/ALAPCO) are participating in the 
litigation as amicus curiae.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Summary of the Proposed Amendments

    Today's proposed amendments to subpart DDDD of 40 CFR part 63 and 
its appendices are summarized in table 1 of this preamble.

              Table 1.--Summary of the Proposed Amendments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Citation                              Change
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec.  Sec.   63.2232(b) and    Amend definition of ``affected source''
 63.2292.                       to include the combustion unit exhaust
                                streams used to direct-fire process
                                units.
Sec.   63.2250(a)............  Amend the rule's language to clarify the
                                applicability of the compliance options
                                and operating requirements during
                                unscheduled startups and shutdowns.
Sec.   63.2252...............  Add a section to clarify that process
                                units that are not subject to compliance
                                options or work practice requirements
                                (e.g., lumber kilns) are excluded from
                                the performance testing, monitoring, SSM
                                plan, recordkeeping, and reporting
                                requirements, except for the initial
                                notification requirements.
Sec.   63.2262(d)(1).........  Allow testing between a wet control
                                device followed by a HAP control device.
Sec.   63.2269(c)............  Amend section to correct numbering of
                                cross-referenced paragraphs.
Sec.   63.2292...............  Amend the definition of ``tube dryer'' to
                                clarify that heat is applied in the
                                dryer to reduce the moisture content of
                                the wood fibers or particles. Amend the
                                definition of ``plywood and composite
                                wood products manufacturing facility''
                                to clarify the products covered by
                                subpart DDDD. Amend the definition of
                                ``plywood'' to clarify that plywood
                                products may be curved or flat. Add
                                definitions of ``molded particleboard''
                                and ``engineered wood product.''
Sec.   63.2292 and Appendix    Move the definition of ``direct-fired
 B, section 15.                 process unit'' from section 15 of
                                appendix B to subpart DDDD to Sec.
                                63.2292 of subpart DDDD.
Table 4, Lines 6-8...........  Allow NCASI Method ISS/FP-A105.01 for
                                testing of formaldehyde, methanol, and
                                total HAP.
Table 4, line 10 and Appendix  Clarify that measured emissions divided
 B, Table 2, line 10.           by the capture efficiency provides the
                                emission rate for unenclosed and
                                uncontrolled presses and board coolers.
Appendix A, section 10.......  Correct misnumbering of sections 10.4 and
                                10.5.
Appendix B, sections 4(a),     Amend terminology to refer to ``emission
 5(a), 6(a) through (c), and    point'' instead of ``process unit.''
 Equations 1 and 2.
Appendix B, section 5(a) and   Add Table 2A and conforming text
 Table 2A.                      specifying which process units must be
                                tested and which process units may use
                                emission factors or engineering
                                estimates to estimate emissions.
Appendix B, section 5(f)(1)..  Add reference to NCASI IM/CAN/WP 99.02,
                                EPA Method 18, and NCASI Method ISS/FP-
                                A105.01.
Appendix B, section 5(f)(2)..  Allow use of other EPA Method 29
                                laboratory analysis procedures with
                                detection limits equal to or lower than
                                atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS)
                                when claiming zero for non-detect HAP
                                metals measurements.
Appendix B, section 5(i).....  Allow use of previous emissions test
                                results (e.g., NCASI IM/CAN/WP 99.01).
Appendix B, section 5(j).....  Allow only one of multiple similar
                                process units at a plant site to be
                                tested (e.g., one of three veneer dryers
                                at a plant).
Appendix B, section 5(k).....  Specify requirements for developing
                                emissions estimates according to Table
                                2A.
Appendix B, section 6(a).....  Amend to clarify that section 6(a)
                                applies when emissions estimation or
                                testing is performed.
Appendix B, section 6(a).....  Add equations for calculation of
                                carcinogen and non-carcinogen weighted-
                                average stack height.
Appendix B, sections 6(b),     Amend to clarify that weighted-average
 6(c), 8(b)(1), and 8(b)(3).    stack height calculations must be used.
Appendix B, section 7(a).....  Amend to correct Web site address
Appendix B, section 8(a)(3)..  Require submittal of emissions estimate
                                calculations with low-risk
                                demonstrations.
Appendix B, section 10(a)....  Amend date for existing sources to
                                conduct emissions tests and to submit
                                demonstrations of eligibility for the
                                low-risk subcategory.
Appendix B, section 10(c)....  Amend date for new sources to conduct
                                emissions tests and to submit
                                demonstrations of eligibility for the
                                low-risk subcategory.
Appendix B, section 11(b)....  Amend to clarify that the parameters that
                                defined the affected source as part of
                                the low-risk subcategory must be
                                submitted for incorporation into its
                                title V permit, as opposed to having the
                                permit revised before the MACT
                                compliance date.
Appendix B, section 15.......  Add definitions of various process units
                                not defined in subpart DDDD and move
                                definition of ``direct-fired process
                                unit'' to Sec.   63.2292.

[[Page 44015]]

 
Appendix B, Table 2..........  Renumber as Table 2B. Replace footnote 1
                                related to benzene and acrolein testing
                                with a footnote noting that direct-fired
                                process units fired with only natural
                                gas or propane are exempt from HAP
                                metals testing.
Appendix B, Table 2, line 5..  Allow NCASI Method ISS/FP-A105.01 for
                                testing of acetaldehyde, acrolein,
                                formaldehyde, and phenol.
Appendix B, Table 2, line 6..  Allow use of NCASI IM/CAN/WP 99.02 or EPA
                                Method 18 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A)
                                for benzene testing.
Appendix B, Table 3..........  Change column heading to ``distance to
                                property boundary.''
Appendix B, Tables 3 and 4...  Delete footnote regarding units of
                                measure.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Rationale for the Proposed Amendments

A. Amendments to Subpart DDDD of 40 CFR Part 63

1. Sampling Location
    It is common in the PCWP industry for multiple add-on control 
devices to be used in series (e.g., a wet electrostatic precipitator 
(WESP) for control of particulate matter (PM) followed by a thermal 
oxidizer for control of organic HAP and volatile organic compounds 
(VOC)). Some types of PM control devices have no effect on HAP 
emissions, including cyclones, multiclones, and baghouses. Wet control 
devices such as wet scrubbers and WESP are used primarily for PM 
control but may also affect (either positively or negatively) HAP 
emissions. The proposed rule did not specify where inlet sampling sites 
should be located when the HAP control device is preceded by a wet 
scrubber or WESP. As a result of industry comments on the proposed 
rule, Sec.  63.2262(d)(1) of the final PCWP rule requires that, ``* * * 
for HAP-altering controls in sequence, such as a wet control device 
followed by a thermal oxidizer, sampling sites must be located at the 
functional inlet of the control sequence (e.g., prior to the wet 
control device) and at the outlet of the control sequence (e.g., 
thermal oxidizer outlet) and prior to any releases to the atmosphere.''
    Following signature of the final rule, a stakeholder experienced 
with testing PCWP process units indicated that some coupled control 
systems are configured such that obtaining representative emissions 
measurements at sampling locations prior to the wet control device is 
not possible (e.g., inlet sampling locations fail to meet the criteria 
in Method 1 of 40 CFR part 60, appendix A). However, representative 
sampling could be accomplished at the outlet to the wet control device 
and inlet to the organic HAP control device. For those situations where 
coupled control systems are used to meet a compliance option that 
requires inlet sampling, we agree that sampling at the inlet of the HAP 
control device is sufficient and are proposing to amend the language in 
Sec.  63.2262(d)(1) to allow this alternative.
2. Definitions
    Tube dryer. Unlike in the proposed PCWP rule, primary tube dryers 
and secondary tube dryers are treated as separate process units in the 
final rule as a result of public comments received on the proposed rule 
(see 69 FR 45961-45962, July 30, 2004). Definitions of primary tube 
dryer and secondary tube dryer were added to the final rule to 
distinguish between the two types of tube dryers. The final rule also 
contains an associated definition of ``tube dryer,'' which is the same 
definition that was proposed. Following signature of the final rule, 
some industry representatives expressed concern that the definitions of 
tube dryer and secondary tube dryer could be misinterpreted to include 
ductwork used to pneumatically transfer hot wood furnish from a primary 
tube dryer to a holding bin, even though no heat is applied to the 
furnish as would occur for a secondary tube dryer. The promulgated 
definition indicates that the tube dryer is ``* * * operated at 
elevated temperature and used to reduce the moisture of wood * * *'' 
(which could occur with hot material passing though a duct even if no 
heat is applied). Given that tube dryers look like ductwork, we agree 
that this could be confusing to permitting authorities. To prevent 
misinterpretations and clarify that heat is applied in the tube dryer, 
we are proposing to amend the definition of ``tube dryer'' to replace 
the words ``operated at elevated temperature and used'' with ``operated 
by applying heat.''
    Affected source. Following Administrator signature of the final 
PCWP rule, it was brought to our attention that applicability of the 
final PCWP rule and the Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Boilers and 
Process Heaters NESHAP (40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDD; referred to as 
the ``Boilers/Process Heaters rule'' throughout the remainder of this 
preamble) was unclear with respect to combustion units that direct-fire 
dryers. When a combustion unit supplies heat by directly exhausting 
combustion gas through a dryer, we would consider the dryer to be a 
``direct-fired dryer.'' The HAP emissions from a direct-fired dryer are 
actually a combination of the emissions from the combustion unit 
exhausting into the dryer and the emissions that result from drying the 
wood. Because the final PCWP rule regulates emissions from direct-fired 
dryers, those combustion unit exhaust streams that direct-fire dryers 
would not be subject to the requirements of the final Boilers/Process 
Heaters rule. Section 63.7491(l) of the final Boilers/Process Heaters 
rule states that any boiler or process heater specifically listed as an 
affected source in another standard under 40 CFR part 63 is not subject 
to the Boilers/Process Heaters rule. Confusion has resulted because the 
PCWP affected source definition contains no mention of combustion units 
(e.g., boilers or process heaters). To clarify applicability of the 
final PCWP rule, we are proposing to amend the definition of ``affected 
source'' to clearly state that combustion unit exhaust streams used to 
direct-fire dryers are part of the PCWP affected source.
    Our proposed amendment to the definition of ``affected source'' 
specifically refers to ``any combustion unit exhaust stream'' rather 
than to individual combustion units. There are numerous configurations 
of combustion units and drying operations in the PCWP industry 
including, for example, suspension burners that are built into 
individual dryers and stand-alone combustion units. Stand-alone 
combustion units can have several exhaust streams including, for 
example, exhaust streams that directly fire multiple dryers and exhaust 
streams that provide heat for other uses (e.g., indirect heat for a 
thermal oil heater). The exhaust streams that directly fire dryers 
would be part of the PCWP

[[Page 44016]]

affected source because the combustion gases come into direct contact 
with the wood material, and the dryer exhaust is a mixture of 
combustion gases and process gases. An exhaust stream that supplies 
indirect heat for other uses would be part of the PCWP affected source 
if it is eventually routed through the direct-fired dryers, such that 
it too contacts the wood material and becomes a mixture of combustion 
gases and process gases. However, if the indirect heat exhaust stream 
does not routinely pass through the direct-fired dryers, then this 
exhaust stream would be subject to the final Boilers/Process Heaters 
rule. Thus, as stated in the preamble to the final PCWP rule (see 69 FR 
45961 and 45963, July 30, 2004), there are combustion units in the PCWP 
industry that can be subject to both the PCWP and Boilers/Process 
Heaters final rules. We refer to ``combustion unit exhaust stream'' in 
our proposed amendment to clarify that different exhaust streams must 
be evaluated separately to determine applicability of the PCWP and 
Boilers/Process Heaters final rules for those individual exhaust 
streams.
    Direct-fired process unit. In tandem with our proposed addition to 
the definition of ``affected source,'' we are also proposing to move 
the definition of ``direct-fired process unit'' from appendix B to 
subpart DDDD to Sec.  63.2292 of subpart DDDD. Previously, the 
definition of ``direct-fired process unit'' was only needed in appendix 
B to subpart DDDD; however, since the proposed amendment to the 
``affected source'' definition refers to direct firing, the definition 
of ``direct-fired process unit'' would be needed for subpart DDDD as 
well. Appendix B to subpart DDDD references all of the definitions in 
Sec.  63.2292 of subpart DDDD.
    Plywood and composite wood products manufacturing facility. 
Following promulgation of the PCWP rule, we have received questions 
regarding applicability of the final PCWP rule to facilities that 
manufacture molded particleboard products. The promulgated definition 
of ``plywood and composite wood products manufacturing facility'' has 
caused some confusion because it does not specifically mention molded 
particleboard manufacturing. Molded particleboard is produced by hot 
pressing a mixture of wood particles and resin into a shape (e.g., a 
pallet, furniture part, toilet seat, etc.) using a press mold uniquely 
designed for the product. The press molds used for molded particleboard 
products are designed very differently from the platen or continuous 
presses used to manufacture conventional particleboard panels. Prior to 
promulgation, we determined that MACT for particleboard press molds is 
no emission reduction, and, therefore, there are no requirements in the 
final PCWP rule for these press molds. However, molded particleboard 
facilities can operate dry rotary dryers or green rotary dryers 
identical to those operated by conventional particleboard plants. 
Rotary dryers at molded particleboard manufacturing facilities were 
included in the MACT determination for PCWP dry and green rotary 
dryers. The final PCWP rule contains work practice requirements for dry 
rotary dryers and control requirements for green rotary dryers. In 
order to ensure that MACT is applied as intended for these dryers, we 
are proposing to amend the definition of ``plywood and composite wood 
products manufacturing facility'' to include molded particleboard 
manufacturing. Note that only those molded particleboard manufacturers 
that are major sources of HAP emissions are potentially affected by 
this clarification to the definition of ``plywood and composite wood 
products manufacturing facility.''
    Several other applicability questions have been raised regarding 
the definition of ``plywood and composite wood products manufacturing 
facility.'' As promulgated, a ``plywood and composite wood products 
manufacturing facility'' is ``a facility that manufactures plywood and/
or composite wood products by bonding wood material (fibers, particles, 
strands, veneers, etc.) or agricultural fiber, generally with resin 
under heat and pressure, to form a structural panel or engineered wood 
product * * *.'' We have received several questions about the 
applicability of the rule to products that are neither structural 
panels nor engineered wood products. Although some products that may 
not be considered structural panels or engineered wood products are 
listed at the end of the definition of ``plywood and composite wood 
products manufacturing facility'' (e.g., kiln-dried lumber), other 
products that we intended to cover are not listed in this definition. 
The phrase ``structural panel or engineered wood product'' was never 
intended to be a basis of exclusion from the source category; instead, 
it was intended to summarize the majority of products made at PCWP 
manufacturing facilities. Certain products that typically would not be 
considered either structural panels or engineered wood products were 
included in the MACT floor analysis and are subject to the promulgated 
rule. We propose to clarify our intent by amending the first sentence 
of the definition of ``plywood and composite wood products 
manufacturing facility'' to cover a wider variety of products.
    Plywood. We also received questions regarding applicability of the 
PCWP final rule to operations where veneer is glued (with heat and 
pressure) to form a curved wood component or onto a curved wood 
component rather than a flat panel. The promulgated definition of 
``plywood'' is `` * * * a panel product consisting of layers of wood 
veneers hot pressed together with resin. Plywood includes panel 
products made by hot pressing (with resin) veneers to a substrate such 
as particleboard, medium density fiberboard, or lumber.'' We did not 
define ``panel product'' in the final rule; however, we intended for 
the term to be interpreted broadly. We consider a product manufactured 
by hot-pressing veneers together or onto a substrate with resin to be 
plywood, regardless of the curvature of the end product. We propose to 
amend the definition of ``plywood'' to clarify our intent. There are no 
control requirements or work practice requirements for plywood pressing 
operations in the final PCWP rule. Therefore, facilities manufacturing 
products that meet the definition of ``plywood'' in the final rule (but 
have no other operations subject to the control, work practice, or 
operating requirements in the final PCWP rule) need only to submit an 
initial notification stating that they have no equipment subject to the 
rule (as discussed in the next section of this preamble).
    Molded particleboard. To supplement our proposed addition of molded 
particleboard manufacturing to the definition of ``plywood and 
composite wood products manufacturing facility,'' we are also proposing 
to add a definition of ``molded particleboard'' to subpart DDDD of 40 
CFR part 63.
    Engineered wood products. Following promulgation of the PCWP rule, 
we received several applicability questions regarding engineered wood 
products. To assist stakeholders in determining what products we 
consider to be engineered wood products, we are proposing to add a 
definition of ``engineered wood product'' to subpart DDDD of 40 CFR 
part 63.
3. Affected Sources With No Process Units Subject to the Compliance 
Options or Work Practice Requirements
    Following promulgation, we received several questions regarding 
applicability of general recordkeeping and reporting

[[Page 44017]]

requirements for affected sources with no equipment subject to specific 
requirements in the final rule. To clarify our intent in the final 
rule, we are proposing to add to subpart DDDD of 40 CFR part 63 a new 
section 63.2252, entitled ``What are the requirements for process units 
that have no control or work practice requirements?'' The proposed 
section states that you are not required to comply with the compliance 
options, work practice requirements, performance testing, monitoring, 
SSM plans, and recordkeeping or reporting requirements of this subpart, 
or any other requirements in subpart A of this part, except for the 
initial notification requirements in Sec.  63.9(b), for process units 
not subject to the compliance options or work practice requirements 
specified in Sec.  63.2240. Thus, affected sources without process 
units subject to the compliance options or work practice requirements 
(for example, lumber kilns, glue-laminated beams, or wood I-joists) 
would not be subject to the performance testing requirements, 
monitoring requirements, SSM plan requirements, and recordkeeping or 
reporting requirements of subpart DDDD, or any other requirements in 
subpart A of 40 CFR part 63. The proposed amendment is appropriate 
because no reports other than the initial notification would apply to 
these process units. The SSM plan is not necessary or required for 
process units not subject to specific requirements of the final rule 
because Sec.  63.6(e)(3) of subpart A of this part requires an affected 
source to develop an SSM plan for process units subject to and control 
equipment used to comply with the relevant standard. The final PCWP 
rule was not intended to require anything other than the initial 
notification for process units not subject to the compliance options or 
work practice requirements.
4. Incorporation by Reference of NCASI Test Methods
    With today's action, we are proposing to amend 40 CFR 63.14 by 
revising paragraph (f) to incorporate by reference one test method 
developed by the NCASI, pending review by EPA: Method ISS/FP-A105.01, 
Impinger Source Sampling Method for Selected Aldehydes, Ketones, and 
Polar Compounds. The method is available from the NCASI, Methods 
Manual, P.O. Box 133318, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709-3318 or at 
http://www.ncasi.org. It is also available from the docket for the 
proposed amendments (Docket ID No. OAR-2003-0048).
    The NCASI Method ISS/FP-A105.01 was developed as an additional test 
method for measuring total HAP that may be used for high-moisture 
sources. The NCASI Method ISS/FP-A105.01 is not appropriate for 
measurement of benzene. In today's proposed amendments, NCASI Method 
ISS/FP-A105.01, which is a self-validating method, would be allowed, 
pending our review, as an alternative to:
     EPA Method 320, Measurement of Vapor Phase Organic and 
Inorganic Emission by Extractive FTIR, for measuring methanol, 
formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, phenol or total HAP;
     EPA Method 0011, Sampling for Selected Aldehyde and Ketone 
Emissions from Stationary Sources, for measuring formaldehyde;
     EPA Method 316, Sampling and Analysis for Formaldehyde 
Emissions from Stationary Sources in the Mineral Wool and Wool 
Fiberglass Industries, for measuring formaldehyde;
     EPA Method 308, Procedure for Determination of Methanol 
Emission from Stationary Sources, for measuring methanol;
     NCASI Method CI/WP-98.01, Chilled Impinger Method for Use 
at Wood Products Mills to Measure Formaldehyde, Methanol, and Phenol, 
for measuring formaldehyde or methanol; and
     NCASI Method IM/CAN/WP-99.02, Impinger/Canister Source 
Sampling Method for Selected HAPs at Wood Products Facilities, for 
measuring methanol, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, phenol or 
total HAP.

B. Amendments to Appendix B to Subpart DDDD of 40 CFR Part 63

1. Addition of Emissions Estimation Procedures
    Appendix B to subpart DDDD provides the methodology and criteria 
for demonstrating that your affected source is part of the low-risk 
subcategory of PCWP manufacturing facilities. As promulgated, appendix 
B to subpart DDDD requires emissions testing of all PCWP process units 
for up to 13 HAP. Table 2 of this preamble summarizes the process units 
that must be tested for each HAP and the emissions test methods 
specified in appendix B to subpart DDDD, as promulgated, for each HAP.

   Table 2.--Emissions Test Methods Specified in Appendix B to Subpart
                          DDDD, as Promulgated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Specified test
             HAP                  Process units           method(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Acetaldehyde, acrolein,       All process units...  NCASI IM/CAN/WP-
 formaldehyde, phenol.                               99.02 or EPA Method
                                                     320 or ASTM D6348-
                                                     03.
Benzene.....................  All process units...  EPA Method 320 or
                                                     ASTM D6348-03.
Methylene diphenyl            Presses that process  EPA Method 320 or
 diisocyanate (MDI).           board containing      Conditional Test
                               MDI resin.            Method 031.
Arsenic, beryllium, cadmium,  Direct-fired process  EPA Method 29.
 chromium, lead, nickel,       units.
 manganese.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: EPA Method 320 is located in 40 CFR part 63, appendix A. EPA
  Method 29 is located in 40 CFR part 60, appendix A. The NCASI IM/CAN/
  WP-99.02 and ASTM D6348-03 were incorporated by reference (see 40 CFR
  63.14) and Conditional Test Method 031 is posted at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/ctm.html.

    Following promulgation, stakeholders commented that emissions 
testing is not feasible or necessary for every process unit. The 
stakeholders claimed that many PCWP process units are not configured 
for emissions testing and that testing of every type of PCWP process 
unit (especially those with insignificant emissions) is not necessary 
to ensure an accurate assessment of risk. In addition, the stakeholders 
stated that requiring emissions testing for acrolein and benzene from 
all PCWP process units is not justified by the available data, which 
show that emissions of acrolein and benzene are frequently not detected 
in the exhausts from many types of PCWP process units. The stakeholders 
also requested that HAP metals emissions testing be limited to those 
direct-fired process units that fire fuels other than natural gas and 
that fuel analysis be allowed as an alternative to HAP metals emissions 
testing.
    Selection of Process Units to be Included in Low-risk 
Demonstration. EPA has determined that every process

[[Page 44018]]

unit with potentially significant emissions, including very small 
emission sources, must be included in the low-risk demonstration 
because the low-risk demonstration is based on the cumulative risk from 
the process units within the PWCP affected source. Generally, this 
means that EPA has included all process units with any detectable 
emissions. However, we wanted to determine if costs could be lowered 
without affecting the quality of the emission estimates. So, we 
explored the feasibility of testing each type of PCWP process unit and 
available emissions estimation methods. We must ensure an accurate 
emissions determination for the affected source, given that the purpose 
of the low-risk demonstration is to certify that a PCWP affected source 
poses a risk to human health and the environment less than the low-risk 
criteria specified in appendix B to subpart DDDD \2\ and is eligible to 
become exempt from MACT compliance requirements. Therefore, for 
purposes of the low-risk demonstration, we prefer to have emissions 
test data over emissions estimates when emissions test data can be 
reasonably obtained.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ To be considered low risk, the PCWP affected source must 
meet the following criteria: (1) The maximum off-site individual 
lifetime cancer risk at a location where people live is less than 
one in one million for carcinogenic chronic inhalation effects; (2) 
every maximum off-site target-organ specific hazard index (TOSHI) 
(or, alternatively, an appropriately site-specific set of hazard 
indices based on similar or complementary mechanisms of action that 
are reasonably likely to be additive at low dose or dose-response 
data for your affected source's HAP mixture) at a location where 
people live is less than or equal to 1.0 for noncarcinogenic chronic 
inhalation effects; and (3) the maximum off-site acute hazard 
quotients for acrolein and formaldehyde are less than or equal to 
1.0 for noncarcinogenic acute inhalation effects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We believe that it is feasible to perform emissions testing for the 
following types of PCWP process units: Fiberboard mat dryers (heated 
and cooling zones), green rotary dryers, hardboard ovens, press 
predryers, pressurized refiners, primary tube dryers, secondary tube 
dryers, reconstituted wood product board coolers, reconstituted wood 
product presses, softwood veneer dryers (heated zones), rotary strand 
dryers, conveyor strand dryers (all zones), dry rotary dryers, veneer 
redryers (heated by conventional means), hardwood veneer dryers (heated 
zones), rotary agricultural fiber dryers, agricultural fiber board 
presses, paddle-type particle dryers, agricultural fiberboard mat 
dryers, and atmospheric refiners. Therefore, emissions testing would 
continue to be required for all of the above listed process units. Most 
of the process units listed above have control or work practice 
requirements under subpart DDDD.
    We believe that emissions testing is not feasible for the following 
types of process units: Fiberboard mat dryers (fugitive emissions), 
softwood veneer dryer (cooling zones and fugitive emissions), hardwood 
veneer dryers (cooling zones), radio-frequency veneer redryers, 
softwood plywood presses, hardwood plywood presses, engineered wood 
products presses, humidifiers, formers, blenders, sanders, saws, fiber 
washers, chippers, log vats, lumber kilns, storage tanks, wastewater 
operations, stand-alone digesters, veneer kilns, particleboard press 
molds, and particleboard extruders. Some of these process units are 
vented primarily for dust control and reclaim of process materials, and 
their venting systems are not designed for flow measurement or 
measurement of organic gases. Some of the process units are not vented 
(i.e., are fugitive emissions sources) or are only partially vented. 
The configuration of these process units, in terms of how and if they 
vent to the atmosphere, varies significantly from plant to plant. 
Often, the emission points from these process units (where defined 
emission points exist) are not configured such that EPA Method 1 or EPA 
Method 2 (40 CFR part 60, appendix A) criteria for selection of 
sampling ports and measurement of gas velocity could be met. Emissions 
data are available from an extensive emissions testing program where 
testable units in several of the process unit groups were identified. 
These emissions data (along with other available data collected during 
NESHAP development) have been used to develop emission factors. Almost 
all of the test data were reviewed by industry experts. All the data, 
except the lumber kiln data, were reviewed by EPA, were available for 
the public to review at proposal, and were available for public review 
during EPA's AP-42 review process. (See legacy docket A-98-44, items 
titled ``Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42 Section 10.5, Plywood 
Manufacturing,'' ``Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42 Section 
10.6.3,'' ``Medium Density Fiberboard Manufacturing,'' ``Emission 
Factor Documentation for AP-42 Section 10.6.2,'' ``Particleboard 
Manufacturing,'' ``Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42 Section 
10.6.1,'' ``Waferboard/Oriented Strandboard Manufacturing,'' and 
``Documentation of Emission Factor Development for the Plywood and 
Composite Wood Products Manufacturing NESHAP.'') In addition, the 
lumber kiln data are now available in ``Procedures for Determining 
Emissions from Plywood and Composite Wood Products Process Units for 
Low-Risk Demonstrations.'' Therefore, as discussed later in this 
section, we are proposing to allow that emission factors be used to 
estimate emissions from the hard-to-test process units for purposes of 
the PCWP low-risk demonstrations. Other emissions estimation methods 
(e.g., engineering estimates) are proposed to be allowed for hard-to-
test process units for which no emission factors are available.
    Based on the available data, three types of process units 
(miscellaneous coating operations, softwood veneer dryer fugitive 
emissions, and log chipping operations) are hard to test but do not 
emit any of the HAP listed in appendix B to subpart DDDD. Thus, 
miscellaneous coating operations, softwood veneer dryer fugitive 
emissions, and log chipping operations would not need to be considered 
in the low-risk demonstration, under the proposed amendments.
    There may be additional ancillary PCWP process units for which no 
HAP data are available (e.g., log storage piles and material handling 
operations). Such processes are likely to be hard to test. No 
information is available to conclude that there are appendix B to 40 
CFR part 63 HAP emissions from other PCWP processes not mentioned 
elsewhere in today's proposed amendments. Nevertheless, in the event 
that there may be an additional HAP emissions source within the PCWP 
affected source that is not listed elsewhere in appendix B to subpart 
DDDD, a category of ``other ancillary processes that emit appendix B 
HAP emissions'' is proposed to be added to appendix B to subpart DDDD, 
and engineering estimates for all of the appendix B HAP would be 
allowed for such processes. We request comment (and emissions data, if 
available) regarding any PCWP emissions sources not listed in appendix 
B to subpart DDDD that are known to emit appendix B HAP emissions. It 
is not our intent to require quantification of emissions for ancillary 
processes that do not emit appendix B HAP. Our intent with the category 
of ``other ancillary processes that emit appendix B HAP emissions'' is 
to capture unique equipment (e.g., a one-of-a-kind dryer) that could 
reasonably be expected to emit appendix B HAP, but is not otherwise 
covered in the process unit definitions provided in subpart DDDD of 40 
CFR part 63 and appendix B to subpart DDDD. Therefore, we request 
comment on whether it would be appropriate to include a list of 
``insignificant

[[Page 44019]]

activities'' for purposes of appendix B to subpart DDDD. We also 
request comment on what activities should be included in such a list. 
Commenters may want to refer to a list of proposed insignificant 
activities in the docket which was submitted by AF&PA, titled 
``Proposed Categorical Insignificant Sources.''
    To incorporate emissions estimation procedures, our proposed 
amendment to appendix B to subpart DDDD would add a table (table 2A to 
appendix B to subpart DDDD) that states for each process unit whether 
emissions testing is required or emissions estimation is allowed for 
each of the appendix B HAP. If emissions estimates are allowed, then 
the proposed table 2A to appendix B to subpart DDDD would specify the 
emission factor (or other emissions estimation technique) to be used in 
developing the emissions estimates. Related text is proposed to be 
added to sections 5(a) and 5(k) of appendix B to subpart DDDD. Section 
6(a) of appendix B to subpart DDDD is also being amended to clarify 
that it applies when emissions estimation or testing is performed. We 
are proposing to add definitions of process units not already defined 
in subpart DDDD to section 15 of appendix B to subpart DDDD. In 
addition, we are proposing to add text to section 8(a)(3) of appendix B 
to subpart DDDD to specify that emissions estimate calculations must be 
submitted with the low-risk demonstration.
    Selection of Emissions Estimation Procedures. As mentioned 
previously, emission factors could be used under the proposed 
amendments to estimate emissions from most of the hard-to-test process 
units. To streamline completion and review of the low-risk 
demonstrations, our proposed amendment to appendix B to subpart DDDD 
specifies emission factors that are to be used in low-risk 
demonstrations. We are not proposing to allow facilities to choose 
their own emission factors (from AP-42 or elsewhere) because we believe 
we have the most extensive collection of PCWP HAP emissions data 
available and because additional time would be required for EPA to 
verify the emission factors selected for each process unit. The 
emission factors proposed to be included in appendix B to subpart DDDD 
are the maximum emission factors available for each type of process 
unit (i.e., the emission factor resulting from the highest emissions 
test). Use of the maximum emission factor builds conservatism into the 
emissions estimates to help account for unit-to-unit variability and 
ensures protection of human health. In addition, the maximum emission 
factor is available for all process units for which we have sufficient 
data. While we believe the maximum emission factor is the best 
statistical approach as explained above, we request comment on using 
other statistical approaches. Facilities approaching the limits of the 
low-risk criteria may refine their analysis of HAP emitted by 
reconfiguring their process unit, if possible, and conducting emissions 
testing.
    Estimation of emissions would be allowed for acetaldehyde, 
acrolein, formaldehyde, phenol, and benzene. In addition, estimation of 
methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI) emissions would be allowed for 
process units processing material containing MDI resin. Except for 
lumber kilns, estimation of HAP metals emissions is not necessary 
because the hard-to-test process units are heated by means other than 
direct firing (if heated at all). In some cases, a particular HAP 
listed on appendix B to subpart DDD was not detected in any emissions 
test run conducted for a process unit type. We are proposing that no 
emissions estimate be developed for HAP that have not been detected 
from a process unit group because the available emission factors are 
based on values equal to one-half of the method detection limit (MDL) 
and are of limited use. Engineering estimates are proposed in some 
cases where all of the data are non-detect but the available data sets 
are small, and it is reasonable to believe that a particular HAP could 
be emitted. In some cases, no applicable emission factor is available 
for certain HAP and process unit combinations where we expect the HAP 
could be detected (e.g., phenol from oriented strandboard (OSB) 
blenders and MDI from MDI blenders). We are proposing to accept 
engineering estimates based on information available to the facility in 
cases where no applicable emission factor is available for a HAP that 
may reasonably be expected to be emitted from a certain type of process 
unit.
    Our data base of emission factors does not include emission factors 
for lumber kilns. It is difficult to measure emissions from lumber 
kilns due to kiln air flow design, fugitive emissions, and the lengthy 
kiln batch cycle (e.g., 24 hours for softwood kilns, days for hardwood 
kilns). Therefore, little emissions test data are available for use in 
developing HAP emission factors for lumber kilns. Methods for 
quantifying lumber kiln flow rates vary from test to test. Most of the 
emissions test data that are available (generally total hydrocarbon 
(THC) data) contain calculated flow rates or other assumptions that 
bring the validity of the data into question. A few tests have been 
conducted on both small- and full-scale lumber kilns to determine 
emissions of HAP (generally formaldehyde and methanol). We reviewed 
available information on lumber kiln emissions and selected the maximum 
emission factors of HAP listed in appendix B to subpart DDDD from the 
literature. Today, we are proposing these emission factors for purposes 
of estimating lumber kiln emissions for the low-risk demonstration. 
Engineering estimates of HAP metals emissions are proposed for direct-
fired lumber kilns. While emissions testing of full-scale lumber kilns 
has proven to be very difficult, studies have shown that testing of 
small-scale lumber kilns can be used to reasonably approximate 
emissions from full-scale lumber kilns if representative lumber samples 
are dried and the venting characteristics of the small-scale kiln mimic 
those of the full-scale kiln. Several U.S. universities and private 
laboratories operate small-scale kilns. To approximate emissions from 
full-scale kilns, a representative sample of lumber is taken from the 
full-scale kiln facility, packaged to prevent moisture loss, and 
shipped to the location of the small-scale kiln where the full-scale 
kiln's drying cycle (e.g., time and temperatures) is mirrored during 
emissions testing. Small-scale kilns are designed for more accurate air 
flow measurement and are less costly to test. In addition to proposing 
emission factor estimates based on the available information, we 
request comment on whether it would be appropriate to allow facilities 
to commission emissions testing at a representative small-scale lumber 
kiln for purposes of the low-risk demonstration. We also request 
comment on any standard procedures for submitting lumber samples and 
conducting small-scale kiln emissions testing that should be 
incorporated into or referenced by appendix B to subpart DDDD. When 
submitting comments on standard procedures, please refer to a document 
in the docket entitled ``Considerations for a Small-scale Kiln Emission 
Testing Program.''
    Emission factors are not available for PCWP resin storage tanks and 
PCWP wastewater/process water operations. For resin storage tanks, we 
are proposing to specify in appendix B to subpart DDDD that facilities 
may apply the maximum emissions estimates reported in our MACT survey 
responses for each tank (depending on the tank contents). We are 
proposing to specify that facilities generate engineering estimates of 
appendix B HAP emissions

[[Page 44020]]

from wastewater/process water operations. Alternatively, we have 
developed computer models for estimating emissions from storage tanks 
(TANKS) and wastewater/process water operations (WATER9). Both models 
are available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/software/index.html. The 
proposed amendments to appendix B to subpart DDDD allow facilities to 
use these models to develop more refined estimates of emissions from 
resin storage tanks and wastewater/process water operations. We also 
request comment on other methods that could be used in appendix B to 
subpart DDDD to quantify emissions from wastewater/process water 
operations, such as the approach outlined in forms VII and VIII of 
appendix C to 40 CFR part 63 and described further with respect to the 
PCWP industry in the supporting information for today's proposed 
amendments.
    Application of Emissions Estimation Procedures. To apply emission 
factors, facilities would need the emission factor (in terms of pounds 
of HAP per process unit throughput) supplied in appendix B to subpart 
DDDD and their site-specific process unit throughput. None of the hard-
to-test process units are equipped with HAP control devices; therefore, 
control efficiency is not a variable in the emission factor estimates 
for low-risk demonstrations. Facilities may also use process unit 
throughput or other parameters in their engineering estimates allowed 
where emission factors were not available.
    Process unit throughput could be based on process unit capacity or 
actual throughput. Section 11 of appendix B to subpart DDDD requires 
facilities to incorporate parameters that define the affected source as 
part of the low-risk subcategory (including production rate) as 
federally enforceable limits in their title V permits. Furthermore, 
according to section 13(a) of appendix B to subpart DDDD, facilities 
must certify with their ongoing title V certifications that the basis 
for their low-risk demonstrations have not changed (including any 
process changes that would increase HAP emissions, such as a production 
rate increase). Given these requirements, we are proposing to allow 
facilities to use the process unit throughput that they wish to 
incorporate into their title V permit in their emissions estimates for 
the low-risk demonstration. We decided not to mandate use of process 
unit capacity for the emissions estimations in order to give facilities 
the flexibility to choose a federally enforceable permit limit on their 
production rate should they wish to minimize emissions by limiting 
production.
    Some PCWP process units have multiple emissions points of varying 
height. For purposes of the low-risk demonstration, it is necessary to 
have an emission rate and emissions release parameters (e.g., stack 
height) associated with each emission point. Thus, we are proposing 
that emissions estimates developed for process units with multiple 
emission points be divided evenly across the emission points. For 
example, emissions estimated for a softwood plywood press with four 
vents would be divided by four, with one-fourth of the estimated 
emissions being assigned to each press vent. We are also proposing 
minor changes to the wording throughout appendix B to subpart DDDD to 
clarify that individual emission points are to be considered 
separately.
    Acrolein and Benzene Testing Requirements. As promulgated, appendix 
B to subpart DDDD allows a process unit to be excluded from the testing 
requirements for benzene and acrolein for purposes of the low-risk 
demonstration when EPA determines it will not emit detectable amounts 
of benzene or acrolein, respectively (see footnote 1 to table 2 to 
appendix B to subpart DDDD, as promulgated). We evaluated the available 
acrolein and benzene data for those process units that must be tested 
for purposes of the low-risk demonstration (i.e., process units for 
which emissions estimation is not allowed). The results of our review 
are included in proposed table 2a to appendix B to subpart DDDD. 
Because our review is complete and the results available, we are 
proposing to delete footnote 1 to table 2 to appendix B to subpart 
DDDD.
    Determining MDI Emissions. At promulgation, appendix B to subpart 
DDDD specified that MDI emissions testing need only be conducted for 
presses processing board containing MDI resin. To date, the only MDI 
emissions data available is for presses processing board formed using 
MDI resin. However, upon further consideration of the potential for MDI 
emissions, we note that there may be other, less common process units 
processing materials containing MDI resin. Table 2A, proposed to be 
added to appendix B to subpart DDDD, specifies that emissions testing 
must be performed for primary and secondary tube dryers, reconstituted 
wood products presses and board coolers, and agricultural fiber presses 
if material containing MDI resin is processed. We are proposing to 
require engineering estimates of MDI emissions for OSB, particleboard, 
and medium density fiberboard (MDF) blending and forming operations, 
finishing sanders and saws, and I-joist curing chambers that process 
material containing MDI resin. We are also proposing to require 
estimates of MDI emissions from MDI resin storage tanks.
2. Emission Testing Requirements
    Stakeholders noted the resource burden associated with the 
emissions testing requirements in appendix B to subpart DDDD and 
suggested several ways the burden may be reduced without sacrificing 
details necessary to ensure that the low-risk demonstration is health-
protective. As a result of some of these suggestions, and in addition 
to our proposal to allow emissions estimation procedures for several 
process units (discussed previously in this preamble), we are proposing 
to amend some aspects of the emissions testing requirements in appendix 
B to subpart DDDD.
    First, stakeholders suggested that only one of multiple identical 
dryers at a facility would need to be tested (e.g., only one of three 
identical veneer dryers) and that the emissions data from the dryer 
tested could be applied to the other identical dryers. This change 
would decrease the number of emissions tests required without 
significantly affecting the quality of the emissions determination. 
After reviewing emissions data gathered at nearly the same time from 
multiple similar PCWP process units at a plant site, we agree that this 
approach would be sufficient for purposes of the PCWP low-risk 
demonstration. We are proposing to amend appendix B to subpart DDDD to 
allow application of test results from one process unit to other 
similar process units at the same plant site, provided that certain 
conditions are met. Facilities would be required to explain how the 
process units are similar in terms of design, function, heating method, 
raw materials processed, residence time, change in material moisture 
content, operating temperature, resin type processed, and any other 
parameters that may affect emissions. To account for minor variations 
in process parameters, facilities would be required to explain and test 
the process unit that would be expected to have the greatest emissions 
(e.g., the unit with a slightly (5 to 10 percent) higher temperature 
set point, dryer processing furnish with slightly higher inlet moisture 
content, press processing thicker panels, process unit with the greater 
throughput, etc.). Also, if the process units have different throughput 
rates, then facilities must convert the emissions test results to terms 
of pounds of HAP per unit

[[Page 44021]]

throughput prior to applying the emissions test data to other similar 
process units.
    Second, stakeholders requested that we allow HAP data collected 
from previous emissions tests to be used for purposes of the low-risk 
demonstration. Allowing use of previous emissions test results would 
decrease the number of emissions tests required without significantly 
affecting the quality of the emissions determination. Thus, we are 
proposing to amend appendix B to subpart DDDD to allow use of previous 
emissions test results, provided that certain conditions are met. The 
emissions tests must have been conducted using the test methods and 
procedures specified in appendix B to subpart DDDD. Previous emissions 
test results obtained using the former NCASI Method IM/CAN/WP-99.01 are 
acceptable. Also, the process units for which previous emissions test 
data are used currently must be operated in the same manner (e.g., with 
the same raw materials, same operating temperature, etc.) as during the 
previous emissions tests, and the process units may not have been 
modified such that emissions would be expected to differ 
(notwithstanding normal test-to-test variability) from the previous 
emissions tests.
    Third, stakeholders requested that NCASI Method IM/CAN/WP-99.02 be 
listed in appendix B to subpart DDDD for measurement of benzene as well 
as for measurement of acetaldehyde, acrolein, formaldehyde, and phenol. 
Following proposal of the PCWP rule, commenters requested that we 
replace references to NCASI Method IM/CAN/WP-99.01 in subpart DDDD of 
40 CFR part 63 (for measurement of acetaldehyde, acrolein, 
formaldehyde, methanol, phenol, and propionaldehyde) with the revised 
version of the same method (NCASI Method IM/CAN/WP-99.02). We reviewed 
NCASI Method IM/CAN/WP-99.02 for applicability with respect to the six 
HAP named in subpart DDDD and concluded that NCASI Method IM/CAN/WP-
99.02 was appropriate for measurement of these six HAP. Prior to 
promulgation, we did not review NCASI Method IM/CAN/WP-99.02 with 
respect to benzene, and, therefore, we did not list it in appendix B to 
subpart DDDD as an applicable method for measurement of benzene. Upon 
further review of the method, we agree that it is appropriate for 
measurement of benzene, and we are proposing to amend appendix B to 
subpart DDDD to allow use of NCASI Method IM/CAN/WP-99.02 for benzene 
measurement. Stakeholders also requested that EPA Method 18 (40 CFR 
part 60, appendix A) be included in appendix B to subpart DDDD for 
benzene measurement, and they expressed concern about using Fourier 
Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy for benzene. We agree that EPA 
Method 18 is appropriate for measurement of benzene. We are proposing 
to add Method 18 to appendix B to subpart DDDD. We request comment on 
the applicability of FTIR for measurement of benzene and the other HAP 
listed in appendix B to subpart DDDD. In addition, as stated 
previously, we are proposing to incorporate by reference NCASI Method 
ISS/FP-A105.01 (following EPA approval of the method) into appendix B 
to subpart DDDD to provide another option for measurement of 
acetaldehyde, acrolein, formaldehyde, and phenol.
    Fourth, stakeholders recommended changes to appendix B to subpart 
DDDD regarding treatment of nondetect data gathered using EPA Method 29 
(40 CFR part 60, appendix A). As promulgated, appendix B to subpart 
DDDD allows Method 29 nondetect measurements to be treated as zero if 
the samples are analyzed using atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS). 
Otherwise, nondetect data for individual HAP must be treated as one-
half of the method detection limit. Stakeholders pointed out that 
laboratory methods other than AAS can achieve method detection limits 
equal to or lower than those obtained with AAS and requested that zero 
be assigned to non-detect measurements analyzed by these other 
laboratory methods. Thus, we are proposing to amend appendix B to 
subpart DDDD to state that zero may be used for Method 29 non-detect 
measurements if the samples are analyzed using AAS or another 
laboratory method specified in Method 29 with detection limits lower 
than or equal to the AAS detection limits.
    Lastly, stakeholders stated that HAP metals emissions testing is 
not necessary for direct-fired process units using only natural gas. 
The vast majority of PCWP direct-fired process units are fired with 
either wood or natural gas. A small number of PCWP direct-fired process 
units are fired with other fuels. Natural gas, or less commonly, 
propane, is often used as a backup or auxiliary fuel. Although we 
believe it is possible that HAP metals emissions could originate from 
combustion in direct wood-fired process units, we agree that measurable 
emissions of HAP metals would not be expected from natural gas-fired 
process units. We also would not expect measurable HAP metals emissions 
from process units direct-fired with propane. Therefore, we are 
proposing to amend appendix B to subpart DDDD to exclude process units 
direct-fired with only natural gas or propane from the HAP metals 
testing requirements. We would continue to require HAP metals testing 
for process units direct-fired using wood, other fuels, or a 
combination of natural gas (or propane) and wood or other fuels. For 
clarity, we are also proposing to add definitions of ``natural gas'' 
and ``propane'' to appendix B to subpart DDDD.
    Stakeholders further suggested that we allow a fuel analysis 
approach similar to that in the Boilers/Process Heaters final rule (40 
CFR part 63, subpart DDDDD) as an alternative to HAP metals testing. 
The fuel analysis method described in the Boilers/Process Heaters final 
rule allows affected sources to demonstrate compliance with the total 
selected metals (TSM) emissions limit using fuel analysis if the 90th 
percentile confidence level of metals concentration in the fuel is less 
than the emissions limit (see 69 FR 55218, September 13, 2004). The 
specific requirements for conducting a fuel analysis are presented in 
sections 63.7521 and 63.7530(d)(1), (2), and (4) of the Boilers/Process 
Heaters final rule. We request comment on the appropriateness of 
providing a fuel analysis alternative to HAP metals testing for direct-
fired process units that use fuels other than natural gas and propane.
3. Calculation of Average Stack Height
    The look-up table analysis described in appendix B to subpart DDDD 
relies on calculation of average stack height. There are some near-
ground-level emission points at PCWP facilities. The near-ground-level 
emission points generally contain small amounts of HAP as compared to 
higher-level emission points. Stakeholders have expressed concern that 
inclusion of numerous near-ground-level emission points in the average 
stack height calculation would unreasonably lower the average stack 
height to be used in the look-up tables. As a result, we are proposing 
to amend appendix B to subpart DDDD to incorporate weighted-average 
stack height calculations for use in the carcinogen and non-carcinogen 
look-up tables. We are proposing to add two equations to section 6(a) 
of appendix B to subpart DDDD. The weighted-average stack heights would 
be based on the toxicity-weighted carcinogen emission rate (TWCER) and 
toxicity-weighted non-carcinogen emission rate (TWNER). Separate 
weighted-average stack heights, the carcinogen weighted-

[[Page 44022]]

average stack height (WAHC) and non-carcinogen weighted-average stack 
height (WAHN), would be developed for use in the carcinogen and non-
carcinogen look-up tables, respectively. The weighted-average stack 
height would be minimally affected by emission points with toxicity-
weighted emission rates that are low relative to the total toxicity-
weighted emission rate at the source. The weighted-average stack height 
will usually be higher than the stack height calculated using a 
straight average (as promulgated), except in unlikely cases where the 
higher-emitting sources are closer to the ground than the lower-
emitting sources. If the higher-emitting sources are closer to the 
ground, then the weighted-average stack height will be lower (i.e., 
more conservative) than a straight average (as promulgated). We believe 
that use of a weighted-average stack height calculation will result in 
a more accurate picture of the potential risk from an affected source 
than a straight average.
4. Permit and Timing Issues
    Date for New Sources To Submit Low-risk Demonstrations. Section 
10(c) of appendix B to subpart DDDD requires new or reconstructed 
affected sources to conduct emissions tests upon initial startup and to 
use the results of these emissions tests to complete and submit the 
low-risk demonstration within 180 days following the initial startup 
date. While this schedule is appropriate for new or reconstructed 
sources starting up after the effective date, it is not feasible for 
new or reconstructed sources starting up prior to the effective date 
because these sources could not have known what the testing 
requirements were for the low-risk demonstration. Therefore, we are 
proposing to amend section 10(c) to state that new or reconstructed 
sources must conduct emissions tests by the effective date or upon 
initial startup, whichever is later. We are also proposing to amend 
section 10(c) to state that new or reconstructed sources must submit 
their low-risk demonstration within 180 days following the effective 
date or initial startup date, whichever is later.
    Date for Existing Sources To Submit Low-risk Demonstrations. 
Section 10(a) of appendix B to subpart DDDD requires existing sources 
to complete and submit their low-risk demonstrations no later than July 
31, 2006. We are proposing to change the submittal date to April 1, 
2007.
    We understand that proposing to extend the deadline for sources to 
submit low-risk demonstrations may have implications for other 
deadlines under the PCWP rule. For example, in cases where we 
disapprove a source's timely-submitted demonstration, a source may have 
little remaining time to install any controls needed to comply with 
MACT. Therefore, we seek comment on whether to extend the MACT 
compliance date by some period of time such as six months to one year 
for sources whose low-risk demonstrations we disapprove or for all PCWP 
sources.
    Timing of Title V Permit Revisions. To become part of the low-risk 
subcategory, section 11 of appendix B to subpart DDDD requires 
facilities to obtain: (1) EPA approval of their low-risk 
demonstrations, and (2) title V permit revisions including terms and 
conditions reflecting the parameters used in their approved 
demonstrations, according to the schedules in their applicable 40 CFR 
part 70 or 40 CFR part 71 title V permit programs. Unless and until EPA 
finds that these criteria are met, a facility is subject to the 
applicable compliance options, operating requirements, and work 
practice requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD. Thus, low-risk 
facilities wishing to avoid MACT applicability must meet the criteria 
for becoming part of the low-risk subcategory before the MACT 
compliance date. There has been some confusion and concern regarding 
the timing of the required title V permit revisions. Stakeholders 
expressed concern that some permitting authorities may be unable to 
approve title V permit revisions before the MACT compliance date. 
According to appendix B to subpart DDDD, as promulgated, low-risk 
demonstrations for existing sources are due to EPA 14 months prior to 
the MACT compliance date. Facilities would apply for permit revisions 
following EPA approval of their low-risk demonstration, leaving a year 
or less for permitting authorities to approve the permit revision.
    In the final appendix B to subpart DDDD (section 11(b)), we 
included the statement ``You must submit an application for a 
significant permit modification to reopen your title V permit to 
incorporate such terms and conditions according to the procedures and 
schedules of 40 CFR part 71 or the EPA-approved program in effect under 
40 CFR part 70, as applicable.'' With this language, we intended to 
consider an application for permit revision submitted prior to the MACT 
compliance date sufficient for meeting the requirement applicable to 
the source to initiate action to revise the title V permit to 
incorporate the parameters that rendered the facility part of the low-
risk subcategory. To clarify that it is sufficient to have submitted an 
application for a permit revision, we are proposing to amend section 
11(b) of appendix B to subpart DDDD to state that the parameters that 
define your affected source as part of the low-risk subcategory must be 
submitted for incorporation as federally enforceable terms and 
conditions into your title V permit. We are also retaining the sentence 
quoted above from section 11(b) of appendix B to subpart DDDD.
5. Using Preliminary Data in the Low-Risk Demonstration
    Industry stakeholders requested that EPA allow facilities to submit 
low-risk demonstrations based on proposed physical changes to emission 
points. A facility would not be required to install controls, make 
stack modifications, or make other modifications prior to approval of 
the low-risk demonstration. All changes would have to be completed for 
the facility to become part of the low-risk subcategory. In addition, 
we would require facilities to verify that emissions do not exceed the 
emission factor calculations presented in the low-risk demonstration by 
conducting emissions tests. The facility would then submit 
documentation to EPA that the physical changes and emissions tests were 
completed. Allowing facilities to complete physical changes after 
getting approval of the low-risk demonstration would not diminish the 
accuracy of the risk assessment. However, it will provide facilities 
some assurance that their low-risk demonstration will be approved 
before they embark on costly equipment reconfiguration, and it will 
allow more time to make the changes. We request comment on this 
approach.
    The industry stakeholders also requested that for emission points 
that require emissions testing, facilities have the option of using 
emission factors in their low-risk demonstrations, pending subsequent 
verification. The facility could choose to submit their low-risk 
demonstration earlier than required and receive feedback on its 
approvability from EPA before conducting emissions tests. The facility 
would then verify the results of the low-risk demonstration by 
performing emissions tests and submitting them to EPA for review and 
approval no later than the date low-risk submittals are due and prior 
to becoming part of the low-risk subcategory. Allowing the use of 
emission factors in the low-risk demonstrations would allow facilities 
the opportunity to use the alternatives to emissions testing included 
in today's proposed amendments; save facilities the cost of emissions 
testing should their risk assessment not be approved by

[[Page 44023]]

EPA; and allow facilities more time to complete emissions testing. If 
the emissions tests do not support the low-risk demonstration, the 
facility cannot become part of the low-risk subcategory. We request 
comment on this approach.

C. Other Amendments to the Rule

    In addition to the proposed changes to address issues raised by 
stakeholders, we are proposing other changes to clarify requirements 
and correct errors.
1. Unscheduled Startups and Shutdowns
    Section 63.2250(a) of subpart DDDD, as promulgated, stated that ``* 
* * The compliance options, operating requirements, and work practice 
requirements do not apply during times when the process unit(s) subject 
to the compliance options, operating requirements, and work practice 
requirements are not operating, or during scheduled startup and 
shutdown periods, and during malfunctions. These startup and shutdown 
periods must not exceed the minimum amount of time necessary for these 
events.'' This language has resulted in confusion about applicability 
of the rule requirements during unscheduled startup and shutdown 
periods. Unscheduled startups and shutdowns resulting from malfunction 
events were always intended to be allowed as part of the startup, 
shutdown, and malfunction plan (SSM plan) (see discussions in 2.8.3.2 
and 2.8.3.5 of the ``National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants for Plywood and Composite Wood Products Manufacturing--
Background Information for Final Standards''). With this proposed 
amendment, we are clarifying our intent that the rule requirements do 
not apply during unscheduled startups and shutdowns covered under the 
SSM plan. We are proposing to amend the language in Sec.  63.2250(a) 
accordingly.
2. Numbering in Appendix A to Subpart DDDD
    As promulgated, section 10 of appendix A to subpart DDDD (the 
tracer gas method for measuring capture efficiency) contained two 
sections numbered 10.4. We are proposing to correct this error by 
renumbering the second section 10.5.
3. Website Address for ``Air Toxics Risk Assessment Reference Library''
    As promulgated, section 7(a) of appendix B to subpart DDDD stated 
that the ``Air Toxics Risk Assessment Reference Library'' was available 
from http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw. However, the document is located at a 
different Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/fera/risk_atra_main.html. 
We are proposing to correct the Web site address in section 7(a) of 
appendix B to subpart DDDD.
4. Lookup Table Units of Measure
    As promulgated, tables 3 and 4 to appendix B of subpart DDDD (the 
lookup tables for carcinogenic and noncarcinogenic effects, 
respectively) contained footnotes stating the units of measure to which 
the values in the lookup tables were normalized. These footnotes have 
been a source of confusion and are not needed, given that the units are 
included in the table titles. Therefore, we are proposing to remove the 
footnotes relating to units of measure from tables 3 and 4 of appendix 
B to subpart DDDD.
5. Lookup Table Reference to ``Property Boundary''
    As promulgated, table 3 to appendix B to subpart DDDD referred to 
the ``distance to nearest residence.'' However, like table 4 to 
appendix B to subpart DDDD, table 3 should refer to the ``distance to 
property boundary.'' We are proposing to correct this error so that 
table 3 to appendix B to subpart DDDD also refers to ``distance to 
property boundary.''
6. Numbering in Section 63.2269(c)
    Section 63.2269(c), as promulgated, stated that for wood moisture 
monitoring, ``you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1), (2), 
(4) and (5) and paragraphs (c)(1) through (4) of this section.'' 
However, section 63.2269(a) has only three paragraphs. We are proposing 
to correct this error by amending section 63.2269(c) so that the 
paragraphs in section 63.2269(a) are referenced correctly and to 
include reference to section 63.2269(c)(5).

V. Additional Clarifications

A. Integrated Drying Systems Where Combustion Units That Heat the 
Dryers Are Used as Control Devices

    There has been some confusion regarding applicability of the final 
PCWP and Boilers/Process Heaters rules to integrated drying systems 
where a combustion unit provides indirect heat to the dryers and also 
serves as the control device for the dryers. In these systems, exhaust 
from a large combustion unit is used to indirectly heat ambient air or 
generate steam (to be used as heat for the dryers) and to provide 
indirect heat for other operations (e.g., to generate steam or heat hot 
oil for the press). After these indirect heat exchanges, the exhaust 
from the combustion unit is emitted to the atmosphere through a 
particulate control device. The dryer exhaust is routed to the 
combustion unit for emissions control.
    The final Boilers/Process Heaters rule states that any boiler or 
process heater specifically listed as an affected source in another 
standard under 40 CFR part 63 is not subject to the Boilers/Process 
Heaters rule (see section 63.7491(l)). The Boilers/Process Heaters rule 
does not exclude boilers and process heaters that are used as control 
devices unless they are specifically considered part of another 
NESHAP's definition of affected source. (See 69 FR 55230, September 13, 
2004.) We received questions regarding whether combustion units in 
integrated drying systems (described previously in this section) are 
part of the PCWP affected source. The definition of ``affected source'' 
in the PCWP final rule does not mention combustion units used as 
control devices. As stated previously, there are combustion units that 
can be part of the PCWP affected source and also be Boilers/Process 
Heaters affected sources. Combustion units in integrated drying systems 
(as described in this section) are part of the Boilers/Process Heaters 
affected source because they meet the definition of ``process heater'' 
in the Boilers/Process Heaters final rule in that they ``* * * transfer 
heat indirectly to a process material (liquid, gas, or solid) or to a 
heat transfer material for use in a process unit * * *''

B. Applicability of the PCWP Rule to Hot Pressing of Veneers Onto a 
Substrate

    We received several questions regarding applicability of the PCWP 
final rule to operations where hardwood or softwood veneer is hot-
pressed with resin onto a substrate (such as lumber, particleboard, 
MDF, etc.) to form a panel product. Such operations may be located at 
facilities that are major sources because they produce other products 
(e.g., furniture). The definition of ``plywood'' in the final PCWP rule 
is as follows: ``Plywood means a panel product consisting of layers of 
wood veneers hot pressed together with resin. Plywood includes panel 
products made by hot pressing (with resin) veneers to a substrate such 
as particleboard, medium density fiberboard, or lumber.'' Thus, the 
pressing operation described above is considered to be plywood 
manufacturing according to the definition of ``plywood.'' However, 
there are no control requirements or work practice requirements for 
plywood pressing operations in the final PCWP rule. Thus, facilities 
hot pressing products that meet the definition of plywood in the final 
rule (but have no

[[Page 44024]]

other operations subject to the control, work practice, or operating 
requirements in the final PCWP rule) need only to submit an initial 
notification stating that they have no equipment subject to the rule 
(as discussed earlier in this preamble).

C. Applicability of the PCWP Rule to Lumber Kilns Drying Utility Poles

    As discussed in the preamble to the final PCWP rule, (69 FR 45948 
and 45962) the PCWP affected source includes lumber kilns located at 
any type of facility, regardless of whether the facility manufactures 
PCWP. We determined that MACT for lumber kilns is no emission 
reduction. Therefore, the only requirements in the PCWP final rule for 
major source facilities with no PCWP process units other than lumber 
kilns is to submit an initial notification.
    Following promulgation of the PCWP rule, we received questions 
regarding applicability of subpart DDDD of 40 CFR part 63 to lumber 
kilns used to dry utility poles. We believe that there may be a number 
of facilities that dry utility poles in lumber kilns, that the 
operations are similar to other lumber kiln operations, and that they 
are part of the PCWP affected source. However, because drying of 
utility poles in lumber kilns was not considered prior to promulgation 
of the PCWP rule, we request comment and data to support a 
determination of whether the PCWP rule should include drying of utility 
poles in lumber kilns.
    Specifically, we request comment on the physical and operational 
similarities and differences in lumber kilns used to dry sawn lumber 
and utility poles in terms of kiln design, wood moisture content, 
drying temperatures, and emissions characteristics. We also request 
comment on whether the final PCWP rule should be amended to include a 
definition of ``lumber,'' to be used with the definition of ``lumber 
kiln'' in the final rule, and if so, suggestions for a definition of 
``lumber.'' For example, one broad definition of lumber could be: 
``Lumber'' means green (undried) timber sawed or split into planks or 
boards, green timber cut or sanded into wood components, and green 
timber processed for use as utility poles).

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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 a ``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 entitlement, 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 today's proposed amendments are a ``significant 
regulatory action'' because they raise novel legal or policy issues. As 
such, the proposed amendments were submitted to OMB for review under 
Executive Order 12866. Changes made in response to OMB suggestions or 
recommendations are documented in the public record (see ADDRESSES 
section of this preamble).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden. 
We are not proposing any new paperwork (e.g., monitoring, reporting, 
recordkeeping) as part of today's notice. With this action we are 
seeking additional comments on some of the provisions finalized in the 
July 2004 Federal Register Notice (69 FR 45943). However, OMB has 
previously approved the information collection requirements contained 
in the existing regulations (40 CFR part 63) under the provisions of 
the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., and has assigned 
OMB control number 2060-0552, EPA ICR number 1984.02. A copy of the OMB 
approved Information Collection Request (ICR) may be obtained from 
Susan Auby, Collection Strategies Division; EPA (2822T); 1200 
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460 or by calling (202) 566-
1672.
    Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources 
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or 
provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time 
needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize 
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and 
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to 
comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; 
train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; 
search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; 
and transmit or otherwise disclose the information.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an agency to 
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice 
and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedure 
Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the rule will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit 
enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's proposed 
amendments on small entities, a small entity is defined as: (1) A small 
business having no more than 500 to 750 employees, depending on the 
business' NAICS code; (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 that is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed 
amendments on small entities, I certify that the proposed amendments 
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities.
    In determining whether a rule has a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern is any 
significant adverse economic impact on small entities, since the 
primary purpose of the regulatory flexibility analyses is to identify 
and address regulatory alternatives ``which minimize any significant 
economic impact of the rule on small entities.'' 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if the rule 
relieves regulatory

[[Page 44025]]

burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect on all of the small 
entities subject to the rule. Today's proposed amendments significantly 
reduce the number of emissions tests (and costs associated with these 
tests) required for facilities to demonstrate that they are part of the 
low-risk subcategory. We continue to be interested in the potential 
impacts of the proposed amendments on small entities and welcome 
comments on issues related to such impacts.

D. 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, including tribal governments, it must have developed, 
under section 203 of the UMRA, a small government agency plan. The plan 
must provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, 
enabling officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and 
timely input in the development of EPA's regulatory proposals with 
significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, 
educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the 
regulatory requirements.
    EPA has determined that today's proposed amendments do not contain 
a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or 
more for State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the 
private sector in any 1 year. Although the final rule had annualized 
costs estimated to range from $74 to $140 million (depending on the 
number of facilities eventually demonstrating eligibility for the low-
risk subcategory), the proposed amendments do not add new requirements 
that would increase this cost. Thus, today's proposed amendments are 
not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. In 
addition, EPA has determined that the proposed amendments do not 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments because they contain 
no requirements that apply to such governments or impose obligations 
upon them. Therefore, today's proposed amendments are not subject to 
section 203 of the UMRA.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132 (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'' are defined in the Executive Order to include 
regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on the States, on 
the relationship between the national government and the States, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels 
of government.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a 
regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless 
the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct 
compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation 
that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless it 
consults with State and local officials early in the process of 
developing the proposed regulation.
    If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13132 requires EPA 
to provide to OMB, in a separately identified section of the preamble 
to the rule, a federalism summary impact statement (FSIS). The FSIS 
must include a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation 
with State and local officials, a summary of the nature of their 
concerns and EPA's position supporting the need to issue the 
regulation, and a statement of the extent to which the concerns of 
State and local officials have been met. Also, when EPA transmits a 
draft final rule with federalism implications to OMB for review 
pursuant to Executive Order 12866, 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 proposed amendments do not have federalism implications. 
They will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the 
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. None of the affected 
facilities are owned or operated by State governments, and the 
requirements of the proposed amendments will not supersede State 
regulations that are more stringent. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does 
not apply to today's proposed amendments.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Executive Order 13175 (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'' are 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 
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal government and Indian tribes.''
    Today's proposed amendments do not have tribal implications. They 
will not have substantial direct effects on tribal governments, on the 
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
government and Indian tribes, as specified in Executive Order 13175. No 
affected facilities are owned or operated by Indian tribal governments. 
Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to today's proposed 
amendments.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant,'' as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental 
health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a

[[Page 44026]]

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.
    Today's proposed amendments are not subject to the Executive Order 
because EPA does not believe that the environmental health or safety 
risks associated with the emissions addressed by the proposed 
amendments present a disproportionate risk to children. The noncancer 
human health toxicity values we used in our analysis at promulgation 
(e.g., reference concentrations) are protective of sensitive 
subpopulations, including children. In addition, for purposes of this 
rulemaking, EPA has not determined that any of the pollutants in 
question has the potential for a disproportionate impact on predicted 
cancer risks due to early-life exposure.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) provides that 
agencies shall prepare and submit to the Administrator of the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, a 
Statement of Energy Effects for certain actions identified as 
``significant energy actions.'' Section 4(b) of Executive Order 13211 
defines ``significant energy actions'' as ``any action by an agency 
(normally published in the Federal Register) that promulgates or is 
expected to lead to the promulgation of a final rule or regulation, 
including notices of inquiry, advance notices of proposed rulemaking, 
and notices of proposed rulemaking: (1)(i) That is a significant 
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 or any successor order, 
and (ii) is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, 
distribution, or use of energy; or (2) that is designated by the 
Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a 
significant energy action.'' Today's proposed amendments are not a 
``significant energy action'' as defined in Executive Order 13211 (66 
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because they are not likely to have a 
significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of 
energy. Further, we have concluded that today's proposed amendments are 
not likely to have any adverse energy effects.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-113, Section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272 
note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in their 
regulatory and procurement activities unless to do so would be 
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary 
consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials 
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, business practices) 
developed or adopted by one or more voluntary consensus bodies. The 
NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through annual reports to the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), with explanations when an agency 
does not use available and applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    These amendments involve a technical standard. EPA cites the 
following standard in this rulemaking: National Council for Air and 
Stream Improvement, Inc. (NCASI), draft method ISS/FP-A105.01 (2/05), 
``Impinger Source Sampling Method for Aldehydes, Ketones, And Polar 
Compounds.''
    Consistent with the NTTAA, EPA conducted searches to identify 
voluntary consensus standards in addition to this method. One voluntary 
consensus standard was found that is potentially applicable to the 
NCASI method. This standard is not acceptable as an alternative to the 
NCASI method, for the reasons stated below.
    The German standard VDI 3862 (12/00), ``Gaseous Emission 
Measurement-Measurement of Aliphatic and Aromatic Aldehydes and Ketones 
by 2,4-Dinitrophenyhydrazine (DNPH) Impinger Method,'' is a good 
impinger method for the sampling and analysis of aldehydes and ketones 
that includes the use of an external standard, field and analytical 
blanks, and repeatability tests. However, the VDI method is missing 
some key quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures that are 
included in the NCASI method. Specifically, VDI 3862 (12/00) is missing 
the use of internal standards, matrix spikes, and surrogate standards 
in the analytical step, as well as a duplicate sample run requirement, 
and sampling train QA/QC samples such as field, run, and sampling train 
spikes. Therefore, this VDI method, as written, is not acceptable as an 
alternative to the draft NCASI method for the purposes of this rule 
amendment.
    Table 4 to subpart DDDD of 40 CFR part 63 and table 2B to appendix 
B to subpart DDDD of 40 CFR part 63 in this amendment list the testing 
method included in the regulation. Under Sec. Sec.  63.7(f) and 63.8(f) 
of subpart A of the General Provisions, a source may apply to EPA for 
permission to use alternative test methods or alternative monitoring 
requirements in place of any required testing methods, performance 
specifications, or procedures.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 63

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

    Dated: July 18, 2005.
Stephen L. Johnson,
Administrator.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I, part 
63 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended as 
follows:

PART 63--[AMENDED]

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

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

Subpart A--[Amended]

    2. Section 63.14 is amended by adding paragraph (f)(4) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  63.14  Incorporation by reference.

* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (4) NCASI Method ISS/FP-A105.01, Impinger Source Sampling Method 
for Selected Aldehydes, Ketones, and Polar Compounds, 2005, NCASI, 
Research Triangle Park, NC, IBR proposed to be approved for table 4 to 
subpart DDDD of this part and appendix B to subpart DDDD of this part.
* * * * *

Subpart DDDD--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants: Plywood and Composite Wood Products

    3. Revise paragraph (b) of Sec.  63.2232 to read as follows:


Sec.  63.2232  What parts of my plant does this subpart cover?

* * * * *
    (b) The affected source is the collection of dryers, refiners, 
blenders, formers, presses, board coolers, and other process units 
associated with the manufacturing of plywood and composite wood 
products. The affected source includes, but is not limited to, green 
end operations, refining, drying

[[Page 44027]]

operations (including any combustion unit exhaust stream routinely used 
to direct fire process unit(s)), resin preparation, blending and 
forming operations, pressing and board cooling operations, and 
miscellaneous finishing operations (such as sanding, sawing, patching, 
edge sealing, and other finishing operations not subject to other 
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP)). The 
affected source also includes onsite storage and preparation of raw 
materials used in the manufacture of plywood and/or composite wood 
products, such as resins; onsite wastewater treatment operations 
specifically associated with plywood and composite wood products 
manufacturing; and miscellaneous coating operations (Sec.  63.2292). 
The affected source includes lumber kilns at PCWP manufacturing 
facilities and at any other kind of facility.
* * * * *
    4. Revise paragraph (a) of Sec.  63.2250 to read as follows:


Sec.  63.2250  What are the general requirements?

    (a) You must be in compliance with the compliance options, 
operating requirements, and the work practice requirements in this 
subpart at all times, except during periods of process unit or control 
device startup, shutdown, and malfunction; prior to process unit 
initial startup; and during the routine control device maintenance 
exemption specified in Sec.  63.2251. The compliance options, operating 
requirements, and work practice requirements do not apply during times 
when the process unit(s) subject to the compliance options, operating 
requirements, and work practice requirements are not operating, or 
during scheduled startup and shutdown periods, and during malfunctions, 
including unscheduled startups and shutdowns resulting from 
malfunctions. Startup and shutdown periods must not exceed the minimum 
amount of time necessary for these events.
* * * * *
    5. Add section 63.2252 to read as follows:


Sec.  63.2252  What are the requirements for process units that have no 
control or work practice requirements?

    For process units not subject to the compliance options or work 
practice requirements specified in Sec.  63.2240 (including, but not 
limited to, lumber kilns), you are not required to comply with the 
compliance options, work practice requirements, performance testing, 
monitoring, SSM plans, and recordkeeping or reporting requirements of 
this subpart, or any other requirements in subpart A of this part, 
except for the initial notification requirements in Sec.  63.9(b).
    6. Revise paragraph (d)(1) of Sec.  63.2262 to read as follows:


Sec.  63.2262  How do I conduct performance tests and establish 
operating requirements?

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) Sampling sites must be located at the inlet (if emission 
reduction testing or documentation of inlet methanol or formaldehyde 
concentration is required) and outlet of the control device (defined in 
Sec.  63.2292) and prior to any releases to the atmosphere. For control 
sequences with wet control devices (defined in Sec.  63.2292) followed 
by control devices (defined in Sec.  63.2292), sampling sites may be 
located at the inlet and outlet of the control sequence and prior to 
any releases to the atmosphere.
* * * * *
    7. Revise paragraph (c) introductory text of Sec.  63.2269 to read 
as follows:


Sec.  63.2269  What are my monitoring installation, operation, and 
maintenance requirements?

* * * * *
    (c) Wood moisture monitoring. For each furnish or veneer moisture 
meter, you must meet the requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) 
and paragraphs (c)(1) through (5) of this section.
* * * * *
    8. In Sec.  63.2292, revise the definitions for ``affected 
source,'' ``plywood,'' ``plywood and composite wood products 
manufacturing facility,'' and ``tube dryer'' and add definitions for 
``direct-fired process unit,'' ``engineered wood product,'' and 
``molded particleboard'' to read as follows:


Sec.  63.2292  What definitions apply to this subpart?

* * * * *
    Affected source means the collection of dryers, refiners, blenders, 
formers, presses, board coolers, and other process units associated 
with the manufacturing of plywood and composite wood products. The 
affected source includes, but is not limited to, green end operations, 
refining, drying operations (including any combustion unit exhaust 
stream routinely used to direct fire process unit(s)), resin 
preparation, blending and forming operations, pressing and board 
cooling operations, and miscellaneous finishing operations (such as 
sanding, sawing, patching, edge sealing, and other finishing operations 
not subject to other NESHAP). The affected source also includes onsite 
storage of raw materials used in the manufacture of plywood and/or 
composite wood products, such as resins; onsite wastewater treatment 
operations specifically associated with plywood and composite wood 
products manufacturing; and miscellaneous coating operations (defined 
elsewhere in this section). The affected source includes lumber kilns 
at PCWP manufacturing facilities and at any other kind of facility.
* * * * *
    Direct-fired process unit means a process unit that is heated by 
the passing of combustion exhaust directly through the process unit 
such that the process material is contacted by the combustion exhaust.
* * * * *
    Engineered wood product means a product made with lumber, veneers, 
strands of wood, or from other small wood elements that are bound 
together with resin (including polyvinyl acetate (PVA) resin or hot 
melt glue). Engineered wood products are generally designed for use in 
the same applications as sawn lumber. Engineered wood products include, 
but are not limited to, laminated strand lumber, laminated veneer 
lumber, wood I-joists, and glue-laminated beams.
* * * * *
    Molded particleboard means a shaped composite product (other than a 
composite panel) composed primarily of cellulosic materials (usually 
wood or agricultural fiber) generally in the form of discrete pieces or 
particles, as distinguished from fibers, which are pressed together 
with resin.
* * * * *
    Plywood means a panel product consisting of layers of wood veneers 
hot pressed together with resin. Plywood includes panel products made 
by hot pressing (with resin) veneers to a substrate such as 
particleboard, medium density fiberboard, or lumber. Plywood products 
may be flat or curved.
    Plywood and composite wood products (PCWP) manufacturing facility 
means a facility that manufactures plywood and/or composite wood 
products by bonding wood material (fibers, particles, strands, veneers, 
etc.) or agricultural fiber, generally with resin under heat and 
pressure, to form a panel, engineered wood product, or other product 
defined in Sec.  63.2292. Plywood and composite wood products 
manufacturing facilities also include facilities that manufacture dry 
veneer and lumber kilns located at any facility. Plywood and composite 
wood products

[[Page 44028]]

include, but are not limited to, plywood, veneer, particleboard, molded 
particleboard, oriented strandboard, hardboard, fiberboard, medium 
density fiberboard, laminated strand lumber, laminated veneer lumber, 
wood I-joists, kiln-dried lumber, and glue-laminated beams.
* * * * *
    Tube dryer means a single-stage or multi-stage dryer operated by 
applying heat to reduce the moisture of wood fibers or particles as 
they are conveyed (usually pneumatically) through the dryer. Resin may 
or may not be applied to the wood material before it enters the tube 
dryer. A tube dryer is a process unit.
* * * * *
    9. Revise Table 4 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63 to read as follows:

 Table 4 to Subpart DDDD of Part 63.--Requirements for Performance Tests
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          For . . .              You must . . .          Using . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each process unit subject  Select sampling       Method 1 or 1A of 40
 to a compliance option in     port's location and   CFR part 60,
 table 1A or 1B to this        the number of         appendix A (as
 subpart or used in            traverse ports.       appropriate).
 calculation of an emissions
 average under Sec.
 63.2240(c).
2. Each process unit subject  Determine velocity    Method 2 in addition
 to a compliance option in     and volumetric flow   to Method 2A, 2C,
 table 1A or 1B to this        rate.                 2D, 2F, or 2G in
 subpart or used in                                  appendix A to 40
 calculation of an emissions                         CFR part 60 (as
 average under Sec.                                  appropriate).
 63.2240(c).
3. Each process unit subject  Conduct gas           Method 3, 3A, or 3B
 to a compliance option in     molecular weight      in appendix A to 40
 table 1A or 1B to this        analysis.             CFR part 60 (as
 subpart or used in                                  appropriate).
 calculation of an emissions
 average under Sec.
 63.2240(c).
4. Each process unit subject  Measure moisture      Method 4 in appendix
 to a compliance option in     content of the        A to 40 CFR part
 table 1A or 1B to this        stack gas.            60; OR Method 320
 subpart or used in                                  in appendix A to 40
 calculation of an emissions                         CFR part 63; OR
 average under Sec.                                  ASTM D6348-03 (IBR,
 63.2240(c).                                         option in table see
                                                     Sec.   63.14(b))
5. Each process unit subject  Measure emissions of  Method 25A in
 to a compliance option in     total HAP as THC.     appendix A to 40
 table 1B to this subpart                            CFR part 60. You
 for which you choose to                             may measure
 demonstrate compliance                              emissions of
 using a total HAP as THC                            methane using EPA
 compliance option.                                  Method 18 in
                                                     appendix A to 40
                                                     CFR part 60 and
                                                     subtract the
                                                     methane emissions
                                                     from the emissions
                                                     of total HAP as
                                                     THC.
6. Each process unit subject  Measure emissions of  Method 320 in
 to a compliance option in     total HAP (as         appendix A to 40
 table 1A to this subpart;     defined in Sec.       CFR part 63; OR the
 OR for each process unit      63.2292).             NCASI Method IM/CAN/
 used in calculation of an                           WP-99.02 (IBR, see
 emissions average under                             Sec.   63.14(f));
 Sec.   63.2240(c).                                  OR the NCASI Method
                                                     ISS/WP-A105.01
                                                     (IBR, see Sec.
                                                     63.14(f)); OR ASTM
                                                     D6348-03 (IBR, see
                                                     Sec.   63.14(b))
                                                     provided that
                                                     percent R as
                                                     determined in Annex
                                                     A5 of ASTM D6348-03
                                                     is equal or greater
                                                     than of 70 percent
                                                     and less than or
                                                     equal to 130
                                                     percent.
7. Each process unit subject  Measure emissions of  Method 308 in
 to a compliance option in     methanol.             appendix A to 40
 table 1B to this subpart                            CFR part 63; OR
 for which you choose to                             Method 320 in
 demonstrate compliance                              appendix A to 40
 using a methanol compliance                         CFR part 63; OR the
 option.                                             NCASI Method CI/WP-
                                                     98.01 (IBR, see
                                                     Sec.   63.14(f));
                                                     OR the NCASI Method
                                                     IM/CAN/WP-99.02
                                                     (IBR, see Sec.
                                                     63.14(f)); OR the
                                                     NCASI Method ISS/WP-
                                                     A105.01 (IBR, see
                                                     Sec.   63.14(f)).
8. Each process unit subject  Measure emissions of  Method 316 in
 to a compliance option in     formaldehyde.         appendix A to 40
 table 1B to this subpart                            CFR part 63; OR
 for which you choose to                             Method 320 in
 demonstrate compliance                              appendix A to 40
 using a formaldehyde                                CFR part 63; OR
 compliance option.                                  Method 0011 in
                                                     ``Test Methods for
                                                     Evaluating Solid
                                                     Waste, Physical/
                                                     Chemical Methods''
                                                     (EPA Publication
                                                     No. SW-846) for
                                                     formaldehyde; OR
                                                     the NCASI Method CI/
                                                     WP-98.01 (IBR, see
                                                     Sec.   63.14(f));
                                                     OR the NCASI Method
                                                     IM/CAN/WP-99.02
                                                     (IBR, see Sec.
                                                     63.14(f)); OR the
                                                     NCASI Method ISS/WP-
                                                     A105.01 (IBR, see
                                                     Sec.   63.14(f)).

[[Page 44029]]

 
9. Each reconstituted wood    Meet the design       Methods 204 and 204A
 product press at a new or     specifications        through 204F of 40
 existing affected source or   included in the       CFR part 51,
 reconstituted wood product    definition of wood    appendix M, to
 board cooler at a new         products enclosures   determine capture
 affected source subject to    in Sec.   63.2292)    efficiency (except
 a compliance option in        or, determine the     for wood products
 table 1B to this subpart or   percent capture       enclosures as
 used in calculation of an     efficiency of the     defined in Sec.
 emissions average under       enclosure directing   63.2292).
 Sec.   63.2240(c).            emissions to an add-  Enclosures that
                               on control device.    meet the definition
                                                     of wood products
                                                     enclosure or that
                                                     meet Method 204
                                                     requirements for a
                                                     permanent total
                                                     enclosure (PTE) are
                                                     assumed to have a
                                                     capture efficiency
                                                     of 100 percent.
                                                     Enclosures that do
                                                     not meet either the
                                                     PTE requirements or
                                                     design criteria for
                                                     a wood products
                                                     enclosure must
                                                     determine the
                                                     capture efficiency
                                                     by constructing a
                                                     TTE according to
                                                     the requirements of
                                                     Method 204 and
                                                     applying Methods
                                                     204A through 204F
                                                     (as appropriate).
                                                     As an alternative
                                                     to Methods 204 and
                                                     204A through 204F,
                                                     you may use the
                                                     tracer gas method
                                                     contained in
                                                     appendix A to this
                                                     subpart.
10. Each reconstituted wood   Determine the         A TTE and Methods
 product press at a new or     percent capture       204 and 204A
 existing affected source or   efficiency.           through 204F (as
 reconstituted wood product                          appropriate) of 40
 board cooler at a new                               CFR part 51,
 affected source subject to                          appendix M. As an
 a compliance option in                              alternative to
 table 1A to this subpart.                           installing a TTE
                                                     and using Methods
                                                     204 and 204A
                                                     through 204F, you
                                                     may use the tracer
                                                     gas method
                                                     contained in
                                                     appendix A to this
                                                     subpart. Measured
                                                     emissions divided
                                                     by the capture
                                                     efficiency provides
                                                     the emission rate.
11. Each process unit         Establish the site-   Data from the
 subject to a compliance       specific operating    parameter
 option in tables 1A and 1B    requirements          monitoring system
 to this subpart or used in    (including the        or THC CEMS and the
 calculation of an emissions   parameter limits or   applicable
 average under Sec.            THC concentration     performance test
 63.2240(c).                   limits) in table 2    methods(s).
                               to this subpart.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

Appendix A to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Alternative Procedure To 
Determine Capture Efficiency From Enclosures Around Hot Presses in the 
Plywood and Composite Wood Products Industry Using Sulfur Hexafluoride 
Tracer Gas

    10. Revise paragraphs 10.4 and 10.5 of section 10 to read as 
follows:

10.0 Calibration and Standardization.

* * * * *
    10.4 Gas Chromatograph. Follow the pre-test calibration 
requirements specified in section 8.5.1.
    10.5 Gas Chromatograph for Ambient Sampling (Optional). For the 
optional ambient sampling, follow the calibration requirements 
specified in section 8.5.1 or ASTM E 260 and E 697 and by the 
equipment manufacturer for gas chromatograph measurements.

Appendix B to Subpart DDDD of Part 63--Methodology and Criteria for 
Demonstrating That an Affected Source Is Part of the Low-Risk 
Subcategory of Plywood and Composite Wood Products Manufacturing 
Affected Sources

    11. In section 4, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:

4. What are the criteria for determining if my affected source is low 
risk?

    (a) Determine the individual HAP emission rates from each 
process unit emission point within the affected source using the 
procedures specified in section 5 of this appendix.
* * * * *
    12. In section 5, revise paragraphs (a), (f)(1), and (f)(2) and add 
paragraphs (i) through (k) to read as follows:

5. How do I determine HAP emissions from my affected source?

    (a) You must determine HAP emissions for every process unit 
emission point within the affected source that emits one or more of 
the HAP listed in Table 1 to this appendix as specified in Table 2A 
to this appendix. For each process unit type, Table 2A to this 
appendix specifies whether emissions testing is required or if 
emissions estimation is allowed as an alternative to emissions 
testing. If emissions estimation is allowed according to Table 2A, 
you must develop your emission estimates according to the 
requirements in paragraph (k) of this section. You may choose to 
perform emissions testing instead of emissions estimation. You must 
conduct HAP emissions tests according to the requirements in 
paragraphs (b) through (j) of this section and the methods specified 
in Table 2B to this appendix. For each of the emission points at 
your affected source, you must obtain the emission rates in pounds 
per hour (lb/hr) for each of the pollutants listed in Table 1 to 
this appendix.
* * * * *
    (f) * * *
    (1) The method detection limit is less than or equal to 1 part 
per million by volume, dry (ppmvd) for pollutant emissions measured 
using Method 320 in appendix A to 40 CFR part 63; or Method 18 in 
appendix A to 40 CFR part 60; or the NCASI Method IM/CAN/WP-99.02 
(incorporated by reference (IBR), see 40 CFR 63.14(f)); or NCASI 
Method ISS/FP-A105.01 (IBR, see 40 CFR 63.14(f); or ASTM D6348-03 
(IBR, see 40 CFR 63.14(b)).
    (2) For pollutants measured using Method 29 in appendix A to 40 
CFR part 60, you analyze samples using atomic absorption 
spectroscopy (AAS) or another laboratory method specified in Method 
29 in appendix A to 40 CFR part 60 with detection limits lower than 
or equal to AAS.
* * * * *
    (i) Use of previous emissions tests. You may use the results of 
previous emissions tests provided that the following conditions are 
met:
    (1) The previous emissions tests must have been conducted using 
the methods specified in Table 2B to this appendix. Previous 
emission test results obtained using NCASI Method IM/CAN/WP-99.01 
are acceptable.
    (2) The previous emissions tests must meet the requirements in 
paragraphs (b) through (j) of this section.
    (3) The subject process unit(s) must be operated in the same 
manner (e.g., same raw material type, same operating temperature,

[[Page 44030]]

etc.) as during the previous emissions test(s) and the process 
unit(s) may not have been modified such that emissions would be 
expected to differ (notwithstanding normal test-to-test variability) 
from the previous emissions test(s).
    (j) Use of test data for similar process units. If you have 
multiple similar process units at the same plant site, you may apply 
the test results from one of these process units to the other 
similar process units for purposes of your low-risk demonstration 
provided that the following conditions are met:
    (1) You must explain how the process units are similar in terms 
of design, function, heating method, raw materials processed, 
residence time, change in material moisture content, operating 
temperature, resin type processed, and any other parameters that may 
affect emissions.
    (2) If the process units have different throughput rates, then 
you must convert the emission test results to terms of pounds of HAP 
per unit throughput prior to applying the emissions test data to 
other similar process units.
    (3) If one of the process units would be expected to exhibit 
higher emissions due to minor differences in process parameters, 
then you must explain and test the process unit that would be 
expected to exhibit greater emissions (for example, the unit with a 
slightly higher temperature set point, dryer processing furnish with 
slightly higher inlet moisture content, press processing thicker 
panels, unit with the greater throughput, etc.).
    (k) If emissions estimation is allowed, you must follow the 
procedures in (1) through (3) of this paragraph.
    (1) You must use the emission factors or other emission 
estimation techniques specified in Table 2A to this appendix when 
developing emission estimates.
    (2) You must base your emission estimates on the maximum process 
unit throughput you will incorporate into your permit according to 
section 11(b) of this appendix.
    (3) For process units with multiple emission points, you must 
apportion the estimate emissions evenly across each emission point. 
For example, if you have a process unit with two emission points, 
and the process unit is estimated to emit 6 lb/hr, you would assign 
3 lb/hr to each emission point.
    13. Revise paragraphs (a) through (c) of section 6 to read as 
follows:

6. How do I conduct a look-up table analysis?

* * * * *
    (a) Using the emission rate of each HAP required to be included 
in your low-risk demonstration (determined according to section 5 of 
this appendix), calculate your total toxicity-weighted carcinogen 
and noncarcinogen emission rates for each of your emission points 
using Equations 1 and 2 of this appendix, respectively. Calculate 
your carcinogen and non-carcinogen weighted average stack height 
using Equations 3 and 4 of this appendix, respectively.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP29JY05.000

TWCER = Toxcity-weighted carcinogenic emission rate for each 
emission point (1b/hr)/([mu]g/m\3\)
ERi = Emission rate of pollutant I (lb/hr)
URE = Unit risk estimate for pollutant I, 1 per Microgram per cubic 
meter ([mu]g/m\3\)-1
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP29JY05.001

TWNER = Toxicity-weighted noncarcinogenic emission rate for each 
emission point (lb/hr)/([mu]g/m\3\)
ERi = Emission rate of pollutant I (lb/hr)
RfCi = Reference concentration for pollutant I, 
micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\)
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP29JY05.002

WAHC = Carcinogen weighted average stack height for use in the 
carcinogen lookup table (Table 3 to this appendix)
H = Height of each individual stack or emission point (m)
ep = Individual stacks or emission points
n = Total number of stacks and emission points
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP29JY05.003

WAHN = Non-carcinogen weighted average stack height for use in the 
non-carcinogen lookup table (Table 4 to this appendix)
H = Height of each individual stack or emission point (m)
ep = Individual stacks or emission points
n = Total number of stacks and emission points

    (b) Cancer risk. Calculate the total toxicity-weighted 
carcinogen emission rate for your affected source by summing the 
toxicity-weighted carcinogen emission rates for each of your 
emission points. Identify the appropriate maximum allowable 
toxicity-weighted carcinogen emission rate from Table 3 to this 
appendix for your affected source using the carcinogen weighted 
average stack height of your emission points and the minimum 
distance between any emission point at the affected source and the 
property boundary. If one or both of these values do not match the 
exact values in the lookup table, then use the next lowest table 
value. (Note: If your weighted average stack height is less than 5 
meters (m), you must use the 5 m row.) Your affected source is 
considered low risk for carcinogenic effects if your toxicity-
weighted carcinogen emission rate, determined using the methods 
specified in this appendix, does not exceed the values specified in 
Table 3 to this appendix.
    (c) Noncancer risk. Calculate the total central nervous system 
(CNS) and respiratory target organ specific toxicity-weighted 
noncarcinogen emission rate for your affected source by summing the 
toxicity-weighted emission rates for each of your emission points. 
Identify the appropriate maximum allowable toxicity-weighted 
noncarcinogen emission rate from Table 4 to this appendix for your 
affected source using the non-carcinogen weighted average stack 
height of your emission points and the minimum distance between any 
emission point at the affected source and the property boundary. If 
one or both of these values do not match the exact values in the 
lookup table, then use the next lowest table value. (Note: If your 
weighted average stack height is less than 5 m, you must use the 5 m 
row.) Your affected source is considered low risk for 
noncarcinogenic effects if your toxicity-weighted noncarcinogen 
emission rate, determined using the methods specified in this 
appendix, does not exceed the values specified in Table 4 to this 
appendix.
* * * * *

[[Page 44031]]

    14. Revise paragraph (a) of section 7 to read as follows:

7. How do I conduct a site-specific risk assessment?

    (a) Perform a site-specific risk assessment following the 
procedures specified in this section. You may use any 
scientifically-accepted peer-reviewed assessment methodology for 
your site-specific risk assessment. An example of one approach to 
performing a site-specific risk assessment for air toxics that may 
be appropriate for your affected source can be found in the ``Air 
Toxics Risk Assessment Guidance Reference Library, Volume 2, Site-
Specific Risk Assessment Technical Resource Document.'' You may 
obtain a copy of the ``Air Toxics Risk Assessment Reference 
Library'' through EPA's air toxics Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/fera/risk_atra_main.html.
* * * * *
    15. Revise paragraphs (a)(3), (b)(1), and (b)(3) of section 8 to 
read as follows:

8. What information must I submit for the low-risk demonstration?

    (a) * * *
    (3) Emission test reports for each pollutant and process unit 
based on the testing requirements and methods specified in Tables 2A 
and 2B to this appendix, including a description of the process 
parameters identified as being worst case. You must submit your 
emissions calculations for each pollutant and process unit for which 
emissions estimates are developed.
* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Identification of the stack heights for each emission point 
included in the calculations of weighted average stack height.
* * * * *
    (3) Calculations used to determine the toxicity-weighted 
carcinogen and noncarcinogen emission rates and weighted average 
stack heights according to section 6(a) of this appendix.
* * * * *
    16. Revise paragraphs (a) and (c) of section 10 to read as follows:

10. When do I submit my low-risk demonstration?

* * * * *
    (a) If you have an existing affected source, you must complete 
and submit for approval your low-risk demonstration no later than 
April 1, 2007. * * *
    (c) If you have a new or reconstructed affected source you must 
conduct the emission tests specified in section 5 of this appendix 
by September 28, 2004 or upon initial startup (whichever is later) 
and use the results of these emissions tests to complete and submit 
your low-risk demonstration within 180 days following September 28, 
2004 or your initial startup date (whichever is later). * * *

    17. Revise paragraph (b) of section 11 to read as follows:

11. How does my affected source become part of the low-risk subcategory 
of PCWP facilities?

* * * * *
    (b) Following EPA approval, the parameters that defined your 
affected source as part of the low-risk subcategory (including, but 
not limited to, production rate, annual emission rate, type of 
control devices, process parameters reflecting the emissions rates 
used for your low-risk demonstration) must be submitted for 
incorporation as federally enforceable terms and conditions into 
your title V permit. You must submit an application for a 
significant permit modification to reopen your title V permit to 
incorporate such terms and conditions according to the procedures 
and schedules of 40 CFR part 71 or the EPA-approved program in 
effect under 40 CFR part 70, as applicable.

    18. Revise section 15 to read as follows:

15. Definitions.

    The definitions in Sec.  63.2292 of 40 CFR part 63, subpart 
DDDD, apply to this appendix. Additional definitions applicable for 
this appendix are as follows:
    Agricultural fiber board press means a press used in the 
production of an agricultural fiber based composite wood product. An 
agricultural fiber board press is a process unit.
    Agricultural fiberboard mat dryer means a dryer used to reduce 
the moisture of wet-formed agricultural fiber mats by operation at 
elevated temperature. An agricultural fiberboard mat dryer is a 
process unit.
    Atmospheric refiner means a piece of equipment operated under 
atmospheric pressure for refining (rubbing or grinding) the wood 
material into fibers or particles. Atmospheric refiners are operated 
with continuous infeed and outfeed of wood material and atmospheric 
pressures throughout the refining process. An atmospheric refiner is 
a process unit.
    Blending and forming operations means the process of mixing 
adhesive and other additives with the (wood) furnish of the 
composite panel and making a mat of resinated fiber, particles, or 
strands to be compressed into a reconstituted wood product such as 
particleboard, oriented strandboard, or medium density fiberboard. 
Blending and forming operations are process units.
    Emission point means an individual stack or vent from a process 
unit that emits HAP required for inclusion in the low-risk 
demonstration specified in this appendix. Process units may have 
multiple emission points.
    Fiber washer means a unit in which water-soluble components of 
wood (hemicellulose and sugars) that have been produced during 
digesting and refining are removed from the wood fiber. Typically 
wet fiber leaving a refiner is further diluted with water and then 
passed over a filter, leaving the cleaned fiber on the surface. A 
fiber washer is a process unit.
    Finishing sander means a piece of equipment that uses an 
abrasive drum, belt, or pad to impart smoothness to the surface of a 
plywood or composite wood product panel and to reduce the panel to 
the prescribed thickness. A finishing sander is a process unit.
    Finishing saw means a piece of equipment used to trim or cut 
finished plywood and composite wood products panels to a certain 
size. A finishing saw is a process unit.
    Hardwood plywood press means a hot press which, through heat and 
pressure, bonds assembled hardwood veneers (including multiple plies 
of veneer and/or a substrate) and resin into a hardwood plywood 
panel. A hardwood plywood press is a process unit.
    Hardwood veneer kiln means an enclosed dryer operated in batch 
cycles at elevated temperature to reduce the moisture content from 
stacked hardwood veneer. A hardwood veneer kiln is a process unit.
    Hazard Index (HI) means the sum of more than one hazard quotient 
for multiple substances and/or multiple exposure pathways.
    Hazard Quotient (HQ) means the ratio of the predicted media 
concentration of a pollutant to the media concentration at which no 
adverse effects are expected. For inhalation exposures, the HQ is 
calculated as the air concentration divided by the reference 
concentration (RfC).
    Humidifier means a process unit used to increase the moisture 
content of hardboard following pressing or after post-baking. 
Typically, water vapor saturated air is blown over the hardboard 
surfaces in a closed cabinet. A humidifier is a process unit.
    I-joist curing chamber means an oven or a room surrounded by a 
solid wall or heavy plastic flaps that uses heat, infrared, or 
radio-frequency techniques to cure the adhesive. An I-joist curing 
chamber is a process unit.
    Log chipping means the production of wood chips from logs.
    Log vat means a process unit that raises the temperature of the 
logs inside by applying a heated substance, usually hot water and 
steam, to the outside of the logs by spraying or soaking. A log vat 
is a process unit.
    Look-up table analysis means a risk screening analysis based on 
comparing the toxicity-weighted HAP emission rate from the affected 
source to the maximum allowable toxicity-weighted HAP emission rates 
specified in Tables 3 and 4 to this appendix.
    LSL press means a composite wood product press that presses a 
loose mat of resinated strands into a billet by simultaneous 
application of heat and pressure and forms laminated strand lumber. 
An LSL press is a process unit.
    LVL press means a composite wood product press that presses 
resinated stacks of veneers into a solid billet by simultaneous 
application of heat and pressure and forms laminated veneer lumber 
or parallel strand lumber. An LVL press is a process unit.
    Natural gas means a naturally occurring mixture of hydrocarbon 
and non-hydrocarbon gases found in geologic formations beneath the 
earth's surface. The principal hydrocarbon constituent is methane.
    Paddle-type particleboard dryer means a dryer that uses elevated 
temperature to

[[Page 44032]]

remove moisture from particles and paddles to advance materials 
through the dryer. This type of dryer removes moisture absorbed by 
particles due to high ambient temperature. A paddle-type 
particleboard dryer is a process unit.
    Panel-trim chipper means a piece of equipment that accepts the 
discarded pieces of veneer or pressed plywood and composite wood 
products panels that are removed by finishing saws and reduces these 
pieces to small elements. A panel-trim chipper is a process unit.
    Particleboard extruder means a heated die oriented either 
horizontally or vertically through which resinated particles are 
continuously forced to form extruded particleboard products. A 
particleboard extruder is a process unit.
    Particleboard press mold means a press that consists of molds 
that apply heat and pressure to form molded or shaped particleboard 
products. A particleboard press mold is a process unit.
    Propane means a colorless gas derived from petroleum and natural 
gas, with the molecular structure C3H8.
    Radio-frequency veneer redryer means a dryer heated by radio-
frequency waves that is used to redry veneer that has been 
previously dried. A radio-frequency veneer redryer is a process 
unit.
    Reference Concentration (RfC) means an estimate (with 
uncertainty spanning perhaps an order of magnitude) of a continuous 
inhalation exposure to the human population (including sensitive 
subgroups) that is likely to be without an appreciable risk of 
deleterious effects during a lifetime. It can be derived from 
various types of human or animal data, with uncertainty factors 
generally applied to reflect limitations of the data used.
    Resin storage tank means any storage tank, container, or vessel 
connected to plywood and composite wood product production that 
contains resin additives. A resin storage tank is a process unit.
    Rotary agricultural fiber dryer means a rotary dryer operated at 
elevated temperature and used to reduce the moisture of agricultural 
fiber. A rotary agricultural fiber dryer is a process unit.
    Softwood plywood press means a hot press which, through heat and 
pressure, bonds assembled softwood veneer plies and resin into a 
softwood plywood panel. A softwood plywood press is a process unit.
    Softwood veneer kiln means an enclosed dryer operated in batch 
cycles at elevated temperature to reduce the moisture content from 
stacked softwood veneer. A softwood veneer kiln is a process unit.
    Stand-alone digester means a pressure vessel used to heat and 
soften wood chips (usually by steaming) before the chips are sent to 
a separate process unit for refining into fiber. A stand-alone 
digester is a process unit.
    Target organ specific hazard index (TOSHI) means the sum of 
hazard quotients for individual chemicals that affect the same organ 
or organ system (e.g., respiratory system, central nervous system).
    Unit Risk Estimate (URE) means the upper-bound excess lifetime 
cancer risk estimated to result from continuous exposure to an agent 
at a concentration of 1 microgram per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) in 
air.
    Wastewater/process water operation means equipment that 
processes water in plywood or composite wood product facilities for 
reuse or disposal. Wastewater/process water operations includes but 
is not limited to pumps, holding ponds and tanks, cooling and 
heating operations, settling systems, filtration systems, aeration 
systems, clarifiers, pH adjustment systems, log storage ponds, 
pollution control device water (including wash water), vacuum 
distillation systems, sludge drying and disposal systems, spray 
irrigation fields, and connections to POTW facilities. Wastewater/
process water operations are process units.
    Worst-case operating conditions means operation of a process 
unit during emissions testing under the conditions that result in 
the highest HAP emissions or that result in the emissions stream 
composition (including HAP and non-HAP) that is most challenging for 
the control device if a control device is used. For example, worst 
case conditions could include operation of the process unit at 
maximum throughput, at its highest temperature, with the wood 
species mix likely to produce the most HAP, and/or with the resin 
formulation containing the greatest HAP.

    19. Add Table 2A to read as follows:

             Table 2A.--to Appendix B to Subpart DDDD of 40 CFR Part 63. Testing and Emissions Estimation Specifications for Process Units.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                         HAP metals from
      Process unit type          Acetaldehyde        Acrolein        Formaldehyde         Phenol           Benzene            MDI          direct-fired
                                                                                                                                         process units b
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agricultural fiberboard mat    test............  test............  test............  test............  test...........  NA.............  test.
 dryers, Dry rotary dryers,
 Fiberboard mat dryer (heated
 zones), Green rotary dryers,
 Hardboard ovens, Hardwood
 veneer dryers (heated
 zones), Paddle-type
 particleboard dryers, Press
 predryers, Rotary
 agricultural fiber dryers,
 Rotary strand dryers,
 Softwood veneer dryers
 (heated zones), Veneer
 redryers (heated by
 conventional means).
Atmospheric refiners,          test............  test............  test............  test............  test...........  NA.............  NA.
 Conveyor strand dryers,
 Pressurized refiners.
Primary tube dryers,           test............  test............  test............  test............  test...........  test if          test.
 Secondary tube dryers.                                                                                                  processing
                                                                                                                         furnish with
                                                                                                                         MDI resin
                                                                                                                         added prior to
                                                                                                                         drying.
Agricultural fiber board       test............  test............  test............  test............  test...........  test if board    NA.
 presses, Reconstituted wood                                                                                             contains MDI
 products presses,                                                                                                       resin.
 Reconstituted wood product
 board coolers.

[[Page 44033]]

 
Blending and forming           NA..............  NA..............  0.060 lb/DOT....  NA..............  NA.............  engineering      NA.
 operations--particleboard                                                                                               estimate if
 and MDF.                                                                                                                MDI resin used.
Blending and forming           NA..............  NA..............  0.0036 lb/MSF \3/ engineering       NA.............  engineering      NA.
 operations--OSB.                                                   8\'' press        estimate.                          estimate if
                                                                    throughput.                                          MDI resin used.
Dry forming--hardboard.......  engineering       NA..............  engineering       engineering       NA.............  NA.............  NA.
                                estimate.                           estimate.         estimate.
Fiber washers................  0.015 lb/ODT....  NA..............  0.0026 lb/ODT...  NA..............  NA.............  NA.............  NA.
Fiberboard mat dryer           0.0055 lb/MSF \1/ NA..............  0.031lb/MSF \1/   NA..............  NA.............  NA.............  NA
 (fugitive emissions).          2\''.                               2\''.
Finishing sanders............  0.0028 lb/MSF \3/ NA..............  0.0042 lb/MSF...  0.015 lb/MSF....  NA.............  engineering      NA.
                                8\''.                                                                                    estimate if
                                                                                                                         MDI resin used.
Finishing saws...............  0.00092 lb/MSF    NA..............  0.00034 lb/MSF    0.0057 lb/MSF...  NA.............  engineering      NA.
                                \3/8\''.                            \3/8\''.                                             estimate if
                                                                                                                         MDI resin used.
Hardwood plywood presses.....  NA..............  NA..............  0.0088 lb/MSF \3/ 0.016 lb/MSF \3/  NA.............  NA.............  NA.
                                                                    8\''.             8\''.
Hardwood veneer dryer          0.058 lb/MSF \3/  NA..............  0.013 lb/MSF \3/  NA..............  NA.............  NA.............  NA.
 (cooling zones).               8\''.                               8\''.
Hardwood veneer kilns........  0.067 lb/MSF \3/  NA..............  0.016 lb/MSF \3/  0.0053 lb/MSF \3/ NA.............  NA.............  NA.
                                8\''.                               8\''.             8\''.
Humidifiers..................  0.0018 lb/MSF \1/ 0.0087 lb/MSF \1/ 0.0010 lb/MSF \1/ 0.00057 lb/MSF    0.0000062 lb/    NA.............  NA.
                                8\''.             8\''.             8\''.             \1/8\''.          MSF \1/8\''.
I-joist curing chambers......  NA..............  NA..............  0.0018 lb/MSF...  NA..............  NA.............  engineering      NA.
                                                                                                                         estimate if
                                                                                                                         MDI resin used.
Log vats.....................  0.0047 lb/MSF \3/ NA..............  NA..............  NA..............  NA.............  NA.............  NA.
                                8\'' removed
                                from vate per
                                hour.
LSL presses..................  engineering       NA..............  0.029 lb/1000 ft  engineering       NA.............  0.18 lb/1000 ft  NA.
                                estimate.                           3.                estimate.                          3.
LVL presses..................  0.29 lb/1000 ft   NA..............  0.79 lb/1000 ft   NA..............  NA.............  NA.............  NA.
                                3.                                  3.
Lumber kilns.................  0.065 lb/MBF....  0.009 lb/MBF....  0.034 lb/MBF....  0.010 lb/MBF....  NA.............  NA.............  Engineering
                                                                                                                                          estimate.
Panel-trim chippers..........  0.00081 lb/MSF    NA..............  0.00034 lb/MSF    0.0019 lb/MSF \3/ NA.............  NA.............  NA.
                                \3/8\''                             \3/8\''           8\'' finished
                                finished board                      finished board    board
                                production.                         production.       production.
Particleboard press molds,     0.034 lb/MSF \3/  0.0087 lb/MSF \3/ 0.64 lb/MSF \3/   0.024 lb/MSF \3/  0.0073 lb/MSF    NA.............  NA.
 Particleboard extruders.       4\''.             4\''.             4\''.             4\''.             \3/4\''.
Radio-frequency veneer         0.0029 lb/MSF \3/ NA..............  0.00065 lb/MSF    NA..............  NA.............  NA.............  NA.
 redryers.                      8\''.                               \3/8\''.
Resin storage tanks..........  NA..............  NA..............  0.19 lb/hr per    0.18 lb/hr per    NA.............  0.0013 lb/hr     NA.
                                                                    tank for tanks    tank for tanks                     per tank for
                                                                    with resin        with resin                         tanks with MDI
                                                                    containing        containing                         resin OR model
                                                                    formaldehyde OR   phenol OR model                    using TANKS
                                                                    model using       using TANKS                        software a.
                                                                    TANKS software    software a.
                                                                    a.

[[Page 44034]]

 
Softwood plywood presses.....  0.012 lb/MSF \3/  NA..............  0.0054 lb/MSF \3/ 0.0022 lb/MSF \3/ NA.............  NA.............  NA.
                                8\''.                               8\''.             8\''.
Softwood veneer dryers         0.012 lb/MSF \3/  NA..............  0.0028 lb/MSF \3/ 0.011 lb/MSF \3/  NA.............  NA.............  NA.
 (cooling zones).               8\''.                               8\''.             8\''.
Softwood veneer kilns........  0.097 lb/MSF \3/  0.012 lb/MSF \3/  0.010 lb/MSF \3/  0.020 lb/MSF \3/  0.0078 lb/MSF    NA.............  NA.
                                8\''.             8\''.             8\''.             8\''.             \3/8\''.
Stand-alone digesters........  0.030 lb/ODT....  0.0024 lb/ODT...  0.0045 lb/ODT...  0.0012 lb/ODT...  NA.............  NA.............  NA.
Wastewater/process water       engineering       engineering       engineering       engineering       engineering      engineering      NA.
 operations.                    estimate (such    estimate (such    estimate (such    estimate (such    estimate (such   estimate (such
                                as WATER9 a or    as WATER9 a or    as WATER9 a or    as WATER9 a or    as WATER9 a or   as WATER9 a or
                                other method).    other method).    other method).    other method).    other method).   other method)
                                                                                                                         if MDI resin
                                                                                                                         used.
Wet forming--fiberboard and    0.0075 lb/MSF \1/ NA..............  0.0036 lb/MSF \1/ NA..............  NA.............  NA.............  NA.
 hardboard (without PF resin).  2\''.                               2\''.
Wet forming--hardboard (PF     0.0067 lb/ODT...  NA..............  0.00039 lb/ODT..  0.00075 lb/ODT..  NA.............  NA.............  NA.
 resin).
Miscellaneous coating          NA..............  NA..............  NA..............  NA..............  NA.............  NA.............  NA.
 operations, Log chipping,
 Softwood veneer dryer
 fugitive emissions.
Other ancillary processes      engineering       engineering       engineering       engineering       engineering      engineering      engineering
 (not listed elsewhere in       estimate.         estimate.         estimate.         estimate.         estimate.        estimate.        estimate
 this table) that may emit
 HAP listed in this table.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
test: Emissions testing must be conducted for the process unit and pollutant according to the test methods specified in Table 2B to appendix B to
  supbart DDDD.
NA: Not applicable. No emission estimates or emissions testing is required for purposes of the low-risk demonstration.
lb/50 MSF: Pounds of HAP per thousand square feet of board of the inches thickness specified (e.g., lb/MSF \3/4\ = pounds of HAP per thousand square
  feet of \3/4\-inch board). See equation in Sec.   63.2262(j) of subpart DDDD to convert from one thickness basis to another.
lb/ODT: 50 Pounds of HAP per oven dried ton of wood material.
lb/MBF: Pounds of HAP per thousand board feet.
lb/MLF: Pounds of HAP per thousand linear feet.
a TANKS and WATER9 software is available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief.software/index.html.
b Excludes direct-fired process units fired with only natural gas or propane.

    20. Redesignate Table 2 as Table 2B and revise to read as follows:

Table 2B to Appendix B to Subpart DDDD of 40 CFR part 63.--Emission Test
                                 Methods
------------------------------------------------------------------------
          For . . .              You must . . .          Using . . .
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Each process unit          Select sampling       Method 1 or 1A of 40
 required to be tested         ports' location and   CFR part 60,
 according to table 2A to      the number of         appendix A (as
 this appendix.                traverse points.      appropriate).
2. Each process unit          Determine velocity    Method 2 in addition
 required to be tested         and volumetric flow   to Method 2A, 2C,
 according to table 2A to      rate                  2D, 2F, or 2G in
 this appendix.                                      appendix A to 40
                                                     CFR part 60 (as
                                                     appropriate).
3. Each process unit          Conduct gas           Method 3, 3A, or 3B
 required to be tested         molecular weight      in appendix A to 40
 according to table 2A to      analysis.             CFR part 60 (as
 this appendix.                                      appropriate).
4. Each process unit          Measure moisture      Method 4 in appendix
 required to be tested         content of the        A to 40 CFR part
 according to table 2A to      stack gas.            60.
 this appendix.
5. Each process unit          Measure emissions of  NCASI Method IM/CAN/
 required to be tested         the following HAP:    WP-99.02 (IBR, see
 according to table 2A to      Acetaldehyde,         40 CFR 63.14(f));
 this appendix.                acrolein,             OR Method 320 in
                               formaldehyde, and     appendix A to 40
                               phenol.               CFR part 63; OR the
                                                     NCASI Method ISS/WP-
                                                     A105.01 (IBR, see
                                                     Sec.   63.14(f));
                                                     OR ASTM D6348-03
                                                     (IBR, see 40 CFR
                                                     63.14(b)) provided
                                                     that percent R as
                                                     determined in Annex
                                                     A5 of ASTM D6348-03
                                                     is equal or greater
                                                     than 70 percent and
                                                     less than or equal
                                                     to 130 percent.

[[Page 44035]]

 
6. Each process unit          Measure emissions of  Method 18 in
 required to be tested         benzene.              appendix A to 40
 according to table 2A to                            CFR part 60; NCASI
 this appendix.                                      Method IM/CAN/WP-
                                                     99.02 (IBR, see 40
                                                     CFR 63.14(f)); OR
                                                     Method 320 in
                                                     appendix A to 40
                                                     CFR part 63; OR
                                                     ASTM D6348-03 (IBR,
                                                     see 40 CFR
                                                     63.14(b)) provided
                                                     that percent R as
                                                     determined in Annex
                                                     A5 of ASTM D6348-03
                                                     is equal or greater
                                                     than 70 percent and
                                                     less than or equal
                                                     to 130 percent.
7. Each process unit that     Measure emissions of  Method 320 in
 processes material            MDI.                  appendix A to 40
 containing MDI resin                                CFR part 63; OR
 required to be tested                               Conditional Test
 according to table 2A to                            Method (CTM) 031
 this appendix.                                      which is posted on
                                                     http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/ctm.html.
8. Each direct-fired process  Measure emissions of  Method 29 in
 unit a required to be         the following HAP     appendix A to 40
 tested according to table     metals: Arsenic,      CFR part 60.
 2A to this appendix.          beryllium, cadmium,
                               chromium, lead,
                               manganese, and
                               nickel.
9. Each reconstituted wood    Meet the design       Methods 204 and 204A
 product press or              specifications        through 204F of 40
 reconstituted wood product    included in the       CFR part 51,
 board cooler with a HAP       definition of wood    appendix M to
 control device.               products enclosure    determine capture
                               in Sec.   63.2292     efficiency (except
                               of subpart DDDD of    for wood products
                               40 CFR part 63 or     enclosures as
                               determine the         defined in Sec.
                               percent capture       63.2292).
                               efficiency of the     Enclosures that
                               enclosure directing   meet the definition
                               emissions to an add-  of wood products
                               on control device.    enclosure or that
                                                     meet Method 204
                                                     requirements for a
                                                     PTE are assumed to
                                                     have a capture
                                                     efficiency of 100
                                                     percent. Enclosures
                                                     that do not meet
                                                     either the PTE
                                                     requirements or
                                                     design criteria for
                                                     a wood products
                                                     enclosure must
                                                     determine the
                                                     capture efficiency
                                                     by constructing a
                                                     TTE according to
                                                     the requirements of
                                                     Method 204 and
                                                     applying Methods
                                                     204A through 204F
                                                     (as appropriate).
                                                     As an alternative
                                                     to Methods 204 and
                                                     204A through 204F,
                                                     you may use the
                                                     tracer gas method
                                                     contained in
                                                     appendix A to
                                                     subpart DDDD.
10. Each reconstituted wood   Determine the         A TTE and Methods
 product press or              percent capture       204 and 204A
 reconstituted wood product    efficiency.           through 204F (as
 board cooler required to be                         appropriate) of 40
 tested according to table                           CFR part 51,
 2A to this appendix.                                appendix M. As an
                                                     alternative to
                                                     installing a TTE
                                                     and using Methods
                                                     204 and 204A
                                                     through 204F, you
                                                     may use the tracer
                                                     gas method
                                                     contained in
                                                     appendix A to
                                                     subpart DDDD.
                                                     Measured emissions
                                                     divided by the
                                                     capture efficiency
                                                     provides the
                                                     emission rate.
11. Each process unit with a  Establish the site-   Data from the
 HAP control device required   specific operating    parameter
 to be tested according to     requirements          monitoring system
 table 2A to this appendix.    (including the        or THC CEMS and the
                               parameter limits or   applicable
                               THC concentration     performance test
                               limits) in table 2    method(s).
                               to subpart DDDD.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Excludes direct-fired process units fired with only natural gas or
  propane.

    21. Revise Table 3 to read as follows:

        Table 3 to Appendix B to Subpart DDDD of 40 CFR Part 63.--Maximum Allowable Toxicity-Weighted Carcinogen Emission Rate (lb/hr)/([mu]g/m3)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Distance to property boundary (m)
  Stack height (m)   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          0          50        100        150        200        250        500        1000       1500       2000       3000       5000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5...................   8.72E-07   8.72E-07   8.72E-07   9.63E-07   1.25E-06   1.51E-06   2.66E-06   4.25E-06   4.39E-06   4.39E-06   4.39E-06   5.00E-06
10..................   2.47E-06   2.47E-06   2.47E-06   2.47E-06   2.47E-06   2.61E-06   3.58E-06   5.03E-06   5.89E-06   5.89E-06   5.89E-06   6.16E-06
20..................   5.81E-06   5.81E-06   5.81E-06   5.81E-06   5.81E-06   5.81E-06   5.90E-06   7.39E-06   8.90E-06   9.97E-06   9.97E-06   1.12E-05
30..................   7.74E-06   7.74E-06   7.74E-06   7.74E-06   7.74E-06   7.74E-06   8.28E-06   9.49E-06   1.17E-05   1.35E-05   1.55E-05   1.61E-05
40..................   9.20E-06   9.20E-06   9.20E-06   9.20E-06   9.20E-06   9.20E-06   9.24E-06   1.17E-05   1.34E-05   1.51E-05   1.98E-05   2.22E-05
50..................   1.02E-05   1.02E-05   1.02E-05   1.02E-05   1.02E-05   1.02E-05   1.02E-05   1.36E-05   1.53E-05   1.66E-05   2.37E-05   2.95E-05
60..................   1.13E-05   1.13E-05   1.13E-05   1.13E-05   1.13E-05   1.13E-05   1.13E-05   1.53E-05   1.76E-05   1.85E-05   2.51E-05   3.45E-05
70..................   1.23E-05   1.23E-05   1.23E-05   1.23E-05   1.23E-05   1.23E-05   1.23E-05   1.72E-05   2.04E-05   2.06E-05   2.66E-05   4.07E-05
80..................   1.34E-05   1.34E-05   1.34E-05   1.34E-05   1.34E-05   1.34E-05   1.34E-05   1.92E-05   2.15E-05   2.31E-05   2.82E-05   4.34E-05
100.................   1.52E-05   1.52E-05   1.52E-05   1.52E-05   1.52E-05   1.52E-05   1.52E-05   1.97E-05   2.40E-05   2.79E-05   3.17E-05   4.49E-05
200.................   1.76E-05   1.76E-05   1.76E-05   1.76E-05   1.76E-05   1.76E-05   1.76E-05   2.06E-05   2.94E-05   3.24E-05   4.03E-05  5.04E-05
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MIR=1E-06.


[[Page 44036]]

    22. Revise Table 4 to read as follows:

      Table 4 to Appendix B to Subpart DDDD of 40 CFR Part 63.--Maximum Allowable Toxicity-Weighted Noncarcinogen Emission Rate (lb/hr)/([mu]g/m3)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Distance to property boundary (m)
  Stack height (m)   -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          0          50        100        150        200        250        500        1000       1500       2000       3000       5000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5...................   2.51E-01   2.51E-01   3.16E-01   3.16E-01   3.16E-01   3.16E-01   3.16E-01   3.46E-01   4.66E-01   6.21E-01   9.82E-01   1.80E+00
10..................   5.62E-01   5.62E-01   5.62E-01   5.62E-01   5.62E-01   5.62E-01   5.62E-01   5.70E-01   6.33E-01   7.71E-01   1.13E+00   1.97E+00
20..................   1.43E+00   1.43E+00   1.43E+00   1.43E+00   1.43E+00   1.43E+00   1.43E+00   1.43E+00   1.68E+00   1.83E+00   2.26E+00   3.51E+00
30..................   2.36E+00   2.36E+00   2.36E+00   2.36E+00   2.36E+00   2.36E+00   2.53E+00   3.04E+00   3.04E+00   3.33E+00   4.45E+00   5.81E+00
40..................   3.11E+00   3.11E+00   3.11E+00   3.11E+00   3.11E+00   3.11E+00   3.42E+00   4.04E+00   5.07E+00   5.51E+00   6.39E+00   9.63E+00
50..................   3.93E+00   3.93E+00   3.93E+00   3.93E+00   3.93E+00   3.93E+00   4.49E+00   4.92E+00   6.95E+00   7.35E+00   8.99E+00   1.25E+01
60..................   4.83E+00   4.83E+00   4.83E+00   4.83E+00   4.83E+00   4.83E+00   5.56E+00   6.13E+00   7.80E+00   1.01E+01   1.10E+01   1.63E+01
70..................   5.77E+00   5.77E+00   5.77E+00   5.77E+00   5.77E+00   5.77E+00   6.45E+00   7.71E+00   8.83E+00   1.18E+01   1.36E+01   1.86E+01
80..................   6.74E+00   6.74E+00   6.74E+00   6.74E+00   6.74E+00   6.74E+00   7.12E+00   9.50E+00   1.01E+01   1.29E+01   1.72E+01   2.13E+01
100.................   8.87E+00   8.87E+00   8.87E+00   8.87E+00   8.87E+00   8.87E+00   8.88E+00   1.19E+01   1.37E+01   1.55E+01   2.38E+01   2.89E+01
200.................   1.70E+01   1.70E+01   1.70E+01   1.70E+01   1.70E+01   1.70E+01   1.70E+01   2.05E+01   2.93E+01   3.06E+01   4.02E+01  4.93E+01
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HI=1.

[FR Doc. 05-14532 Filed 7-28-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P